Turbine sacks Jeff Anderson

[Gutboy Barrelhouse]

From Warcry:

Turbine has undergone a corporate shake-up, according to sources within the company and some quiet edits to their own website. The official company page now lists Jim Crowley as President and CEO, removing all mention of Jeff Anderson.

The move comes suddenly, as WarCry interviewed Anderson only last week at DigitalLife and saw no indications. There is no word on how or why he left at this time.

WarCry was not able to get official comment on the move from Turbine as the changes were discovered outside of business hours. We will continue to follow this story as it develops.

[Trippy]

Hmm...

[LC]

Maybe they got tired of making bad games.

[Sairon]

Turbine is a funny company. I mean they have the MMO experience under the belt and I've always felt that the games they've released during later years have always hold a high technical standard when compared to most of the field. However, someone responsible for game design at that company doesn't know what the hell he's doing. I guess AC2 could get some points for originality when compared to other dikus, but there was still so much wrong.

[Evil Elvis]

'Bout time.

[Hutch]

Turbine is a funny company. I mean they have the MMO experience under the belt and I've always felt that the games they've released during later years have always hold a high technical standard when compared to most of the field. However, someone responsible for game design at that company doesn't know what the hell he's doing. I guess AC2 could get some points for originality when compared to other dikus, but there was still so much wrong that they shut down the servers.

fify ;)

AC2 was too much like other dikus.

AC1 was my first MMO, so I was hoping for AC2 to be AC1 with the bugs and horrible imbalancing removed. Instead, they gave us races and classes. And weird, slip-n-slide character animation. And towns devoid of NPCs. And a (comparatively) tiny world to explore. And monsters roaming the landscape that could only be tackled in groups. Et cetera.

[Salamok]

never played AC but my free trial of DnD Online was so turn based it should have been called DnD Offline.

[atricks]

   Does this mean they will start making mmos that don't put me to sleep when I try to play them?

[Numtini]

I'd have to guess that the LOTRO 800k second largest western MMO stories weren't accurate. That or someone had insanely inflated ideas of success.

[SnakeCharmer]

IIRC, LOTRO boasted 800K characters, not subs.

How many characters could you have on one realm/server?

[Trippy]

No, they claimed 4 million characters.

[BigBlack]

Looking forward to seeing what this means.

Or, maybe not, since the new president may very well decide to shitcan AC1. :(

[Merusk]

That'd be incredibly dumb, since all their costs are paid for and it's just a revenue stream at this point.  Consolodate servers, maybe, shut down? Pft.   Same reason you see UO running 10 years later.

How big was LOTR's beta?  I imagine most of those beta folks who bought jumped at the chance for a lifetime sub for less than 1 year's sub to the game.  It's almost stupid not to have done so.  Of course an offer like that can fuck the company offering it if all they get for subs is 60% lifetimers and 40% recurring subs.  Perhaps that's what happened here.

[Trippy]

Or, maybe not, since the new president may very well decide to shitcan AC1. :(

Jim Crowley was the producer on AC1.

[Broughden]

That'd be incredibly dumb, since all their costs are paid for and it's just a revenue stream at this point. 

Remember. We are talking about Turbine here.

[Jamiko]

Or, maybe not, since the new president may very well decide to shitcan AC1. :(

Jim Crowley was the producer on AC1.

Scenario wrote this on the LotRO forums: "You are confusing Jim Crowley with Dave "Crowley" Javier (AC1's Producer, and not Jim Crowley). They are two different people."

[shiznitz]

Obviously none of us knows the details of the LotR license agreement, but it isn't outside the realm of possibility that the cuurent subscriber levels do not generate sufficient revenue to support the royalty. I doubt the license fee was just a one-time payment.

[Johny Cee]

That'd be incredibly dumb, since all their costs are paid for and it's just a revenue stream at this point.  Consolodate servers, maybe, shut down? Pft.   Same reason you see UO running 10 years later.

How big was LOTR's beta?  I imagine most of those beta folks who bought jumped at the chance for a lifetime sub for less than 1 year's sub to the game.  It's almost stupid not to have done so.  Of course an offer like that can fuck the company offering it if all they get for subs is 60% lifetimers and 40% recurring subs.  Perhaps that's what happened here.

I have to think that Lifetime subs are a good idea.  It means it's free to check up on an MMO,  and maybe get back into it.  If you get back into it,  you tend to drag a couple friends with you.  Kind of guarantees you'll never hit a position like DAoC where you have people quiting from burnout,  then other people quiting because the place is depopulated.

I know with Magic Online,  since you can screw around in casual for free,  I'll go a couple months without logging in.  That get sucked back in because I go check the casual/new cards and find something I like to do. 

[BigBlack]

That'd be incredibly dumb, since all their costs are paid for and it's just a revenue stream at this point.  Consolodate servers, maybe, shut down? Pft.   Same reason you see UO running 10 years later.

I'm inclined to agree, but AC1's numbers appear to be significantly lower than UO's - and AC1 does a new update every month.  Staff costs alone have got to be over $100k a year for the game (they have at least 4 people on the live team), the rough equivalent of 10,000 subs.  Server costs can't be too huge, but still.

[sam, an eggplant]

I have to think that Lifetime subs are a good idea.

You're cracked, offering lifetime subscriptions for $200 when the game costs $15/month is simply bad business.

[Venkman]

Lifetime subs are good business, for the company, and the few people with the mental facility to a) stay with a brand-new unproven game for 18 months at least; and, b) to survive the sort of sweeping changes an MMO can go through. But for the rest of humanity, it's just odd.

They recently announced the reactivation of that lifetime program, for people who started the game after launch and fall into the above category.

As for Jeff, I hope it was amicable and mutual.

[stu]

Implementing the lifetime subscription option is a good idea. MMO players are always looking for the next big thing, hopping from one game to the next. Just wait and see what happens when Conan and Warhammer are released. Even WoW was created with a subscription life expectancy of six months at launch. At $15/mo and the game purchase, that's still less than $200. For a non-WoW MMO, lifetime subs can guarantee a company 6+ months worth of reveue in one payment and retain veteran players. An MMO with a strong in-game community/veteran base will always foster new players, thus keeping the ship afloat with new subs. It's kind of like MMO Reaganomics lol.

[Jamiko]

They recently announced the reactivation of that lifetime program, for people who started the game after launch and fall into the above category.

The lifetime fee offer for Founders has been reactivated. A Founder is someone who preordered the game *and* activated their account at retail launch (chose the $9.95 monthly fee instead of the lifetime). That fee is still $199. No credit for previous monthly payments made. Founders that referred a friend are also eligible for this program.

They also have offered a lifetime fee for non-Founders (like you describe above - people that started playing later and are paying $14.95 per month) and that amount is $299. Just to make it clear.

Edit: Added monthly fee for non-founders for additional clarity.

[Nebu]

They also have offered a lifetime fee for non-Founders (like you describe above - people that started playing later) and that amount is $299. Just to make it clear.

20 months to break even?  Wow... just wow.

[sam, an eggplant]

$299 is a more reasonable price, but offering lifetime subscriptions is still crazy. Turbine must be in a liquidity crunch.

[BigBlack]

I can actually imagine it not being that crazy if the numbers work out right.  A company named Student Advantage reamed me and many of my friends at college by selling a four year "Super student discount" to us when we came in as freshmen.  10% off here, 15% off there.  Lasts 4 years, for the grand ol' price of $50.  I don't know a single person who's even come close to breaking *even* on using the discount, much less coming out ahead.  If enough people who buy the Lifetime Subscription wouldn't have blown $200 (or now $300) on the subscription otherwise, however many they *do* sell, they're coming out ahead.  And even if they come out behind on a few, those people have zero barrier to entry if they quit and want to come back later on, which might help them weather some of the inevitable population decline a Diku MMO experiences a few years out.

And since it's not a physical commodity they're selling -- it didn't cost them any money to produce the lifetime subs -- they don't lose a thing if it turns out not many people take advantage of the offer.

I know a lot of gamers.  I know a lot of people who've gotten into WoW.  I know far fewer who've spent $200+ on WoW, and maybe one who's spent $300+.  And even if one guy would have spent $250 otherwise, that's only a marginal loss of $50.  I'd wager (AKA I'm talking out of my ass here, but whatever it seems reasonable) that for every one guy like that, there are three or four who buy the lifetime on impulse and burn out after a month or three.  The margins are on Turbine's side.

The only scenario I could see this really becoming a problem is if they end up six years from now with really low sub numbers and an abnormally large chunk of those are lifetimers.  But in a situation like that, if what shiznitz guesses is true and the licensing fee to Tolkien's people isn't just a one-time payment, they're probably in trouble either way whether they've got too many lifetime subscribers or not.

Yes, I know, making judgments about corporate strategy on internet message boards = fail.  But I can at least imagine some very possible scenarios where Turbine's lifetime subscription offer makes good sense.

[Evildrider]

never played AC but my free trial of DnD Online was so turn based it should have been called DnD Offline.

Then you must not have played it at all, seriously, there is nothing turn based in DDO.  Unless you consider every other MMO out there turn based as well.

I've been playing DDO since launch, and it's the only Turbine game I've played.  I really don't have many complaints other then they need to get content out as fast as possible.  I'm still enjoying the game and it manages to be fun and keep my attention.  Which WoW couldn't do. 

I'm actually kind of spoiled by DDO's combat system.  I can't stand other MMO's because of that.  AoC looked like they were on the right track, but they failed as far as i've seen.

Although I'm hoping that the shake-up will step up the games content progression.

[Johny Cee]

I can actually imagine it not being that crazy if the numbers work out right.  A company named Student Advantage reamed me and many of my friends at college by selling a four year "Super student discount" to us when we came in as freshmen.  10% off here, 15% off there.  Lasts 4 years, for the grand ol' price of $50.  I don't know a single person who's even come close to breaking *even* on using the discount, much less coming out ahead.  If enough people who buy the Lifetime Subscription wouldn't have blown $200 (or now $300) on the subscription otherwise, however many they *do* sell, they're coming out ahead.  And even if they come out behind on a few, those people have zero barrier to entry if they quit and want to come back later on, which might help them weather some of the inevitable population decline a Diku MMO experiences a few years out.

And since it's not a physical commodity they're selling -- it didn't cost them any money to produce the lifetime subs -- they don't lose a thing if it turns out not many people take advantage of the offer.

I know a lot of gamers.  I know a lot of people who've gotten into WoW.  I know far fewer who've spent $200+ on WoW, and maybe one who's spent $300+.  And even if one guy would have spent $250 otherwise, that's only a marginal loss of $50.  I'd wager (AKA I'm talking out of my ass here, but whatever it seems reasonable) that for every one guy like that, there are three or four who buy the lifetime on impulse and burn out after a month or three.  The margins are on Turbine's side.

The only scenario I could see this really becoming a problem is if they end up six years from now with really low sub numbers and an abnormally large chunk of those are lifetimers.  But in a situation like that, if what shiznitz guesses is true and the licensing fee to Tolkien's people isn't just a one-time payment, they're probably in trouble either way whether they've got too many lifetime subscribers or not.

Yes, I know, making judgments about corporate strategy on internet message boards = fail.  But I can at least imagine some very possible scenarios where Turbine's lifetime subscription offer makes good sense.

From a finance angle:

When you're evaluating a stream of payments versus a payment up front, the discount rate you use is king. 

If a significant amount of the cost of producing LOTR was debt, rather than equity,  the discount rate would be something like: inflation + interest rate of financing + <value you attach to better liquidity and current ratio>

A large amount of payments on the front end can mean you can payoff or refinance your debt, reducing your long term interest payments.  It also means that you make your balance sheet look better (current ratio, working capital ratio, debt-to-equity ratios, etc.),  meaning it's easier to secure financing for your next project.  Rather then having to delay new projects while you payoff old debt,  or are forced to secure new debt or equity investments at disadvantageous terms.

[Sairon]

Turbine is a funny company. I mean they have the MMO experience under the belt and I've always felt that the games they've released during later years have always hold a high technical standard when compared to most of the field. However, someone responsible for game design at that company doesn't know what the hell he's doing. I guess AC2 could get some points for originality when compared to other dikus, but there was still so much wrong that they shut down the servers.

fify ;)

AC2 was too much like other dikus.

AC1 was my first MMO, so I was hoping for AC2 to be AC1 with the bugs and horrible imbalancing removed. Instead, they gave us races and classes. And weird, slip-n-slide character animation. And towns devoid of NPCs. And a (comparatively) tiny world to explore. And monsters roaming the landscape that could only be tackled in groups. Et cetera.

AC2 was in fact pretty original. They had some original classes, the sentry dude comes to mind. The whole "no NPCs deal". The crafting system which iirc was pretty deep compared to what was around at the time. The whole take on a story in a MMO also comes to mind.

[Numtini]

AC2 had everything going for it except one thing, it wasn't any fun to play.

[Stormwaltz]

 

[Trippy]

Spill it! You can't leave us hanging like that.

[Numtini]

Oh on the lifetime thing, is $250 or 200 a good deal for the company? Well, I have never spent that much on a single game except for, you guessed it, UO. It's a good deal.

[Hutch]

AC2 was in fact pretty original. They had some original classes, the sentry dude comes to mind. The whole "no NPCs deal". The crafting system which iirc was pretty deep compared to what was around at the time. The whole take on a story in a MMO also comes to mind.

I agree that it was original. And I"m going to stop there, before this spirals into yet another treatise on the pros and cons of AC2. We've all been there, no need to go again :)

[Hutch]

Spill it! You can't leave us hanging like that.

I second the motion.