Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Consolidated Post: APAC/Oceanic Server Concerns

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Consolidated Post: APAC/Oceanic Server Concerns
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

PPAlien's Avatar


PPAlien
03.26.2013 , 10:22 PM | #3931
Ok, I think this whole rant thread could be solved with one simple and HONEST answer.
If continuing support for a single merged APAC server is not financially plausible, just tell us that is why this is happening. Don't beat around the bush and tell us something you think we want to hear.

If the reason really is because it will provide the best playing experience for us all, then listen carefully to us when we tell you this is not true.

The logical thing to do in the event that it is financially plausible to run a single APAC server would be to merge the 3 servers together and then if that still didn't solve all the issues to then transfer everyone to whichever server they wish after giving it a decent amount of time to work.

Also, a little bit of advertising in Australia at all wouldn't hurt in the slightest. I have yet to see an ad for it over here apart from online due to google ads recognising my cookies.

jackdaley's Avatar


jackdaley
03.26.2013 , 10:23 PM | #3932
Quote: Originally Posted by Aurojiin View Post
Remember professional help is only a phone call away. If you want, you can live an emotionally healthy life, free from the desperate feeling of being totally unloved.

Just reach out. There are people who care.
Really?

-IceHawk-'s Avatar


-IceHawk-
03.26.2013 , 10:25 PM | #3933
Quote: Originally Posted by PseudoScience View Post
That is just a strong reaction from an angry community. EA should take some heat for this. The APAC community has been treated us like second class citizens since beta.
To be appropriately blunt APAC by its very nature was never going to be on par with NA or Europe when it came to SW:TOR.

There are real geographic and financial restraints which make APAC a less than ideal marketplace to expand into.

EA mishandled the attempt.

Quote: Originally Posted by PseudoScience View Post
EA ignored the population issues for months and compounded the problem so more and more people left.
Actually this is fundamentally wrong.

EA was plentifully aware of the title-wide population issues over the last few months.

The entire point of the F2P transition was to see if a new and viable growth model could address those concerns. In NA and Europe they clearly did, as anyone on the servers can attest.

There is a very good chance that the number of new NA players brought in F2P alone dwarfs the entire population of the APAC server.

Quote: Originally Posted by PseudoScience View Post
Now they are shutting APAC servers down

When EA has this track record with our community you wonder why they get this strong reaction and why the population ran for the hills in the first place. I appreciate them giving us local servers but they are taking that away.
The localized servers were part of the "Pie-In-The-Sky-WOWKiller" moment that nearly crashed this game through the 500,000 total subscriber threshold. It was a massive mistake, likely cost the CEO his job (I mean seriously, what other major near-disaster happened under his leadership of EA that comes even close? There is none...), and is being withdrawn because frankly, and this is the unfortunate part...

...APAC likely never had the population for EA to rationalize localized servers to its investors in the first place.
Quote: Originally Posted by PseudoScience View Post
I get that you don't have a vested interest or don't really care but all I'm saying is to get some perspective, you're not on EA's payroll so don't act like it.
Actually, my vested interest is in maintaining SW:TOR as a financially sound product for as long as possible so I can continue to enjoy the game. And while I may not necessarily agree with how EA has handled the APAC situation I understand it and recognize it for what it is:

The last piece of a year-long financial restructuring of the long-term viability of this game.

You can express dissatisfaction without degenerating into trollish or outright offensive remarks in the same manner in which you can express an understanding of said decision without being a company-shill.

jackdaley's Avatar


jackdaley
03.26.2013 , 10:25 PM | #3934
Quote: Originally Posted by Jinsali View Post
wel quite obviously your a troll..but you can keep waiting because the consesus in gen chat on fleet is you'll be lucky to even get 10% of those numbers..oh you'll get the characters which will take up disk space on the server, but you wont get the players.
Meh the harbinger will be running fine without them..a pity you can't say the same for the APAC servers

Izabo's Avatar


Izabo
03.26.2013 , 10:26 PM | #3935
Ping rate on Harbinger right now for me is under 100, but then again, there are only 12 people on at the moment on this world. When there were 147 people here, the ping was between 500-700. I remember many tales of Har having issues to want to voluntarily move there. Chat being inoperative, lag issues. I understand that the choices made for us are out of our hands. I don't believe the petition is wasted time. Rather than sit around complaining, some folks are letting their voices be heard, which is better than doing nothing, no matter the outcome. It's the effort to be involved that is important. The name-calling and rock throwing disgusts me. We're supposed to be adults; some of us anyway. Instead of being snots to each other, can we not have civil dialog on this matter? I prefer to combine the servers of Asia. That is my preference; not my choice. I'm an old dog and not welcoming of change! We were made to move here; now we're to move back. What did this accomplish? If the PvP'rs want more opponents, let them have free character transfers to a server of their choice, let the rest of us group on Dal. RP'rs can RP all that they want. We can PvE and PvP casually. Sigh.... Don't flame or tell me I spell badly, or that I'm ignorant. You'd not be the original name-caller stating these things, nor would it make you appear clever. JMO Next...............
Unto death I send you, without honor.

DaftVaduhhh's Avatar


DaftVaduhhh
03.26.2013 , 10:27 PM | #3936
IceHawk, there was a sufficient population at APAC launch, well and truly. They failed to give them anything of note in terms of new content from April through to September though. Killed the game globally, killed it here.

Nothing about the SWTOR server set up here would have seen a substantial change in the infrastructure of EA Australia. A couple of new racks in the server farm and a software install.

They didn't have to lease a new building or install a fibre-optic run.

Iceman_sith's Avatar


Iceman_sith
03.26.2013 , 10:28 PM | #3937
Quote: Originally Posted by -IceHawk- View Post
To be appropriately blunt APAC by its very nature was never going to be on par with NA or Europe when it came to SW:TOR.

There are real geographic and financial restraints which make APAC a less than ideal marketplace to expand into.

EA mishandled the attempt.


Actually this is fundamentally wrong.

EA was plentifully aware of the title-wide population issues over the last few months.

The entire point of the F2P transition was to see if a new and viable growth model could address those concerns. In NA and Europe they clearly did, as anyone on the servers can attest.

There is a very good chance that the number of new NA players brought in F2P alone dwarfs the entire population of the APAC server.


The localized servers were part of the "Pie-In-The-Sky-WOWKiller" moment that nearly crashed this game through the 500,000 total subscriber threshold. It was a massive mistake, likely cost the CEO his job (I mean seriously, what other major near-disaster happened under his leadership of EA that comes even close? There is none...), and is being withdrawn because frankly, and this is the unfortunate part...

...APAC likely never had the population for EA to rationalize localized servers to its investors in the first place.

Actually, my vested interest is in maintaining SW:TOR as a financially sound product for as long as possible so I can continue to enjoy the game. And while I may not necessarily agree with how EA has handled the APAC situation I understand it and recognize it for what it is:

The last piece of a year-long financial restructuring of the long-term viability of this game.

You can express dissatisfaction without degenerating into trollish or outright offensive remarks in the same manner in which you can express an understanding of said decision without being a company-shill.
All of this is irrelevant to what the APAC community wants, and Bioware asked us what we thought would be the best solution.
Eviros SageStulloQuo-Jin Guardian

PseudoScience's Avatar


PseudoScience
03.26.2013 , 10:37 PM | #3938
There is no point in trying to give our perspective to IceHawk he will just label it as irrational. He is nothing more than a troll masquerading as a "man of logic and reason". All his points are wild assumptions at best and I don't have the energy trying to educate him.

This issue is bigger than a couple of troll guys, lets focus back on the community and what we want in light of the circumstances.
APAC

soneil's Avatar


soneil
03.26.2013 , 10:45 PM | #3939
Quote: Originally Posted by -IceHawk- View Post
This would tend to be my argument; EA seriously mishandled the expansion into this marketplace, likely failed to achieve sustainable and significant enough ROI to rationalize continued investment in personnel, benefits, utilities, maintenance, et al, and are now retreating from the marketplace in an effort to cut their losses.
As someone else pointed out, marketing in australia from what I've seen has been severely lacking. EB had copies of the game on shelves for a few weeks after it came out and that was it. No posters or any kind of in store promotion. I never saw it advertised anywhere apart from direct emails I got from being a subscriber. With so little effort put in to promoting the game here is it any wonder there hasn't been enough population to sustain local servers in the long term.

Ultimately, I wish someone would come out and officially say it's all about cost. I can accept that. Given how long it took us to actually get any announcements about this issue in the first place though, I won't hold my breath. Responses to the apac community have been given sparingly at best.
Academy Exemplar - Gav Daragon
Republic 50s - Nefash, Tal-Hirron, Delin
Imperial 50s - Terrill, Rending, Vermeesa
Nefash's Pilot Training School - Space missions resource.

-IceHawk-'s Avatar


-IceHawk-
03.26.2013 , 10:45 PM | #3940
Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
Right off the bat, you have failed to understand what I am implying as a strategy. This is a low cost, potential PR boon that can fly in the face of consumer opinion on EA. Right now people begrudgingly hand their money over to EA because they control key licenses and the odd successful bit of IP. Fifa, Madden and a host of other sports franchises speak to that.
I understand your argument.
EA apparently disagrees with you...

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
I actually remember a time when they were recognised for fostering creativity and pushing forward as a market leader, rather than a massive cash cow with monopolistic properties.
That was a long time ago and I doubt it is ever coming back unfortunately.

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
There's a reason why investor concerns should always be looked at with a pinch of salt, the least of which is to do with the fundamentally understood semi-strong efficiency theory of markets. A lack of corporate transparency, which EA is renowned for, causes a slump like you describe. What's worse is that some of the people in charge of the purse strings appear to lack an understanding of the industry as a whole, and cling to AAA products exclusively, which defeats the point of even being in a creative space.

I'm not advocating throwing caution to the wind, but only churning out carbon copies is quite clearly killing brands and development studios the world over in this space, and EA is naive enough to think that this alone is a winner. Relying on investors who more often than not are advised by people who have a rudimentary understanding of the underpinning of such markets when they are not based around traditional resources is a doomed prospect.

Attempting to offer an educated summary to these investors would serve them well, but they fail to offer this here, and they fail to offer this in general. They talk the financial language with little colour in the way of industry speak and knowledge. A total disconnect from the production line to corporate dooms any company, and that is what you are witnessing.
You will not find any disagreement from me on this point, I think we have a fundamental consensus that the business model EA utilizes seemingly offers little to be envious...except of course for their profit margins...

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
I feel like we don't have all the answers required to see this logic, and myself and many others simply wish to hear/see more. I think if the answers were as simple as you claim, they would have outright said it's not financially viable.
Can you point me to the Developer posts from Bioware and the Press-Releases from Electronic Arts that stated the transition to Free-To-Play in this game was based on the inability of the title to retain financial stability using the model it launched with?

As I seem to recall all of the press releases danced around the issue, inferred at a number of points SW:TOR was always intended to break into this "modern monetization scheme," and no one ever put forth an official statement declaring one of the largest single-investments the company has ever made financially unsound.

You are not going to see a company like EA openly declare something is not financially viable...that has a funny influence on the direction of stock prices, especially around quarterly earning reports.

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
What stuns me is that both you and they think there is something of significantly greater return to be done with the resources.
Again, I have made no such claim. I am merely pointing out that whatever the profit margin EA is earning from the APAC servers is clearly failing to meet planned ROI and is therefore not facilitating future invesement.

If APAC was returning ROI at an expected rate do you really think EA would dare shut it down?

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
They have shown an inability to dissuade themselves from maximising the bottom line within a 6 month window, because apparently every last penny counts to investors on a quarterly report, even when you can more than adequately account for budgetary increases.

Basically what you're implying repeatedly is that the APAC servers are making a staggering loss, and the metrics point to people pouring into NA servers any way, so let's boot off the last 10,000. How were they making money before? Were they projecting these three servers would be constantly full, even when there had been no new content for 5 months?
Remember we are talking about a title that cost a reported $200 million between development and marketing and then crashed through the floor within months of launch.

To say that EA's projections for this title were likely well beyond the realistic marketplace is a no-brainer.

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
How stupid are these people?
They nearly mismanaged this massive title into the ground and are still retreating from regional marketplaces, so I would say pretty stupid.

Quote: Originally Posted by DaftVaduhhh View Post
How stupid are you?
Honestly?
My IQ is 150, I am the first graduate to earn an MA from my institution in the last decade with a perfect 4.0, have numerous institutional-level award winning pieces of research, literally earned every single academic honor offered within my department and university, and have earned a fully funded ride to finish out my Doctorate while I work on publishing independent research.

So, I would infer that I am slightly above the curve of "stupid."

Thanks for asking though, but, this is relevant to the discussion how?