SWTOR looking to have a future.

[Osmeric]

No, you don't know.

Your argument is basically "you can't know for sure, therefore you can't know at all".

This is passive-aggressive denial. It ignores that evidence comes in a continuum of certainty, not discrete absolute values of truth or falsity.

[Swnem]

Your argument is basically "you can't know for sure, therefore you can't know at all".

This is passive-aggressive denial. It ignores that evidence comes in a continuum of certainty, not discrete absolute values of truth or falsity.

What evidence? I don't deny anything. I say we don't know cause we have no evidence. I swear people cannot handle that answer. We must invent an answer if we don't have one eh? " I don't know" is so difficult to accept. All he/she is doing is speculating.
Actually the poster made a whole debate with himself before when i said nothing to the case. I thought he confused me with the other poster that divided the 1bil yearly. I made no such claims. I say we don't know the proportion, wich we don't. It's arrogant to think we do. We don't know how much money is made in the CC in each individual year. We don't know how much it costs to maintain all those servers at launch compared to the few mega servers we have now. It's speculation to build a narrative. It's not that i don't think the game made more money in it's first years, it's quite possible, but we don't know for sure. So, it's disingenuous to assume the proportion was heavily skewed.

It's also quite irrelevant. The game is being supported, it has a good dev team now, it has more investment happening and has EA claiming they like it's business. So, it takes a lot of spinning and overblown expectations to say this is all terrible compared to the limbo the game was on after KOTET. Of course we would all love to see more support, but, this was a dying game before Ossus came out. Uncertainty of the future permeated those years. Now, it's not uncertain anymore. How terrible! O.o

[Osmeric]

What evidence? I don't deny anything.

There is a lot of evidence on how the game has progressed over time. This evidence has nonzero value in drawing conclusions. You are rejecting it because the inferences are not 100% ironclad certain.

You are engaging in a typical form of passive-aggressive denial, where the standard of evidence is raised to avoid any intimation of a conclusion you don't like.

[Swnem]

There is a lot of evidence on how the game has progressed over time. This evidence has nonzero value in drawing conclusions. You are rejecting it because the inferences are not 100% ironclad certain.

You are engaging in a typical form of passive-aggressive denial, where the standard of evidence is raised to avoid any intimation of a conclusion you don't like.

Denial of what? The narrative a poster is trying to build without being certain of it? Speculation?
The standard of evidence? What the heck is that? Evidence is evidence. There's no halvesies evidence. This is ridiculous. Think what you will.

[Osmeric]

Denial of what? The narrative a poster is trying to build without being certain of it? Speculation?
The standard of evidence? What the heck is that? Evidence is evidence. There's no halvesies evidence. This is ridiculous. Think what you will.

Your cluelessness is of a level that you don't realize how you are malfunctioning. A true Dunning-Kruger hero you are. Come back when you achieve at least a minimal level of self awareness.

But let's address a point here:

"no halvesies evidence"

Wrong. Evidence comes with continuous weighting, not black and white, true or false. Reaching conclusions involves weighing evidence, adjusted for its strength and weakness. There's even an entire branch of mathematics devoted to this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_logic

[Swnem]

Your cluelessness is of a level that you don't realize how you are malfunctioning. A true Dunning-Kruger hero you are. Come back when you achieve at least a minimal level of self awareness.

But let's address a point here:

"no halvesies evidence"

Wrong. Evidence comes with continuous weighting, not black and white, true or false. Reaching conclusions involves weighing evidence, adjusted for its strength and weakness. There's even an entire branch of mathematics devoted to this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_logic

And then you say i'm passive agressive. Sorry that i don't assume things. It is the scientific method. It leads to the truth, not the random narratives posters come up with. Facts are important when building a theory. Otherwise all you got is a conspiracy theory.

You and the other poster just cannot say how much the game made on each year cause you don't know. Even if you want to make the case that the first years were better, maybe they were, you have ZERO clue as to how much it was. Therefore, your conclusion is not accurate. It's that simple. Your assumptions are not facts and never will be. Just speculation. Speculation isn't a fact. End of.

[Osmeric]

And then you say i'm passive agressive. Sorry that i don't assume things. It is the scientific method. It leads to the truth, not the random narratives posters come up with. Facts are important when building a theory. Otherwise all you got is a conspiracy theory.

You and the other poster just cannot say how much the game made on each year cause you don't know. Even if you want to make the case that the first years were better, maybe they were, you have ZERO clue as to how much it was. Therefore, your conclusion is not accurate. It's that simple. Your assumptions are not facts and never will be. Just speculation. Speculation isn't a fact. End of.

Please stop digging, okay?

Let's look at a place where the notion of "evidence" originated: the legal system. How is evidence evaluated there? BY WEIGHING. It does not demand logical certainty. It demands (in civil cases) mere *preponderance* of evidence. If 51% of the weight of the evidence is for one side, that side wins.

And how could it be otherwise? Evidence usually doesn't arrive to us in the form of indisputable facts. Evidence is uncertain, evidence is circumstantial, evidence is indirect. And we're set up to make decisions based on that evidence, even though it isn't ironclad, most often.

This is really like how you make decisions in life, too. You don't demand certainty before deciding what to do in big life decisions. You do the best you can with what you know.

You are demanding certainty because you don't like the direction the real evidence points in. It's your way of going LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

[Swnem]

Please stop digging, okay?

Let's look at a place where the notion of "evidence" originated: the legal system. How is evidence evaluated there? BY WEIGHING. It does not demand logical certainty. It demands (in civil cases) mere *preponderance* of evidence. If 51% of the weight of the evidence is for one side, that side wins.

And how could it be otherwise? Evidence usually doesn't arrive to us in the form of indisputable facts. Evidence is uncertain, evidence is circumstantial, evidence is indirect. And we're set up to make decisions based on that evidence, even though it isn't ironclad, most often.

This is really like how you make decisions in life, too. You don't demand certainty before deciding what to do in big life decisions. You do the best you can with what you know.

You are demanding certainty because you don't like the direction the real evidence points in. It's your way of going LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

Imagine if in science we just made stuff up in order to complete theories.

Indeed, you do the best you can with what you know. If only you heard youself.

You have no evidence, that's the thing eh? Point of this thread is: swtor made 1 bil lifetime, EA is pleased. I accept that. You and that other poster are the ones that feel like downplaying it.
Game is doing well, fact. The devs officially stated that onslaught is a sucess, they teased a new xpac already. Yet, you feel the need to downplay it.

This is swtor. It doesnt have a huge team but it's being supported and has a future. Exactly the claim of the thread.

So, take your conspiracy theory to someone that cares. Don't like? Not satisfied? Don't play. It's that simple. No need to pester others that find enjoyment in the game.

[Osmeric]

Imagine if in science we just made stuff up in order to complete theories.

You have no clue about how science actually works, do you?

Science is based on imprecise and unreliable evidence. It cannot be otherwise. Yet unlike you, scientists are not paralyzed by this. They draw provisional conclusions, of greater or lesser weight depending on the quality of the evidence. As evidence accumulates, the conclusions become more firm.

You have no evidence, that's the thing eh? Point of this thread is: swtor made 1 bil lifetime, EA is pleased. I accept that. You and that other poster are the ones that feel like downplaying it.

There is plenty of other evidence. For example, there is the number of servers in operation. There is the fact that EA did NOT say what the current $/quarter is from the game. You ignore this. This sort of selective perception is another form of your defective thinking.

So, take your conspiracy theory to someone that cares. Don't like? Not satisfied? Don't play. It's that simple. No need to pester others that find enjoyment in the game.

I don't play SWTOR. I played for one month when it came out and never went back. Let me tell you, that it has survived as long as it has has surprised me.

[Katchii]

You have no clue about how science actually works, do you?

Science is based on imprecise and unreliable evidence. It cannot be otherwise. Yet unlike you, scientists are not paralyzed by this. They draw provisional conclusions, of greater or lesser weight depending on the quality of the evidence. As evidence accumulates, the conclusions become more firm.

You don't know how science works either, apparently, if you believe it's based on imprecise or unreliable evidence.

It may sometimes be incomplete, because we either don't have the technology or ability to gather a complete set of data, but that is a far cry from imprecise and unreliable.

There is plenty of other evidence. For example, there is the number of servers in operation. There is the fact that EA did NOT say what the current $/quarter is from the game. You ignore this. This sort of selective perception is another form of your defective thinking.

The evidence you're pointing to just proves that it's a relatively small population game without the need for many servers and hasn't made enough in a quarter to be noteworthy enough to be singled out. That doesn't mean it's not successful. The game is doing just fine.

I don't play SWTOR. I played for one month when it came out and never went back. Let me tell you, that it has survived as long as it has has surprised me.

You have every right to post here, regardless of your player status...but if what you said is true and you don't care about the game, I have to ask what purpose you posting here serves other than just trying to stir the pot?

[quras]

SNIP.... What exactly are you trying to accomplish here?

The same thing that led me to post at all to your nonsense post about swtor and revenue.

Show to you that you have to be some kind of fool to think this game at this point makes anywhere near 125 million a year as you eluded readers to believe.
Why that is simply not the case in bioware boasting of making 1 billion dollars. Readers were told 1 billion because it sounds good and we were not told what it made in 2019 because... Well thats not worth mentioning anywhere it seems, not even to shareholders.

It's more than likely made the bulk of that when it was more popular. Sadly, 8 years later when the game can't even get mentioned damn near anywhere, there is just no way swtor makes that kind of money and I explained why. you tried to turn it into some "game is dying debate" which I didn't say.

[Swnem]

You have no clue about how science actually works, do you?

Science is based on imprecise and unreliable evidence. It cannot be otherwise. Yet unlike you, scientists are not paralyzed by this. They draw provisional conclusions, of greater or lesser weight depending on the quality of the evidence. As evidence accumulates, the conclusions become more firm.



There is plenty of other evidence. For example, there is the number of servers in operation. There is the fact that EA did NOT say what the current $/quarter is from the game. You ignore this. This sort of selective perception is another form of your defective thinking.



I don't play SWTOR. I played for one month when it came out and never went back. Let me tell you, that it has survived as long as it has has surprised me.

What a bundle of nonsense. You don't know how science works. Afraid it's not me. You should look up raw data and hypothesis. Cause those are what you are talking about. Your hypothesis does not graduate to theory without evidence. Evidence can be acquired from data if properly processed and verified. Shock, it's what you and your buddy don't have for your assertions. Thus why it is a hypothesis or like i like to call it, speculation or conspiracy theory to support a narrative.

Revenue is not generated only by number of players/subs. It's generated by the whales in the cartel market too. For the millionth time, we don't know how much it's been doing. We do know it's lost players from launch, yes. But that is why it went for a hybrid model. The new servers are mega servers and hold way more people than the old ones, but there is no doubt that many servers were dead back in the day and many players left. These new ones seem to be pretty healthy though.

So, at least you confess that you have no knowledge of what happened to the game. Dude, I think this conversation has run it's course. There's really nothing else to get from this exchange.

- - - Updated - - -

The same thing that led me to post at all to your nonsense post about swtor and revenue.

Show to you that you have to be some kind of fool to think this game at this point makes anywhere near 125 million a year as you eluded readers to believe.
Why that is simply not the case in bioware boasting of making 1 billion dollars. Readers were told 1 billion because it sounds good and we were not told what it made in 2019 because... Well thats not worth mentioning anywhere it seems, not even to shareholders.

It's more than likely made the bulk of that when it was more popular. Sadly, 8 years later when the game can't even get mentioned damn near anywhere, there is just no way swtor makes that kind of money and I explained why. you tried to turn it into some "game is dying debate" which I didn't say.

I figured. That is why i said you were talking to yourself. You got the wrong poster buddy. Wasn't me that said that.

I totally admit the game may have made more in the first year, but we don't know the proportions of the revenue from there onwards. So, my answer to your narrative has always been we don't know. The game has been in clear populational decline since launch (not necessarely in whale decline), but with Ossus/Onslaught it hasn't been the case. The game has plenty of activity. So, i really doubt that last year the game did worse than the years since KOTFE/ET. So, i have trouble buying your narrative that the game is in constant decline.

[Osmeric]

You don't know how science works either, apparently, if you believe it's based on imprecise or unreliable evidence.

You are wrong, of course. ALL evidence in science is fraught with the potential for error. There are statistical measurement errors. There are systematic errors in design of experiments. There are errors of inappropriate models. There are human errors, inherent biases, and even outright fraud. NO experiment in science produces 100% certain facts. Yet science advances anyway, because it produces provisional truths, not absolute certainty.

Time and again in the history of science provisional results have later been shown to be wrong. Science is not a laying down on one fact brick after another, it's a work in progress where things get torn down too.

And if you know how science is done in the trenches, it isn't a crystal clear deductive enterprise. It's a morass of uncertainty and confusion, where scientists often have to guess which of conflicting results they should ignore.

[Katchii]

You are wrong, of course. ALL evidence in science is fraught with the potential for error. There are statistical measurement errors. There are systematic errors in design of experiments. There are errors of inappropriate models. There are human errors, inherent biases, and even outright fraud. NO experiment in science produces 100% certain facts. Yet science advances anyway, because it produces provisional truths, not absolute certainty.

Time and again in the history of science provisional results have later been shown to be wrong. Science is not a laying down on one fact brick after another, it's a work in progress where things get torn down too.

And if you know how science is done in the trenches, it isn't a crystal clear deductive enterprise. It's a morass of uncertainty and confusion, where scientists often have to guess which of conflicting results they should ignore.

The point is, if you believe science is filled with people moving forward based on imprecise or unreliable evidence you're flat out wrong. It being able to change over time as new evidence comes forward doesn't change that truth. No evidence gets ignored either. Decisions get made favoring one thing over another, because as you say, there IS some level of uncertainty in SOME areas of science but that doesn't mean the other options or information gets ignored.

That said, saying "science" like it covers literally all areas of it, is incredibly misleading. Science on the bleeding edge of technology is more like you describe, where venturing into the unknown means there's a LOT of unanswered questions and you're forced to work from incomplete data to try and make something of it and possibly doing things wrong that doesn't mean the data they're using is imprecise or unreliable, it just means you DON'T KNOW what to do with it because you don't necessarily know what it means because no one has ever seen this stuff before. I'd argue that the vast majority of science is in established areas where the subject matter is well known and characterized and all you're doing is going through the correct process to ensure you have a valid experiment/ study with results you can defend.

Source: I'm a microbiologist.

[Fkiolaris]

Point is, whichever way you try to cut what is and isn't evidence, all the indicators available show that there is practically zero chance that SWTOR made 125 million dollars last year. So trying to attack people that point that out (talking about the other poster above) is out of order I am afraid.

Now before this circular, pointless discussion keeps rolling, lets wait and see what updates the game will be getting. I am willing the bet that quras is 100% correct simply because, well, of all the other major patches and "expansions" and downsizing of the last few years.

[Osmeric]

Katchii: if you're a microbiologist, you're a stunningly ignorant one.

Science, including biology, is in the middle of a reproducibility crisis. Much published research is garbage and wrong. You are drowning in imprecise and unreliable evidence.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

[Fkiolaris]

Science, including biology, is in the middle of a reproducibility crisis. Much published research is garbage and wrong. You are drowning in imprecise and unreliable evidence.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

Off-topic (and apologies): mate, you brought back memories from years ago with that paper, kudos :-).

[Swnem]

Point is, whichever way you try to cut what is and isn't evidence, all the indicators available show that there is practically zero chance that SWTOR made 125 million dollars last year. So trying to attack people that point that out (talking about the other poster above) is out of order I am afraid.

Now before this circular, pointless discussion keeps rolling, lets wait and see what updates the game will be getting. I am willing the bet that quras is 100% correct simply because, well, of all the other major patches and "expansions" and downsizing of the last few years.

I think you got this wrong. It's those posters that attacked the guy that said that and some of us that never advocated it. They are the ones that have been out of order and shooting in every direction.
Heck the guy you are defending is spreading false information over how scientific results are built and is considering something published as something verified and accepted by the scientific community and graduated to theory. Surely, you can see who is in the wrong here, but maybe you got a personal investment of some sort.

Oh and btw there is no evidence in favor or against swtor making 125m last year. We don't know at all. We got literally zero data to work with to extrapolate it. You can't say it did or it didn't. You can only speculate. I would love to see these indicators of yours.

[Katchii]

Katchii: if you're a microbiologist, you're a stunningly ignorant one.

Science, including biology, is in the middle of a reproducibility crisis. Much published research is garbage and wrong. You are drowning in imprecise and unreliable evidence.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

I really couldn't give two shits what some random internet poster thinks of me or my abilities. I know my field, you THINK you do.

Not going to respond anymore as it's off-topic.

[quras]

SNIP...

Oh and btw there is no evidence in favor or against swtor making 125m last year. We don't know at all. We got literally zero data to work with to extrapolate it. You can't say it did or it didn't. You can only speculate. I would love to see these indicators of yours.

Oh there is plenty of evidence as to why swtor isn't making anywhere near 125M a year. You might not like it or even agree with it and it's circumstantial for parts of it but it's evidence none the less.

what isn't circumstantial is Server mergers like swtor has has went through from 217 to 5 in 8 years. It didn't happening because the game is doing all that well. It's just not doing so poorly they will shut it down. I think thats going to happen when the SW contract runs out with EA.

However ,there is plenty of things that point to this game making no where near that kind of money a year. Hell, if it made much money at all it would at least get a mention in the very area EA wants to talk about money with it's shareholders.