BW gets plenty of funding. Don't let the theories they don't fool you. ... It's blatantly obvious at this pint that the funding and manpower has gone to Anthem.

As a point of interest, these are totally different cost centers. The funding between them is entirely different. Funding for SWTOR is based upon projections and how those projections hit revenue targets for that cost center. The same will be true of Anthem.

I'm not so much dismissing your point because, yes, Bioware Austin does get funding. So does Anthem. (Anthem has been getting funding from 2012 on.) The cost centers, however, are entirely different and that means just saying "we get funding" is not, by itself, meaningful. If I get (relative measures) one dollar of funding while someone else gets twenty dollars of funding, that obviously will have an impact on what I can do.

I know people don't want to accept they're being milked, but we're being milked. I personally accept it for what it is.

There is truth to this, I think, but I realize it's an arguable point for many. While a lot of people put so much stock in Anthem -- and admittedly, it's a big thing for BioWare -- in the context of Star Wars people seem to be really underestimating how much is riding on Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. A game that is going to be in canon (which matters to some) and is trying to correct for some of the mistakes made by this game (as an MMO) and the Star Wars: Battlefront games.

On the broader point: SWTOR is currently not being used as a barometer at all regarding the success or failure of Star Wars games. It simply isn't. From an industry standpoint right now, it barely rates a mention. That even includes in earnings reports and future revenue projections as released during shareholder calls.

SWTOR is serving only as a very limited sort of learning experience because it ultimately doesn't (at least right now) matter all that much. The Battlefront series was a lot of learning because it showed a few missteps. The first didn't have a single-player campaign at all. The second focused initially on transactions but did have the story elements (including a tie-in novel).

Another learning experience came with the shutting down of Visceral's Star Wars game and then the shutting down of the "reboot" of that game by EA Vancouver. Some of those decisions, arguably, were driven at least in part by the perceived lack of success of SWTOR. But that's complicated by the fact that SWTOR started before EA took acquisition and it was based on a past series (Knights of the Old Republic) that fans generally did like.

So the only part of SWTOR that is being taken as a learning experience is the notion of a single-player game versus a more traditional MMO game (and perhaps versus a single-player game with some multiplayer elements). Now consider the type of game that Fallen Order is purported to be and you'll see why whether it succeeds or fails will have a large impact on whether a model like that of SWTOR is viable.

I also read a lot on here that once Anthem launches they'll get back to this game. Nope. Wishful thinking.

Largely correct. Different cost centers. Different development teams. That being said, the alpha team tends to be dispersed after launch of a big game. That happened with SWTOR, for example. So that team from Anthem most certainly could be brought into SWTOR. Or they could more likely be moved into something like the next Dragon Age. A large part of that will be determined by those projections being made by product teams.

Or that the studio will close if Anthem fails. Also nope. Anthem's success or failure will have no bearing on this game.

I also think this is largely correct. A "failure" an Anthem -- and failure is very relative, just like it is for movie studios with box office figures -- would definitely cause some internal shifting of resources and a re-alignment of assets. Regardless of what does or does not happen with Anthem, the "worst" that would happen is SWTOR's cost center stays the same for the duration.

This is the SW cash cow that will help fund further Anthem development, further Dragon Age development and further Mass Effect development.

That definitely won't happen unless they lay off the staff and stop any active development on this game. The cost centers generally don't cross boundaries. The revenues taken in are what are used for further projections to determine future revenue targets. That informs the hiring of staff (who then, of course, have to be regularly paid), retaining current staff (who also like to be paid regularly), what those staff are assigned to do, work on graphical updates (such as what happened with KOTFE/KOTET), etc.

BW gets plenty of funding. Don't let the theories they don't fool you. They let the community's theory that they're underfunded float to give themselves room to breath. "Oh hey they think we don't have any money." "Let them think that and keep doing what you're doing." They've neither denied it nor confirmed it. It's blatantly obvious at this pint that the funding and manpower has gone to Anthem. I give them stick about Anthem on these forums because the neglect of this game as a result is a bane of contention.

 

[sNIP]

 

I also read a lot on here that once Anthem launches they'll get back to this game. Nope. Wishful thinking. Or that the studio will close if Anthem fails. Also nope. Anthem's success or failure will have no bearing on this game. This is the SW cash cow that will help fund further Anthem development, further Dragon Age development and further Mass Effect development. They're already making it easier to maintain and updates are slower and slower to come out. Expect more of the same.

Actually, I think you may be very right about this. There is a piece of information that I have come across that proved to be... more insightful than I expected. The piece of information that I have come across entails that SWTOR technically isn't part of EA and Bioware anymore and hasn't been for a while. Supposedly it's 100% seperate from both companies and any titles both have produced.

So that makes me wonder, whether they ever suffered from Anthem getting more manpower and whether indeed they're using the "we're underfunded" as an excuse to cut themselves some slack.

Actually, I think you may be very right about this. There is a piece of information that I have come across that proved to be... more insightful than I expected. The piece of information that I have come across entails that SWTOR technically isn't part of EA and Bioware anymore and hasn't been for a while. Supposedly it's 100% seperate from both companies and any titles both have produced.

 

So that makes me wonder, whether they ever suffered from Anthem getting more manpower and whether indeed they're using the "we're underfunded" as an excuse to cut themselves some slack.

Mind to share this peace of information/source where we can read it? Sounds interesting.

Mind to share this peace of information/source where we can read it? Sounds interesting.

It's a screenshot of something that Eric Musco wrote on the forums: https://imgur.com/a/qSFaaC7. Funnily enough I can't find that post in the dev tracker, because I was hoping to find the wider context of it

Actually, I think you may be very right about this. There is a piece of information that I have come across that proved to be... more insightful than I expected. The piece of information that I have come across entails that SWTOR technically isn't part of EA and Bioware anymore and hasn't been for a while.

if it helps clear things up, that's not accurate.

Were that the case, at minimum, all of the branding done around SWTOR, including on the web site, would be in violation of the law due to misrepresentation. (You can't claim your game is affiliated with a studio or a publisher, including the use of imagery, if it's not.)

Where much of the speculation has come from is the entire absence of SWTOR being absent from the last couple of earnings reports and shareholder calls. (That said, most people weren't making the distinctions between the 10-Q and the 8-K reports.)

What Eric was referring to in his post is SWTOR being a separate cost center; he just didn't word it that way. That cost center is influenced by the fact that it's a licensed product (i.e., Star Wars) which makes some of the logistics of that cost center unique among the other cost centers.

if it helps clear things up, that's not accurate.

 

Were that the case, at minimum, all of the branding done around SWTOR, including on the web site, would be in violation of the law due to misrepresentation. (You can't claim your game is affiliated with a studio or a publisher, including the use of imagery, if it's not.)

 

Where much of the speculation has come from is the entire absence of SWTOR being absent from the last couple of earnings reports and shareholder calls. (That said, most people weren't making the distinctions between the 10-Q and the 8-K reports.)

 

What Eric was referring to in his post is SWTOR being a separate cost center; he just didn't word it that way. That cost center is influenced by the fact that it's a licensed product (i.e., Star Wars) which makes some of the logistics of that cost center unique among the other cost centers.

It might be that I was given the wrong context around Eric's post! It was something that I was told via via, but the way it was explained to me was that supposedly neither EA or Bioware wants for SWTOR to be part of either company.

Still, even if SWTOR is a seperate cost center, doesn't that mean that it produces revenue for itself? If that is the case, then the entire "we're underfunded"-trope is a lie. As Kodrac said it, it is something players hypothesized and the devs simply never negated it but kind of drove on its current, in the sense that they seemed to give themselves breathing room that way.

if it helps clear things up, that's not accurate.

 

Were that the case, at minimum, all of the branding done around SWTOR, including on the web site, would be in violation of the law due to misrepresentation. (You can't claim your game is affiliated with a studio or a publisher, including the use of imagery, if it's not.)

 

Where much of the speculation has come from is the entire absence of SWTOR being absent from the last couple of earnings reports and shareholder calls. (That said, most people weren't making the distinctions between the 10-Q and the 8-K reports.)

 

What Eric was referring to in his post is SWTOR being a separate cost center; he just didn't word it that way. That cost center is influenced by the fact that it's a licensed product (i.e., Star Wars) which makes some of the logistics of that cost center unique among the other cost centers.

This is how i interpret this post as well. It does not say it is separate from EA or Bioware, just that it is separate title.

iWhat Eric was referring to in his post is SWTOR being a separate cost center; he just didn't word it that way. That cost center is influenced by the fact that it's a licensed product (i.e., Star Wars) which makes some of the logistics of that cost center unique among the other cost centers.

What's unique about it is their silence. It's deafening and speaks volumes. I mean, I get that they'd rather wash their hands of someone else's licensed product (and **** show of an engine) and develop something totally of their own creation, but they should show more than apathy towards us, their paying customers. It verges on contempt. Like they literally don't care. I've never been one to believe the maintenance mode doomsayers in past years, but I'm starting to get the feeling that's where we're headed and that 6.0 is the proverbial carrot on a stick.

Easier to maintain... *thinking* I wonder why they would want to make a game that gets updates at ever increasing intervals by a studio that is about to launch their own new IP easier to maintain? Hmmmm....

I'd like to be wrong, though.

What's unique about it is their silence. It's deafening and speaks volumes. I mean, I get that they'd rather wash their hands of someone else's licensed product (and **** show of an engine) and develop something totally of their own creation, but they should show more than apathy towards us, their paying customers. It verges on contempt. Like they literally don't care. I've never been one to believe the maintenance mode doomsayers in past years, but I'm starting to get the feeling that's where we're headed and that 6.0 is the proverbial carrot on a stick.

Yeah, we're in the same boat here. I find myself starting to feel the disillusionment with the game that many have been feeling already, especially with the information I have come across. I'd like to believe that what Krypto said is true, but the context I was given around it makes me believe otherwise. Added to that, the silence and behaviour of the devs seems to add credence to the idea SWTOR is not longer part of either EA or Bioware.

... that supposedly neither EA or Bioware wants for SWTOR to be part of either company.

There have been rumors swirling that EA feels it might actually be better off without the Star Wars license because it does provide some cost overheads that they may not want to incur. That being said, those cost overheads often come from how well (or not) the games do. If they underperform, the costs outweigh the revenues. That being said, publically, of course, both EA and Disney tout confidence in their relationship.

Still, even if SWTOR is a seperate cost center, doesn't that mean that it produces revenue for itself? If that is the case, then the entire "we're underfunded"-trope is a lie.

It does, yes. But that's not to say that EA, as a publisher, couldn't add to the funding of that cost center since it's a studio they own. It's kind of like how, say, Sony Pictures can fund Columbia Studios (whom they acquired) for certain projects. But Columbia can also do its own funding as well. Sony will take a cut of revenue because that's part of what owning them means: Sony provides certain things like operations and marketing that Columbia does not have to do.

The basic dynamic is that the product team for a studio -- and for each game within that studio -- will deliver projections of future revenue based on what they plan to deliver to customers. The projections are based on the traditional triple play: reducing costs, increasing revenue, or sustaining revenue. EA, as publisher, will have a stake in those revenue projections. Just as Sony would with Columbia, for example.

So EA really wants BioWare Austin projections to be accurate because they are more likely to be reached. And if they are reached, that means other plans based on those projections can go forward. Often that money is spent before it actually comes in.

EA's part of that stake will go to whatever they want to do as a wider company. They can distribute that as they see fit. Part of that could, of course, be distributed right back to SWTOR. If it's not -- because they want to fund something else -- then someone could claim that SWTOR is being "underfunded" even though those funds were never guaranteed to go back into their cost center.

The part of the stake that BioWare gets, however, is entirely theirs. This is part of how contracts are drawn up between studios and publishers. And, again, it's actually very similar to how the movie and television industry works. So whatever BioWare makes it can utilize as it sees fit. Obviously the more profitable they are, the more they get (and the more EA gets as their percentage of the revenue).

I bring all that up because if SWTOR performs poorly from a monetary perspective, then, yes, the game will be "underfunded" in the sense that they didn't make as much money as they hoped and thus have less to spend, when they factor in the various other aspects of their business, such as operating costs, employee salary, etc. Also of note, it's often not how much money you make; it's how under your projections you were. That's where cost centers get hit.

It's kind of odd, really, but again the movie industry works the same way. Internally the success of movies is not based on the box office returns; it's based on how those returns compare to the initial projections. Because it's those projections (often made years before a movie comes out) that were the basis of current spending. Consider an oft-cited and accurate example. The biopic movie Steve Jobs cost about $40 million to make. However, it would have to have made $100 just to break even in terms revenue. To get back just half off those initial costs -- i.e., a profit of $20 million -- the movie would have to make close to $140 million.

As another example, consider The Amazing Spider-Man 2. This cost $260 million to make. It grossed over $700 million. Yet it's profit was only $20 million for the studio, due to projections that the movie would actually make $900 million at least.

This may seem like a huge distraction and that I'm wasting electrons here, but the game industry and its projections work very similarly.

As Kodrac said it, it is something players hypothesized and the devs simply never negated it but kind of drove on its current, in the sense that they seemed to give themselves breathing room that way.

The community team for SWTOR could never -- or, rather, should never -- confirm or deny any sort of funding questions or even internal health issues, perceived of otherwise. That would fall afoul of the disparagement clause.

When the devs are openly saying that they put a NiM Op into the game solely because one of the devs wanted it, and there's an entire gear grind focused around said Op, I think it's very fair to surmise that they are mismanaging the resources they have.

If true, then that creates a problem if they are putting content in just because a dev want it. This actually will have me stop my sub faster.

If true, then that creates a problem if they are putting content in just because a dev want it. This actually will have me stop my sub faster.

They did say it. I do think it was attempted as joke but yeah (as non ops player) it did not make me laugh.

My tinfoil hat theory is all they have left working there is Matt who is OPS guy so thats why they can just make OPSes and nothing else. Then Charles for writing and Eric is desperately trying to animate Lana to do things Charles writes. Keith is playing those OPSes. That's why the silence from them all! And then Ossus stuff they just found from the attic and added to game to make it look someone is home.

Uh i wrote that part as joke but now it starts to sound plausible.

If true, then that creates a problem if they are putting content in just because a dev want it. This actually will have me stop my sub faster.

I would have contradicted this in the past, saying this was absolutely not true. But now? It doesn't sound too far-fetched to me. I've said it a few times, I really thought Keith would have been a huge improvement to SWTOR's direction but... now? Now I have different thoughts about that and they're definitely several tones less positive.

Added to that, the silence and behaviour of the devs seems to add credence to the idea SWTOR is not longer part of either EA or Bioware.

Or at least not part of their plans. And instead of being honest and up front about it they're intentionally stringing us along. Which makes it worse and only adds resentment. Like I said, I don't blame them if they want to be rid of it, but they could at least be straight shooters instead of tap dancers or mutes. I can understand being silent for fear of shooting themselves in the foot, but throw us a bone. Communicate! You have a Community Manager- use him.

Or at least not part of their plans.

That part is likely closest to the truth. Or, rather, plans are in a holding pattern right now. We've seen that in the last couple of earnings calls for sure. Little to no mention of SWTOR at all. And, again, a large part of that does have to do with Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. It's by another studio entirely but it is an attempt at a course correct, over a broad series of Star Wars games (some released, some not).

I don't mean to imply that it's going to "replace" this game. I simply mean that it is clearly an attempt to respond to a variety of feedback about current Star Wars games as well as to meet Disney's mandate that all active content going forward needs to be part of canon.

And instead of being honest and up front about it they're intentionally stringing us along.

But, to be fair, they can't say anything negative of that sort. There is a disparagement clause that teams are under.

I can understand being silent for fear of shooting themselves in the foot, but throw us a bone.

For many, the bone has been thrown. And they have left. Some recently, some long ago. Subscription-based games are a gamble in a very real sense. You are gambling your money against what you hope to be the continued success of the game that justifies your continued expense.

For others, however, there is not necessarily a bone that needs to be thrown. Some are okay with the game as it is. Others are newer people coming to the game for the first time, thus subscribing, and still having a lot of content to get through. Yet others are more here for the single player ("story") experience only and don't care about a lot of the issues having to do with gearing or end game. They do presumably care about the bugs but that also depends on how aware they are of them and how tolerant they are of them.

Long-time players of a game that has seen its ups and downs often have a parallax effect in terms of perception that doesn't impact many other players. So what some see as the twilight hours of a game are not perceived as such by others, who don't have the same expectations of the game or the same longevity with it.

Yeah, we're in the same boat here. I find myself starting to feel the disillusionment with the game that many have been feeling already, especially with the information I have come across. I'd like to believe that what Krypto said is true, but the context I was given around it makes me believe otherwise. Added to that, the silence and behaviour of the devs seems to add credence to the idea SWTOR is not longer part of either EA or Bioware.

BW's community management team can behave apathetic and lack communication, that doesn't indicate they are not part of EA or Bioware, that just proves they are terribly mismanaged and there's a lack of accountability within their studio.

There have been rumors swirling that EA feels it might actually be better off without the Star Wars license because it does provide some cost overheads that they may not want to incur. That being said, those cost overheads often come from how well (or not) the games do. If they underperform, the costs outweigh the revenues. That being said, publically, of course, both EA and Disney tout confidence in their relationship.

Disney may be pricing themselves out of a job (product). I've seen it before with contractors. Even if the dreams of SW fans and gamers alike were to come true and EA would lose the franchise (whether they drop it themselves or EA pulls the plug) who would want to work with them if the cost is too high to be not worth the trouble? If anything this game and the scrapped games/studios may scare people away from wanting to make SW games to the detriment of the fans/gamers. You'd think Disney would have thought of this already but you never know.

SWTOR is serving only as a very limited sort of learning experience because it ultimately doesn't (at least right now) matter all that much.

I am surprised SWTOR defenders did not mob attack you for such a blasphemous sounding statement. SWTOR is everything to some people!

I am surprised SWTOR defenders did not mob attack you for such a blasphemous sounding statement.

Probably rightfully so. I could have been a little less dogmatic there, I guess. I more just meant that any lessons that SWTOR had to teach were learned awhile ago and that mainly centered on the distinction of MMO, single-player RPG, or with additional multiplayer elements.

What has taught EA a bit more about Star Wars is Disney's desire to have everything canon, the shuttering of Star Wars 1313, the problems with the two Battlefront games, and the rationale behind the disbanding of Visceral's game and the reboot of that game attempted internally.

When a given game stops appearing on earnings reports, that tends to mean that it's not as important in terms of revenue structure going forward (at least for now) and that any lessons it might be teaching about where to invest dollars have been learned (again, at least for now).

Disney may be pricing themselves out of a job (product). I've seen it before with contractors. Even if the dreams of SW fans and gamers alike were to come true and EA would lose the franchise (whether they drop it themselves or EA pulls the plug) who would want to work with them if the cost is too high to be not worth the trouble?

Valid points, sure. Yeah, Disney has to be aware that if the perceived (or actual) cost of being a licensee for the franchise is too onerous, people will be less likely to take it on, even given that it's the Star Wars franchise. This is particularly so as the fan base at large has been very vocal about concerns that Disney might want to go with, particularly in terms of concerns of oversaturation.

If anything this game and the scrapped games/studios may scare people away from wanting to make SW games to the detriment of the fans/gamers. You'd think Disney would have thought of this already but you never know.

Entirely. Granted, there are reasons for those cancellations -- whether good or bad, of course, is a matter of dispute -- but a lot if has to do with a combined focus on what Disney wants for Star Wars combined with what a publishing house like EA can do to be profitable with whatever gets produced. That's tricky with a licensed franchise and that's the case whether it's EA, BioWare, or any other publisher and/or studio.

I don't think it's the case that Disney hasn't thought some things out but they, like any business, are learning. Barring a crystal ball that tells the future, companies sometimes just have to try things and see what works. That's going to involve some mis-steps here and there but that's also where the best learning opportunities tend to manifest.

BW's community management team can behave apathetic and lack communication, that doesn't indicate they are not part of EA or Bioware, that just proves they are terribly mismanaged and there's a lack of accountability within their studio.

On its own it's not a convincing argument. But if you viewed side by side with this:

It's a screenshot of something that Eric Musco wrote on the forums: https://imgur.com/a/qSFaaC7. Funnily enough I can't find that post in the dev tracker, because I was hoping to find the wider context of it

The image shifts.

On its own it's not a convincing argument. But if you viewed side by side with this ... the image shifts.

But you have to combine that with the fact that BIoWare Austin is still listed as an asset of EA and Star Wars: The Old Republic is listed as an asset of BioWare Austin. Those are part of overall revenue earnings statements as well as investment assets. So if they were lying about this, they are doing it in full violation of the law in terms of reporting purposes. (The fact that SWTOR hasn't been specifically mentioned in earnings reports lately does not indicate that somehow it has been shifted away.)

They are also using branding for the game that would be in violation of the law for representation since the game and the site use the logos of BioWare and EA.

They would also be distributing an End User Access and License Agreement under false pretenses (i.e., stating the license is with EA), which is also against the law. Combine that with them also providing a Terms of Service for Electronic Arts specifically.

Combine that with the people who do respond internally from the studio (Eric, Chris, etc) are BioWare Austin employees, as seen by their LinkedIn profiles.

I'll certainly grant that it's possible to believe that everyone just decided to violate the law across a broad array of fronts, hoping no one would discover this (from the government, to shareholders, to customers), and that BioWare Austin employees are all agreeing to keep up the front. But it's also possible to believe the situation is exactly as it appears.

But it's also possible to believe the situation is exactly as it appears.

That's my impression of it, and I believe this to be the case. It's not nearly as complicated and intriguing as people would like it to be imo, it's simple why the game has fallen through the cracks into a royal mess.

Hey Ylliarus!

 

To try to calm any tin foil hats spinning up from that image you linked, let me try to provide some context. The reason you cannot find that post anywhere on the forums is because it came from our Influencer forums. For those that don’t know (and we have a blog in the works for this very topic) we have something called the Influencer Program. This group contains content creators of all sizes who we aim to support via promotion, etc. One of the components of the group is that they have access to a closed, under-NDA forum where we sometimes seek out early feedback on things, address questions from their communities, and more.

 

The image you are linking to is from a specific topic that was brought up by some folks in the group. They were looking to get into creating content for Anthem in addition to SWTOR and were asking for similar support/access to what they have in our Influencer program. What you are seeing is my response to that request. There are a number of EA-wide influencer programs, most prominently the game changers group. We built our own program for SWTOR separate from that as we had very specific benefits we wanted to provide. As a result, being in our group doesn’t automatically mean that someone receives those same benefits on other EA or BioWare titles. So all in all, this post is really just me directing our influencers who are looking to expand into other EA games to investigate the EA game changer program.

 

That is the full context of that post, so I hope that clears up any concerns.

 

-eric

I'm glad you feel free to post there, but seldom here Eric...no hard feelings at all...