Forums: Index > Game Discussion > E3 2012
Note: This topic has been unedited for 1929 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

So it seems like Bioware hasn't registered for this year's E3 [1], and with registration closing on the 14th, it doesn't look like they'll be showing up. What does this mean? Anything really. Bioware could simply be keeping things close to their chest, or they simply don't have anything at a stage where they can show it (Or if we're going to be silly, they're keeping their heads low for a while). Then again, this could be a good thing. Instead of ploughing into the next game, Bioware seem to be taking their time, after all, Origins was released in October 2009, and Dragon Age 2 announced and released in August 2010 and March 2011 respectively. Seeing as how we haven't heard word one about any potential Dragon Age 3 since it was confirmed that the support for DA2 was finished. Anyway, we'll have to wait and see. --Madasamadthing (talk) 22:52, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

They just released ME:3 and DA:3 is, presumably, still in the early stages, so I don't know what they would promote by going to E3. Whocares65 (talk) 04:20, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Considering the kind of shit-storm they've been weathering lately, I'd be surprised if they announced anything in a hurry. But TBH what I'd like is for them to announce something about the Extended Cut. Diain (talk) 04:50, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Let's hope, lets pray to God and hope, that they have actually leaned something from the shitty sales number of DA2, learned that rusing a game dosn't pay of, and that the fact that they are not participating is because they actually want to take their time and do a good job with DA3. -rphb- (talk) 09:31, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Well, they have this malnourished cripple of a cash cow named SWTOR; guess their current priorities is not to let it croak, so there may not be any new announcements, just heavy push of that one. Dorquemada (talk) 12:30, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

On a completely random tangent, Yogscast will be there. Yogscast > Bioware? -Gabriellesig 12:44, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

This is actually a smart move. No press is good press right now. In fact, they should do this for some time while they refocus and try to recapture the magic that most think they have lost. And it would behoove them to devote their attention to TOR in an effort to stop the bleeding. They have to save that game. If not the future is murky at best. The Grey Unknown (talk) 14:52, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed entirely, they really do need to run damage control before pumping more product, especially since EA has gone along and pinned upcoming franchises to their namesake. Restoring BioWare's reputation will aid in saving games such as the upcoming Generals 2. I don't think they can save The Old Republic though, I think the MMO market has been over-saturated and is now beginning to fold on itself. They're trying to bail out a boat with a huge hole in it. Would I like to see more content from BioWare at E3? Absolutely. Is it a smart move for them to do so? Not at all. --RomeoReject (talk) 15:52, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
This. SWTOR cannot be saved. It's very story based. It would've been more suited to a SP game, like KOTOR 3, rather than an MMO. Which I believe was the plan before someone somewhere came up with the banal MMO idea. Either way, their best bet would be to count their losses and move on, and take their time to deliver a quality product. All they need is one good game. If DA3 is anywhere as good as DAO, they'll be back at the top in a jiffy and all this will be forgotten, because the way I see it, fans want to believe in Bioware. Badly. Because they gave us good games, and they're the only ones who can give us games of that kind. All they need to do is forget all the new-fangled money making ideas, and go back to basics and deliver a simple, solid RPG. Diain (talk) 17:09, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Counting their losses may not be a viable option though concerning TOR. Given the reported development cost, not to mention marketing and upkeep...and based on sales, and giving them both the high end of sales and monthly fees (many of which were freebies) and low end of production costs, which is overly generous, they could easily still be somewhere around nine figures in debt. Perhaps even over that. No...they HAVE to try to save that game, even though I agree, it's not going to work. Not saving it may mean dire consequences. The Grey Unknown (talk) 21:20, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Considering that SWtOR had a production cost of approximately $125 million (and thats the conservative guess![2]), Bioware HAS to try and recoup the costs or it is going to be in big trouble. That kind of outlay for what was supposed to be the World of Warcraft killer means that they have no choice but to try. The problem is, World of Warcraft is 8 years old this year, it is the most subscribed MMORPG in the world, it has been since day one, but remember that 8 years ago, people had more disposable income to spend on a luxury like an online subscription to a game. We've also seen it before, with a rake of other supposed WoW-killers, which have become free to play or just shut down, the only way the ones still active can make money now is from people buying gold-level items. Somehow I can't see Bioware charging people for a Thedosian pattern lightsabre. --Madasamadthing (talk) 21:59, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
As you stated though, it can't be saved. Spending more money attempting to save it is silly. It's like individuals who have annihilated most of their car: It's not worth putting the money in to something that wont recoup the costs. What astounds me however is that they're even trying this mainstream "Do what the competition's doing" nonsense at all. Common sense dictates that going for a larger market also means going up against the bigger competition. If they stay true to the smaller, hardcore market, they pretty much have the market to themselves - which equates to garaunteed sales. What they're doing effectively translates to going to a Roulette table and have one option that garauntees a win at 1% winnings, and going, "Nah, screw that. Let's bet on a single number that might pay out ten times!" --RomeoReject (talk) 21:46, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
125 million is way too conservative given the protracted time in dev, the size of the team involved, Lucas and the rights etc, the voice acting etc etc. I was thinking 200 million or so, without the advertising. Some cost estimates have it as high as 300 million overall though which is just insane if true. And factor in upkeep and's easily the most expensive game ever made I would think....So, seeing as how they have sold somewhere around 2.5 to 3 million games only, which under normal circumstances is great BTW for a PC only game, sales recouped probably 100 million or so, maybe a little more. Monthly fees are harder to calculate, especially given how many free months, and multiple month subs there have been at lower costs etc. Even in the best of circumstances they are still dangerously in the red. And it will most likely only get worse as subs continue to fall while upkeep remains high. They are likely betting the farm on the next two updates, and hoping sub numbers jump back up over 2 million for at least three to six months, then a slower decline will at least let them earn back most of their money. If subs keep dropping though people will start to get fired, and positions (more of them) will be eliminated. Other games are likely to be affected also, and perhaps Bioware itself, though that seems unlikely at this point at least. I actually hope they can save it, though I seriously doubt they can, otherwise, there is a very real chance the fallout will drastically alter future Bioware releases. And not in a good way. The Grey Unknown (talk) 22:48, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Three million sales recouped a hundred million? Well if the game's $333 of course it isn't selling well... ;) --RomeoReject (talk) 23:47, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
More like 3 million copies leading to a year long subscription at $15 a month which should lead to $504 million in the first year. Which is never going to happen. MMOs are supposed to be a long term investments, because it is unlikely to recoup that much money in a short amount of time. If its lucky, SWtOR could get maybe half a million long-term subscribers after initial purchase, paying each month. Half a million people spending $180 a year, so thats maybe $90 million a year. Again, I doubt that is going happen. Depending on how much Bioware spent in development, in an ideal world, it would take between two to four years before they started seeing a profit from SWtOR. Its not an ideal world, they could be looking at six years before they even start to break even. Why? Because their creditors and investors are going to be asking where their money is. Not only that, but there is the fact that debt never stays at the same level, it increases, and it can change a lot (and Bioware will have debts before they shipped SWtOR out, utilities, wages, advertising). --Madasamadthing (talk) 00:30, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
This is also ignoring the cost of running all those servers... I don't think the game will EVER turn a profit. I think it'll just turn in to a money pit. --RomeoReject (talk) 06:49, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
a $333 game would bring in a billion bucks if we take the standard cost per game at full price. 3 million nets 180 million. I'm not sure the exact percentages EA/BW gets, or the prices of each of those games sold as some could be more, some less, but it's probably reasonable to assume they got at least a 100 million from sales. Give or take 20 million either way maybe. So either way it's still bad, especially with subs leaving in droves and the upkeep of the game still being as high as it is. It may turn into a money pit, or they may drastically scale it back but retain enough people to turn a moderate profit for a year or so to recoup at least some loses. But I think overall the game won't make money, and that means lots of people are going to lose jobs. The only way to save it is to keep at least a million people paying for over a year, and to keep upkeep costs down. That seems highly unlikely at this point. I think the game will be free to play by years end, but we'll see....they should have made KOTOR 3. That game would have sold huge, and been on all three platforms too. Seriously dumb move making an MMO. The Grey Unknown (talk) 12:49, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Actually recent reports say that subscription has already dropped to 1.3 mill. Diain (talk) 10:23, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Bioware's next game isn't suppose to be released until 2013, and, believe it or not, it's not an RPG. It's a Command & Conquer game, Generals 2.You can check out the sneak peak here: [3] JKPackard (talk) 20:11, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

I know, I mentioned it earlier with the current danger of going in to E3. I'm looking forward to it immensely, though if we're being honest, it isn't truly a "BioWare" game, it's just attatched to their label thanks to EA. That said, they really need to regain consumer confidence before touting anything about Generals 2, and their current actions suggest they have no interest in doing so. --RomeoReject (talk) 20:26, May 12, 2012 (UTC)