| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (45)

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 7:55PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For all the naysayers:

Please find ONE analyst who says something bad about SWTOR regarding how they project it to do. If you can find just one professional (not a gaming blog) that says "SWTOR doesn't look to be profitable, or break even, or have over 500K subs" we will shut up. Because us players that are actually playing the game have never seen one.

Nothing you've said is back by anyone in the know about the gaming business.

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:07PM comps said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

they haven't said it yet because the first month isn't up, it doesn't take a genius to work out that just over 1 million initial players won't equate to 1 million subs they stated they needed to be profitable at the first month though.

however, if you are enjoying the game what difference does it make?
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:08PM silver001 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@real65rcncom
A couple of things to get to say. Note: it will sound trollish to the fanbois.
1. Analyst DO NOT use real data but make estimates.
2. Implying that there is such a thing as a "professional" journalist in any gaming site is laughable.
3.I have been reading the swtor community, while only a small percentage of players use the forums; it is becoming apparent IF you are to believe them that SWTOR is a half baked game. Don't get me wrong it might be fun for a month but it seems to have no lasting value (based on the complaint). Speaking as a guy that hasn't and wont pay money to play such a POS. Then again, I consider all games without an active combat system in 2011 to be a POS.

BTW instead of popping your champagne, how about we wait and see how many people actually stay past the first month.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:25PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@comps Analysts don't wait until the 'first month is up'.

Or they wouldn't be analysts.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:29PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@silver001 didnt sound overly trollish. Just lacking.

Still waiting for you or anyone to find an analyst not using his/her brain here.

Didn't imply a 'professional journalist'. Please reread that.. something you missed. I'm asking for a quote from a PROFESSIONAL, not a blogger or journalist... someone who's job it is to predict things for a living like trends. Also, not the guy from WoW either who's got a vested interest.

Why would I believe something like you who DOESN'T play reads something and thinks it's a 'half baked' game when I'm actually.. playing the game, lol? I'm in it and there is nothing like that at all so not sure what 'evidence' you've picked up.

Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:35PM comps said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

you seem to think games industry analysts know what the hell they are talking about and aren't just the lap dogs of the companies making the games. the people you are referring to are just looking at the initial sales and drawing the conclusion that everything is rosy because that's pretty much all their employers want to hear. after the first month re-subscription figures are out then you will see some real 'analysis'
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 10:56PM h4ngedm4n said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@silver001
"Then again, I consider all games without an active combat system in 2011 to be a POS."

I agree with you! But on the other hand, I think there are enough players who don't care for an active combat system. Probably enough to keep SWTOR happy.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 11:07PM Zyrusticae said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

I somehow fail to see how some random "analyst" possesses more foresight than anyone who's actually participated in the games industry for the past dozen or so years.

Because, y'know, no matter what they're called, they're still predicting the future. The future of a very volatile and ever-changing market, at that.

Also, my goodness, is the rampant fanboyism really necessary? I mean, look, I just don't like the game, and last I checked, I am as entitled to my opinion as anyone else posting on this site, so pre-emptively telling me to "shut it" really doesn't make much sense to me.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 11:40PM Joaquin Crowe said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom The analyst firm that doesn't want to get a sweet EA contract.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 12:27AM avaloner said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom
The SWTOR forums are already filled with "server mergers pls" "dead servers" "this game dead/dieing already", "my guild is dieing people are quiting", "same old same old" posts. As much as you hate RIFT the way things seem to be going in SWTOR, it seems to be declining faster then RIFT did at launch and SWTOR cost 3 times as much! Sure RIFT did not have the numbers of SWTOR at launch but then the bigger they are the harder they fall.

SWTOR has little beyond its cutscens to carry it and the SW world. It has some major issues in regards to its core game mechanics which are turning alot of people off. Hell there isnt even a combat log... LOL. And end game is nothing but dailes, faceroll dugeons (full of crates) and faceroll raids(s) (full of crates), dead world PVP and inbalnced class/faction rage.

That said I think once the dust settles it will retain something ike 30-30% of its launch day playerbase after 6 months pretty much like every single other MMO since WOW.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 4:01AM Protoavis said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

Because analysts were totes saying DCUO would be a flop just as it launched...oh wait they were pegging it as a huge success for a long time based solely on initial sales figures which dwindled off very quickly after three months.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 1:10PM starka1 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@avaloner

Links please?
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 7:52PM DancingCow said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@comps

"1 million subs they stated they needed to be profitable"

They'll be profitable with half a million.

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/02/ea-swtor-generating-significant-dev-costs-500k-subscribers-wou/

Personally I think they'll be fine. I disagreed with analysts predicting 2+ million box sales based on pre-order figures because I reckon this is the kind of game where you're either in or out and most of those likely to be in would have pre-ordered.

Similarly I reckon they won't follow the same attrition pattern of other MMOs. Most of those who bought it will probably stick with it.

The wildcards are games like GW2 and TSW. They'll be the first AAA MMOs to depart from the standard WoW design. How the market responds to that newness factor will be interesting.
Reply

Posted: Dec 29th 2011 6:56AM Protoavis said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@starka1

Actually looking at their forums (anyone can see them) and a lot of threads are complaint threads so they might not be making it up so much

http://www.swtor.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=255

Looks around a 1 in 5 threads in the general section is a complaint
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:02PM DancingCow said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"2011 has seen several people predicting the death of the MMO market and the death of subscription games, often times in the same sentence."

You call them people. I call them industry cash shop stooges and they've been crying the exact same message of imminent doom for years now.

It didn't happen last year, or the year before or the year before that and it probably won't next year either.

Though admittedly GW2 might give it a good kick to the nuts.

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 8:24PM toychristopher said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@DancingCow The Guild Wars model is what I wish they would follow, because it's about providing value to the customer. Not about milking them of a subscription fee or an excessive cash shop.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 11:24PM freebase said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should probably know GW2 doesn't have a sub because there is no PvE endgame.
Reply

Posted: Dec 27th 2011 11:42PM silver001 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freebase Thats why huh? because I thought it didnt have a sub they don't believe in subs just like in guild wars 1. And they wanted a new model for their at the time innovative MMO (guild wars 1) and kept the same spirit for guild wars 2. (Actually Arenanet is the reason I will never play a sub based game because you don't actually need to charge a sub).

And if you mean NO endgame, as in a carrot on a stick gear grind (get t1, then t2 then t3) then yes, guild wars 2 has no endgame . But if you mean a game where you play because you want to have FUN and the developer feel that reaching level cap shouldn't change the way the game plays then yes guild wars 2 has no endgame. BTW guild wars 1 did just fine without raids and given the lackluster nature of Swtor and WoW continue decline guild wars 2 will be a refreshing change for people that hate WoW and it clones.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 12:04PM Borick said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freebase There's no endgame grind? Seriously?

That alone is enough to make me look into it. I hope that you aren't just teasing me.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2011 12:25PM Irem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Borick
There's no progression raiding and ArenaNet's philosophy is to try to make the entire game as relevant and content-rich as possible, rather than just the bit you do after max level. Some people like to interpret that as "omg no endgame, there's nothing to do!"
Reply

Featured Stories

MMO Week in Review: It is your Destiny

Posted on Jul 27th 2014 6:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW