| 60 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Did SWTOR paid for itself already? |
|
|
7/23/12 9:46:28 AM#2
A couple other people have pointed out that it might not work like that. Even if they got gobs of money at launch, they may have structured things to expect a certain amount of money every month, in the hopes that the money coming in would be than the money they've agreed to pay out every month. The game could be in a perpetual state of being paid for. Join the League For Gamers. |
|
|
7/23/12 9:48:04 AM#3
Probably not because they are laying off people. I'm sure there is more to come. |
|
|
All one needs to know is how much money was spent and how much has entered so far. |
|
|
7/23/12 9:59:58 AM#5
Originally posted by Mephster The layoffs are typical as has been explained. . large group for initail development. . smaller group for maintanence and new content. They do not need to create as much etc. Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is! |
|
|
7/23/12 12:26:59 PM#6
Originally posted by Mephster Downsizing development teams always happens when a big milestone has been passed in realizing some software. Banks, insurers, public services, etc. do it as well. You simply don't need the workforce for maintenance, bugfixing and incremental improvement. Or rather the needs for different talent arises. Where you needed programmers at first, now you need administrators. |
|
|
7/23/12 3:08:06 PM#7
Originally posted by theAsna But the problem here is EA said flat out and quite loud that they do not want to cut the staff at all. I'm sure someone has to have that quote. I should of saved it but didn't, that's on me but it damn sure happen. Paraphrasing it went something like...They want to keep their entire staff intact post launch so they can continue releasing content without delay. There is another quote from EA when 1.2 came out that said they will from here on out be releasing content once a month, every month. That was content they said, not just tweaks here and there but content. It hasn't happen and there's noway to say it has. Must I provide souces? I'm sure someone has them and be careful what you ask for because they do exist. |
|
|
7/23/12 3:43:07 PM#8
If they spent $200 millions making it, then not a snowballs chance in hell. |
|
|
7/24/12 1:46:49 AM#9
Originally posted by busdriver Assuming they never sold a single Collector's Edition box, the game made $115 million on day 1. Additionally, there is a press statement from January/Feb time frame (hard to pull up on my phone here) where Bioware said, flat out, that the game was making them a profit. So yeah... you can think what you want to. Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access. |
|
|
7/24/12 4:22:03 AM#10
Nope, games not making any profit, still in the red, recent layoffs prove it. They will cut expenses (including staff) until they are in the green. And yes, James Ohlen was sure to mention in any possible pre and during launch that they WILL NOT downsize the team. So much for that lol. And JO is THE man in charge of SWTOR. |
|
|
7/24/12 4:31:59 AM#11
Originally posted by Danrlei Not in real world. Here's an easy to read page to learn more. |
|
|
7/24/12 9:35:18 AM#12
Originally posted by Souldrainer
To OP:
This is the fundamental issue of people chiming in on a complex subject for which they appear to have little, or probably no, training. In the second message, the poster clearly claims MARKET SALES which isn't even "gross revenue" to EA. That number he made up wasn't even the right "wrong number." He looks at retail sales and ignores the wholesale selling price EA got. He ignores the costs of sales. He ignores marketing. Continuing development. Overhead. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Sadly, There's nothing right about what he said in his generic claim. And yet he says this: So yeah... you can think what you want to. You tell me, does aggressively asserting something so factually wrong that anyone who has ever run a business, never mind is a CPA, can see is horribly wrong somehow make it right?
The SEC has a good brochure on what a financial statement is and how profit is computed:
An income statement is a report that shows how much revenue a company earned over a specific time period (usually for a year or some portion of a year). An income statement also shows the costs and expenses associated with earning that revenue. The literal “bottom line” of the statement usually shows the company’s net earnings or losses. This tells you how much the company earned or lost over the period. http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/begfinstmtguide.htm
You'll notice the SEC doesn't say: Multiply another company's retail sales by the other company's retail price = profit for the developer!!! Woot! Because that isn't it...
|
|
|
7/24/12 9:49:43 AM#13
Originally posted by MosesZD Thank you very much! Jeez, at that people that think a company actually earns 100% of retail sales. /facepalm |
|
|
7/24/12 10:55:53 AM#14
They spent $200-300 million on voice acting, graphics development, class development, pvp development, etc. And a share of profit coming from customers goes to Lucas Arts (a large chunk), a dev said at the guild summit (I think?) that they need over a million subscribers to make up for the cost spent which is roughly $75 million a month, chop that up into benefits going to Lucas Arts, so I don't think they've quite made back the amount spent yet. |
|
|
AG-Vuk
Hard Core Member
Joined: 7/26/04
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. |
7/24/12 11:43:06 AM#15
Originally posted by mikahr Layoffs prove nothing to a congolmerate as big as EA. Profits are easily shielded and not reported for tax reasons. Profit reports are a tool that are used to molify shareholders and award bonuses. One divisions cuts in manpower mean nothing, other then future products are being evalutated for manpower needs. That may be a issue of concern , but layoffs in general indicate nothing especially in this particular industry . If you were to comparing to tradition manufacturing, then yes. This isn't manufacturing this is entertainment and the rules are different. The fact that exectives are being removed or moved around indicated displeasure at the top . |
|
7/24/12 11:52:36 AM#16
I'm of the opinion that they didn't spend nearly as much on it compared to what's been reported. If so, they might have broken even just on box sales. CEO said in terms of profits it's not in EA's top-5 but is in the top-10. Even better than Tiger Woods PGA :-)
Of course, just because EA said something doesn't mean I believe it. |
|
|
7/24/12 11:53:50 AM#17
Originally posted by Danrlei Oh man, not even close. They've probably paid off the CGI trailers, and little else. This game broke the back of two huge development companies and made EA's stock nose dive. No, not even close. |
|
|
7/24/12 11:55:46 AM#18
Highly doubtful. Big difference between revenue and profit. They are lucky if they made 70% on retail sales and then LA takes 30% of monthly subs for the Star Wars IP. On top of that they spent millions on advertising and continuing development & support. |
|
|
7/24/12 11:56:35 AM#19
Originally posted by mikahr Your reasoning is flawed. Just because they are laying people off does not mean they are in the red. They could be in the black but obviously their revenues are dropping and their current structure and staff is unsustainable in the long run so the cuts could be necessary to ensure support for the game for the coming years.
This game sold so many Copies including collectors editions then enjoyed a solid first couple months of subscribership. Im confident they made a hefty profit and will tone the game down to cut any future losses.
Thanks to the hypsters, the pig was fed and thus we can all expect more hyped up and over spent MMOs meant for a quick profit in the near future. Now: Skyrim |
|
|
7/24/12 11:58:54 AM#20
Originally posted by ZigZags It was the most expensive MMO ever made, and it dissolved two development teams. There's no way they made a profit. According to EA's earlier estimates they'd have to run for at least 2-3 years before making a profit. |
|