Page 1 of 28
1
2
3
11
... LastLast
  1. #1

    Is it fair to consider SW:TOR a failure?

    Surely many of you are familiar with the vast amount of negativity this game has received since its release from sources such as the following:

    http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Paragus1...t-The-Tortanic
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertco...or-surrenders/
    http://www.swtor-life.com/editorial/...r-failed/7143/

    Yet because the game failed to meet expectations and failed to retain over a million players, is it a failure? How do we define exactly what a failure is? Partly because I can't post this on the official forums without an active subscription, I'm posting it here (equips flame retardant shield) among other locations. The idea behind the video is exploring whether or not SW:TOR should be considered a failure. Personally, I think it has been a pretty big disappointment; but then again, so was EverQuest II yet it retained a sizable playerbase years after release. I believe SW:TOR failed to meet many expectations, but as long as BioWare are still pumping out content updates for a playerbase which remains relatively stable over a long time period, I can't say it's a failure. Obviously, to achieve a relatively stable population like Rift and EQ2, the game has to be doing something right in order to keep those people pleased. Ultimately, I think it's too early to say with 100% certainty either way. I specifically site Warhammer Online as an example of a failed MMO, yet it took that game awhile to reach its horrid state. Even though BioWare are still pumping out content updates, a couple years down the road, SW:TOR could also be sitting in maintenance mode with only a couple active servers.

    Anyway, check out the video and let me know why you do or do not consider the game a failure.


  2. #2
    It's not a bad game, per se. But it certainly aimed higher then it could deliver.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    It's not a bad game, per se. But it certainly aimed higher then it could deliver.
    Either that or they aimed lower than their fanbase anticipated. Either one is a negative. I still believe there's a big difference between failing to meet expectations and being a failure. That's really what the video is about.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by XeroFive89 View Post
    Either that or they aimed lower than their fanbase anticipated. Either one is a negative. I still believe there's a big difference between failing to meet expectations and being a failure. That's really what the video is about.
    Precisely. RIFT never tried to be the WoW killer, though some fans certainly wanted to paint it in that light early on. RIFT does it's thing. That's why it doesn't feel like such a failure.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by XeroFive89 View Post
    Either that or they aimed lower than their fanbase anticipated. Either one is a negative. I still believe there's a big difference between failing to meet expectations and being a failure. That's really what the video is about.
    I quite liked SWTOR when I played it, unfortunately it seems that they relied on the brand to get their audience and either forgot or did not have time to address gameplay issues.

    They are definitely adding things and it could make a comeback to a certain degree, but the MMO market is fickle. It is extremely hard to win players back after they quit (for whatever reason)

    When it goes F2P I will most likely log in now and then to check it out, but I doubt I will ever sub to it.

    Precisely. RIFT never tried to be the WoW killer, though some fans certainly wanted to paint it in that light early on. RIFT does it's thing. That's why it doesn't feel like such a failure.
    Rift is also a good thing, but to say it didn't go after the WoW market is a false. Did you see their ads at launch, "This isn't Azeroth" etc etc. It has now developed into its own thing and kudos to them, but their marketing was a direct attack against WoW in the beginning

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Synche View Post
    Rift is also a good thing, but to say it didn't go after the WoW market is a false. Did you see their ads at launch, "This isn't Azeroth" etc etc. It has now developed into its own thing and kudos to them, but their marketing was a direct attack against WoW in the beginning
    Well, true enough, but I argue that was mainly for the attention and marketing. I really doubt Trion envisioned themselves as a viable threat to WoW, and the fans of the game certainly didn't push as hard as SWTOR fans did.

    But honestly, what the hell do I know?
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  7. #7
    The game was fun leveling to 50, the problem is once you get there the game is dead. No dual spec in a game these days, and 4 major patches later and still nothing is laughable. I personally played a Sorcerer, lightning to 50, then flipped to healing for our guild. I made the mistake of dropping all my credits into my professions and after switching specs a few time was completely broke and unable to afford to switch twice per day when I wasn't raiding. That is why I quit playing, and for that reason alone the game is a dud for me. Such a simple thing to code!

  8. #8
    I wouldn't consider it a "failure" in the normal sense of the word.

    Did it fail to live up to the expectations that EA set for the game? Absolutely. It was not the financial success that they were hoping for, and it was apparently not the game that a lot of players were expecting (based on the rapid decline in playerbase).

    Was it a "failure" though? No. It still has a relatively large playerbase for a MMO and the freemium transition has a lot of potential. While they didn't take too many risks, they did do some really great work on the game, specifically with all the fully voiced and animated cutscenes.

    I wouldn't call it a success, but it's not a failure either.

  9. #9
    Step One: Look at the expectations for the game prior to release

    Step Two: See if the game met those expectations

    Conclusion: SWTOR is a failure

    *~To change one's life: Start immediately. Do it flamboyantly.~*

  10. #10
    Field Marshal Zaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    85
    Yes. SWTOR is arguably a failure but I am fine with liking it anyway. Much to my surprise I am still playing it more than... not making a VS thread. Although that's mainly cos I've only managed to get though the server queue once so far.

  11. #11
    For all I know, the game is turning a profit so I can't comment on that side of things. It was a fun enough game, too, in spite of the sluggish post-launch support. One thing I would point out, though, is the opportunity cost of making this game. What else could BioWare and EA have done with all of the manpower and money they used for this MMO? For example, how many single-player Star Wars RPG's could BioWare have made instead of this? That's the part that gets me.

  12. #12
    Brewmaster Hiya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,311
    IMO it was.......due to the fact they had one of the most powerfull names to tie to a MMO and they......DROPPED THE BALL. They didnt learn anything from MMOs of the past...
    Quote Originally Posted by Nosonia View Post
    - Remember STV? People had to go to the same netural camps to get quests... shit was serious -

  13. #13
    I agree it's not a bad game however if you look at it in terms of what the devs kept on saying and what they were expecting then yes, it was a failure.

  14. #14
    I don't know that I'd call it a failure, but that third article sounds like it was written by me. Every problem I had with the game rolled into one tidy article.

  15. #15
    I wouldnt say failure, they did make mistakes with it though sadly! Especially with the free engine... if they could pay 300m for voice actors why not another 6 for an awesome engine that doesent have bugs

  16. #16
    I am Murloc! SirRobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Counciltucky
    Posts
    5,663
    Quote Originally Posted by XeroFive89 View Post
    Is it fair to consider SW:TOR a failure?
    Short answer? No, of course not. Long answer? Well... Maybe... Though it really depends on how you interpret TOR "failing."

  17. #17
    Dreadlord Cinnamohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Enterprise, AL
    Posts
    791
    I would consider it a failure due to the fact that the endgame is just a watered down version of WoW's. And sure the leveling may seem nice, but it really does get old about halfway through, if you're not all that into the story or you're sick of hearing the same voice actors.

    If they made the game based off of Star Wars Galaxies pre-NGE, it probably could have done a lot better.
    Last edited by Cinnamohn; 2012-09-28 at 10:06 PM.

  18. #18
    Depends on how you define failure.

    An objective measure would be profitability.

    A subjective measure would be is it "good" or did it meet your expectations.
    Lv30 (Warframe) - Volt - Grakata - Lex Prime - Dragon Nikana -
    Lv40 (Firefall) - Dragonfly - Biotech - Mammoth - Arsenal - Nighthawk - Raptor - Recon - Tigerclaw - Electron -
    Lv60 (Neverwinter) - Rogue - Fighter - Wizard - Guardian - Cleric -

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Waifu View Post
    I wouldnt say failure, they did make mistakes with it though sadly! Especially with the free engine... if they could pay 300m for voice actors why not another 6 for an awesome engine that doesent have bugs
    Uh...they didn't get a free engine. They licensed an early beta version of the hero engine. The engine itself isn't responsible for the bugs, there's nothing inherently wrong with it. What a company does with a given engine is up to them. You can take a fabulous engine like Unreal 3 Engine and produce a barely functional game if you don't know how to use it properly.

    Quote Originally Posted by hk-51 View Post
    How did they spend 300m on voice actors when they only spent 120ish million?
    Rumor has it that the budget was closer to 200 million. But again, that's all speculation that comes from journalists/analysts, so it's not necessarily the most accurate (though I do put some stock in it being close to the actual development costs).
    Last edited by Edge-; 2012-09-28 at 10:13 PM.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Waifu View Post
    I wouldnt say failure, they did make mistakes with it though sadly! Especially with the free engine... if they could pay 300m for voice actors why not another 6 for an awesome engine that doesent have bugs
    Okay... Um.

    How did they spend 300m on voice actors when they only spent 120ish million?

    Also, how is the hero engine free, exactly?

    ---------- Post added 2012-09-28 at 10:16 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by edgecrusherO0 View Post
    Rumor has it that the budget was closer to 200 million. But again, that's all speculation that comes from journalists/analysts, so it's not necessarily the most accurate (though I do put some stock in it being close to the actual development costs).
    I remember that we had 2 hard figures. over 100 million and under 200 million and there were a lot of leaks placing it in the lower half. EA, this is speculation, intentionally allowed the figure to be inflated to give the impression the game would have high production value ect.
    Lv30 (Warframe) - Volt - Grakata - Lex Prime - Dragon Nikana -
    Lv40 (Firefall) - Dragonfly - Biotech - Mammoth - Arsenal - Nighthawk - Raptor - Recon - Tigerclaw - Electron -
    Lv60 (Neverwinter) - Rogue - Fighter - Wizard - Guardian - Cleric -

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •