WAR to be released...

[cevik]

Edit to adress haemish:   So if I say because John Mcain slept around on his wife I think John Mccain has Herpes.  I can use the fact that I said "I think" as a defense for a defamation suit.

I think there is a chance John McCain has herpes because he cheated on his wife.

It is a fact that John McCain has herpes.

Can you spot the difference in those two sentences?

[Vinadil]

We really need a standard for "success" in the MMO world that does not include millions of subscribers and billions in revenue.  I suppose it is hard to quantify many times, but most people consider "success" a 10-12% return on investment, with 18% being increadibly successful.  So $40million in, $46million out... and we are good.  I think that is why people see games like SWG, LotRO, and others and call them a success.  They are likely paying the bills... and included in those bills is the return to the investors.

[amiable]

OK, so you guys are taking umbrage that I took:

"Level-restricting an open beta just makes me think that the restricted parts aren't done"

to mean:

"Level-restricitng an open beta is proof that the restricted parts aren't done."  

And that "makes me think" is not "proof" so the validity of anything I have to say about why that may be a false assumption is defacto incorrect?

Because that really is a point worth fighting over.  If so mea culpa.

[kildorn]

We really need a standard for "success" in the MMO world that does not include millions of subscribers and billions in revenue.  I suppose it is hard to quantify many times, but most people consider "success" a 10-12% return on investment, with 18% being increadibly successful.  So $40million in, $46million out... and we are good.  I think that is why people see games like SWG, LotRO, and others and call them a success.  They are likely paying the bills... and included in those bills is the return to the investors.

Success in MMO land is not having your company's name/product becoming a verb to describe horrible things you shouldn't do.

[Kirth]

This is the greatest thread in months.   

It really makes you think.

[tazelbain]

Because that really is a point worth fighting over.

But is not entertaining Triforcer, its own reward?

[cevik]

OK, so you guys are taking umbrage that I took:

"Level-restricting an open beta just makes me think that the restricted parts aren't done"

to mean:

"Level-restricitng an open beta is proof that a game is incomplete."  

And that "makes me think" is not "proof" so the validity of anything I have to say about why that may be a false assumption is defacto incorrect?

Because that really is a point worth fighting over.  If so mea culpa.

You're the one that put words in Haemish's mouth and then tried to quote him to prove me wrong, so uhh.. was it worth the fight?  

Personally, I had a fun 30 minutes.

[squirrel]

We really need a standard for "success" in the MMO world that does not include millions of subscribers and billions in revenue.  I suppose it is hard to quantify many times, but most people consider "success" a 10-12% return on investment, with 18% being increadibly successful.  So $40million in, $46million out... and we are good.  I think that is why people see games like SWG, LotRO, and others and call them a success.  They are likely paying the bills... and included in those bills is the return to the investors.

It's an easy thing to calculate. Generally all you want is your return to be > your cost of capital. So Return (on either equity or investment) > CoC = Success.

ie. If it costs you 13% to borrow money and your game makes 15% return on the capital it's a success. This is a very simplified example of Net Present Value (which has a time component, i'm just making a point, don't freak out), which if it is positive is a success. What you count as your return really depends on how you're financed.

Now, that's from the business side, personally I think LotRO had much greater 'potential' and failed to realize it. So while not a failure, it's not what I would call successful, but then I don't have any skin in the game.

[amiable]

OK, so you guys are taking umbrage that I took:

"Level-restricting an open beta just makes me think that the restricted parts aren't done"

to mean:

"Level-restricitng an open beta is proof that a game is incomplete."  

And that "makes me think" is not "proof" so the validity of anything I have to say about why that may be a false assumption is defacto incorrect?

Because that really is a point worth fighting over.  If so mea culpa.

You're the one that put words in Haemish's mouth and then tried to quote him to prove me wrong, so uhh.. was it worth the fight?  

Personally, I had a fun 30 minutes.

Yes, I learned something.

[cevik]

Now, that's from the business side, personally I think LotRO had much greater 'potential' and failed to realize it.

This was what I was trying to say, only I like to do it in a more inflammatory way so that I get a chance to bump my post count a little higher.

[HaemishM]

Yes, I learned something.

So did I.

Reading is hard for some and whatnot.

[amiable]

Yes, I learned something.

So did I.

Reading is hard for some and whatnot.

Well then, I will man up and admit I was wrong and you and Cezvik were right about my lack of reading comprehension.  I still think my point about LOTRO related to open beta is valid though.

[Triforcer]

We really need a standard for "success" in the MMO world that does not include millions of subscribers and billions in revenue.  I suppose it is hard to quantify many times, but most people consider "success" a 10-12% return on investment, with 18% being increadibly successful.  So $40million in, $46million out... and we are good.  I think that is why people see games like SWG, LotRO, and others and call them a success.  They are likely paying the bills... and included in those bills is the return to the investors.

It's an easy thing to calculate. Generally all you want is your return to be > your cost of capital. So Return (on either equity or investment) > CoC = Success.

ie. If it costs you 13% to borrow money and your game makes 15% return on the capital it's a success. This is a very simplified example of Net Present Value (which has a time component, i'm just making a point, don't freak out), which if it is positive is a success. What you count as your return really depends on how you're financed.

Now, that's from the business side, personally I think LotRO had much greater 'potential' and failed to realize it. So while not a failure, it's not what I would call successful, but then I don't have any skin in the game.

A small profit is a failure if the same funds used to make the product could've produced a larger profit if diverted elsewhere.  Time value of money and whatnot. 

[squirrel]

We really need a standard for "success" in the MMO world that does not include millions of subscribers and billions in revenue.  I suppose it is hard to quantify many times, but most people consider "success" a 10-12% return on investment, with 18% being increadibly successful.  So $40million in, $46million out... and we are good.  I think that is why people see games like SWG, LotRO, and others and call them a success.  They are likely paying the bills... and included in those bills is the return to the investors.

It's an easy thing to calculate. Generally all you want is your return to be > your cost of capital. So Return (on either equity or investment) > CoC = Success.

ie. If it costs you 13% to borrow money and your game makes 15% return on the capital it's a success. This is a very simplified example of Net Present Value (which has a time component, i'm just making a point, don't freak out), which if it is positive is a success. What you count as your return really depends on how you're financed.

Now, that's from the business side, personally I think LotRO had much greater 'potential' and failed to realize it. So while not a failure, it's not what I would call successful, but then I don't have any skin in the game.

A small profit is a failure if the same funds used to make the product could've produced a larger profit if diverted elsewhere.  Time value of money and whatnot. 

Heh yes I know. I was keeping it simple. Although technically any project where NPV >0  is a worth doing as NPV is designed to manage the time value as I said. However that doesn't make it a "good" investment if there are other opportunities that would've yielded a higher RoE/RoI. In that case you should do the project/investment with the highest NPV at the end. Of course those are reliant on good projections, which given the IP I seriously doubt LotRO had. Oil futures probably would've performed A LOT better.

[Vinadil]

A small profit is a failure if the same funds used to make the product could've produced a larger profit if diverted elsewhere.  Time value of money and whatnot. 

I know it is semantics... but really I would call that a mistake, not a failure.  Otherwise you are saying that every choice I make that is not the BEST POSSIBLE OF ALL CHOICES!! is a failure.  I suppose a person could try to live in that world, but man that has to be a depressing place.

[squirrel]

A small profit is a failure if the same funds used to make the product could've produced a larger profit if diverted elsewhere.  Time value of money and whatnot. 

I know it is semantics... but really I would call that a mistake, not a failure.  Otherwise you are saying that every choice I make that is not the BEST POSSIBLE OF ALL CHOICES!! is a failure.  I suppose a person could try to live in that world, but man that has to be a depressing place.

Yeah this is correct. Also, risk profiles are generally taken into account. Investing in monkey brain futures may conceivably be a better choice than steel futures, but it's hella riskier.

Also investors absolutely LOVE recurring revenue (such as subscriptions) which may account for some of the, erm, odd projects that seem to get funded.

[tmp]

Thanks, if someone in the knows defense of the NDA not being lifted is that it's just as good as LoTRO, then it made canceling my pre-order all that much easier!

I owe you one (technically I probably will end up owing you $204.14).

Eh, he isn't defending NDA being kept in place; he's just providing LotRO as example of game that had level cap in open beta but still had content fully developed past that open beta cap, in response to your point how level cap must mean that content is missing.

Don't cross the streams.

[cevik]

in response to your point how level cap must mean that content is missing.

Holy fucking shit, are we really about to do this all over again?

EDIT:  Just for the record, I didn't say anything about the level cap, that was someone else.  I'm all about the NDA not being lifted.

[Kirth]

in response to your point how level cap must mean that content is missing.

Holy fucking shit, are we really about to do this all over again?

Queue benny hill music?

[tmp]

EDIT:  Just for the record, I didn't say anything about the level cap, that was someone else.  I'm all about the NDA not being lifted.

Well, the level cap thing was technically Haemish's saying and then there's your follow up to the effect how using LotRO as example is helping to make "your" (plural) point, but that's really a) splitting hair and b) largely red herring.

Regarding the main thing that's NDA drop i haven't actually seen a statement that it is *not* being dropped before game launch -- that quoted stuff earlier in the thread is about open beta and doesn't mention NDA in one way or another whatsoever. Then on another forum there's mention NDA is likely to be dropped next week, which seems reasonable.

[WayAbvPar]

Bombed doesn't begin to describe whatever it is auto assault did.

Auto Assault got 200 feet off the ground, had the bomb stick in the bomb bay doors, then flew directly into a mountain of pig shit.

[Mrbloodworth]

Did they make their money back? Is everyone getting paid? Is there an expansion coming out? Are investors happy? Are customers happy? Is a profit being made?


Your version of unsuccessful, and "bombed" is not mine.

Did they make their money back?  I don't know, have a link?

Is there an expansion coming out?  SWG had an expansion, and it too bombed.

Are the investors happy?  Turbine isn't public, but I suspect they've had to do a lot of answering to the investors.

Are the customers happy?  I'd say no, since the subscriptions started dropping and then Turbine stopped telling us what the numbers were.  Anecdotal:  I certainly wasn't a happy customer, my wife wasn't a happy customer, my 3 friends that played the game weren't happy customers, the guild I was in that fell apart wasn't full of happy customers.

Is a profit being made?  No idea, Turbine isn't public as best I can tell, so I don't think either of us know that.

What's your point again?

My point being, you don't know the opposite is true. You just like to hate games that are not your favored ones. You have become about as bad as an official forums poster. Enjoy extreme land where everything not wow is "FAIL!!1!!OMGWTFBBQ".

[cevik]

My point being, you don't know the opposite is true. You just like to hate games that are not your favored ones. You have become about as bad as an official forums poster. Enjoy extreme land where everything not wow is "FAIL!!1!!OMGWTFBBQ".

I'm not really being all that extreme when I say that LotRO didn't even remotely approach what it should have in terms of concurrent subscribers when it comes to the IP that they had available.

[Ingmar]

My point being, you don't know the opposite is true. You just like to hate games that are not your favored ones. You have become about as bad as an official forums poster. Enjoy extreme land where everything not wow is "FAIL!!1!!OMGWTFBBQ".

I'm not really being all that extreme when I say that LotRO didn't even remotely approach what it should have in terms of concurrent subscribers when it comes to the IP that they had available.

I don't think LotR is actually the primo gaming IP that everyone keeps acting like it is. It never sells like everyone expects it to, no matter what the game format is (boardgames excepted.)

[Mrbloodworth]

My point being, you don't know the opposite is true. You just like to hate games that are not your favored ones. You have become about as bad as an official forums poster. Enjoy extreme land where everything not wow is "FAIL!!1!!OMGWTFBBQ".

I'm not really being all that extreme when I say that LotRO didn't even remotely approach what it should have in terms of concurrent subscribers when it comes to the IP that they had available.

You didn't say that now did you? You said it bombed, Failed, sucked ETC... those words to me, are reserved for things that really DO fail, or when im just voicing my opinion. Not for games i just don't like, or felt had more "Potential".

If that were the case, EvE should never have been what it is today, because it "FAILED" so long ago.

LOTRO is doing just fine from what i can see, and never "Bombed" or "Failed". Seed FAILED (RIP), Perpetuals ST:O FAILED, Auto Assault FAILED.

Doesn't really matter, this whole derail is completely stupid. Some one brought up a valid point in response to what they quoted, but you just had to let everyone know your canceling your preorder.

[cevik]

Well, the level cap thing was technically Haemish's saying and then there's your follow up to the effect how using LotRO as example is helping to make "your" (plural) point, but that's really a) splitting hair and b) largely red herring.

Just for the record, I haven't claimed anyone else in the thread is even remotely aligned to my point, if I said something plural it was either a mistake or I meant it in the royal sense.  I even went so far as to say that the open beta parts of Haemish's point weren't really something I agreed to.

I just said that if someone likes LotRO, that if they also say they like Warhammer Online, I'm taking that as a negative towards Warhammer Online, not a positive.  This is especially true because the NDA is still in place, so the only information I'm allowed to know about the game is what Mythic tells me, and when I watched their released video of the game it looked like combat was slow and boring (see:  G4TV video) and, since I thought LotRO combat was slow and boring, it adds weight to the "if you like LotRO I probably don't share any common interests with you".

Regarding the main thing that's NDA drop i haven't actually seen a statement that it is *not* being dropped before game launch -- that quoted stuff earlier in the thread is about open beta and doesn't mention NDA in one way or another whatsoever. Then on another forum there's mention NDA is likely to be dropped next week, which seems reasonable.

I can only go by what I know, and at this point the NDA has not been lifted.  Could it be lifted in the next hour?  Maybe.  But for every minute it stays under NDA I have to think it hurts the game more than it helps it.  Unless Mythic has something to hide.  Which goes back to my point, not lifting the NDA makes it appear you have something to hide.  If they do then not lifting the NDA is probably good to keep those only peripherally paying attention on board.

[cevik]

You didn't say that now did you? You said it bombed, Failed, sucked ETC... those words to me, are reserved for things that really DO fail, or when im just voicing my opinion. Not for games i just don't like, or felt had more "Potential".

When you compare the actual LotRO subscription numbers to what any sane person would have thought the potential for that IP's subscription numbers could have been, it is my opinion that the game bombed.  It bombed in a horrible and tragic way.  It bombed so horrifically that I'm actually embarrassed when it see any of the letters l o t r or o.  A lot of words have one or two o's in them, I spend a lot of time embarrassed for that poor, poor abortion of a game.  And I'm using the word "game" very loosely here.

And it bombed because it sucked.

[Mrbloodworth]

[amiable]

You didn't say that now did you? You said it bombed, Failed, sucked ETC... those words to me, are reserved for things that really DO fail, or when im just voicing my opinion. Not for games i just don't like, or felt had more "Potential".

When you compare the actual LotRO subscription numbers to what any sane person would have thought the potential for that IP's subscription numbers could have been, it is my opinion that the game bombed.  It bombed in a horrible and tragic way.  It bombed so horrifically that I'm actually embarrassed when it see any of the letters l o t r or o.  A lot of words have one or two o's in them, I spend a lot of time embarrassed for that poor, poor abortion of a game.  And I'm using the word "game" very loosely here.

And it bombed because it sucked.

But as we have been saying, it didn't bomb.  If a movie "bombs" at the box office it means that the production cost a great deal more than the revenue generated.  This clearly is NOT the case for LOTRO but it is the case for games like Vanguard or Auto Assault.  LOTRO still has all of its servers active and is releasing an expansion.  Just because YOU don't like the game does not mean it is a bomb.  

[tmp]

This is especially true because the NDA is still in place, so the only information I'm allowed to know about the game is what Mythic tells me, and when I watched their released video of the game it looked like combat was slow and boring (see:  G4TV video) and, since I thought LotRO combat was slow and boring, it adds weight to the "if you like LotRO I probably don't share any common interests with you".

I'm going to sort of one-up this one, actually -- i quite like LotRO, find its combat pretty okay overall *and* yet watching the official WAR videos made me think it was extremely slow and boring. There seems to be pace difference between WAR and LotRO that's similar to one between LotRO and WoW, caused by the way animations are handled. That said since i'm not in beta i have no way to tell if that was changed with the recent updates. On the other hand it's something that can be easily verified in open beta despite any level cap.

[cevik]

But as we have been saying, it didn't bomb.  If a movie "bombs" at the box office it means that the production cost a great deal more than the revenue generated.  This clearly is NOT the case for LOTRO but it is the case for games like Vanguard or Auto Assault.  LOTRO still has all of its servers active and is releasing an expansion.  Just because YOU don't like the game does not mean it is a bomb.  

Since you like to cut and paste from the dictionary:

    

Main Entry:
    bomb
Pronunciation:
    \ˈbäm\
Function:
    noun
Etymology:
    French bombe, from Italian bomba, probably from Latin bombus deep hollow sound, from Greek bombos, of imitative origin
Date:
    1684

1 a: an explosive device fused to detonate under specified conditions b: atomic bomb; also : nuclear weapons in general —usually used with the
2: a vessel for compressed gases: as a: a pressure vessel for conducting chemical experiments b: a container for an aerosol (as an insecticide) : spray can
3: a rounded mass of lava exploded from a volcano
4: a lead-lined container for radioactive material
5: failure, flop <the play was a bomb>

I'm not saying that the production costs exceeded the revenue generated.  I'm saying that when compared to the level of potential success the IP was capable of generating, the game was a flop, it was a bomb.

[amiable]

But as we have been saying, it didn't bomb.  If a movie "bombs" at the box office it means that the production cost a great deal more than the revenue generated.  This clearly is NOT the case for LOTRO but it is the case for games like Vanguard or Auto Assault.  LOTRO still has all of its servers active and is releasing an expansion.  Just because YOU don't like the game does not mean it is a bomb.  

Since you like to cut and paste from the dictionary:

    

Main Entry:
    bomb
Pronunciation:
    \ˈbäm\
Function:
    noun
Etymology:
    French bombe, from Italian bomba, probably from Latin bombus deep hollow sound, from Greek bombos, of imitative origin
Date:
    1684

1 a: an explosive device fused to detonate under specified conditions b: atomic bomb; also : nuclear weapons in general —usually used with the
2: a vessel for compressed gases: as a: a pressure vessel for conducting chemical experiments b: a container for an aerosol (as an insecticide) : spray can
3: a rounded mass of lava exploded from a volcano
4: a lead-lined container for radioactive material
5: failure, flop <the play was a bomb>

I'm not saying that the production costs exceeded the revenue generated.  I'm saying that when compared to the level of potential success the IP was capable of generating, the game was a flop, it was a bomb.

Well since you like wikipedia so much:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_office_bomb

"The phrase box office bomb refers to a film for which the production and marketing costs greatly exceeded the revenue retained by the movie studio. This should not be confused with instances when official figures show large losses, yet the movie is a financial success; see Hollywood accounting."

And the definition you gave still doesn't prove your point.  It wasn't a flop. 

[cevik]

Well since you like wikipedia so much:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_office_bomb

"The phrase box office bomb refers to a film for which the production and marketing costs greatly exceeded the revenue retained by the movie studio. This should not be confused with instances when official figures show large losses, yet the movie is a financial success; see Hollywood accounting."

And to think you called me a grammar nazi:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bomb

bomb  (bm)
n.
1.
a. An explosive weapon detonated by impact, proximity to an object, a timing mechanism, or other means.
b. An atomic or nuclear bomb. Used with the.
2. Any of various weapons detonated to release destructive material, such as smoke or gas.
3. Football A long forward pass.
4.
a. A container capable of withstanding high internal pressure.
b. A vessel for storing compressed gas.
c. A portable, manually operated container that ejects a spray, foam, or gas under pressure.
5. Slang A dismal failure; a fiasco.

[cevik]

And the definition you gave still doesn't prove your point.  It wasn't a flop. 

To address your edit:  Yes, yes it was.  The game was a disaster.

[amiable]

5. Slang A dismal failure; a fiasco.

[/quote]

How was it a dismal failure?  It wasn't.  Lots of people signed up, lots of people still play.  it made money.  They are making an expansion.   It is only a dismal failure IN YOUR HEAD!