The state of the game...

Replies

  • Monel
    1718 posts Member
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    Does Game health = it’s engagement factor?

    The amount of money they are making doesn’t matter, at least to the players, when it’s clearly not being put back into the game.

    Well that's just false also. The game has to make a certain amount of money to justify its existence. So to say it doesnt matter to someone that plays the game is ridiculous. Now, if it is taking huge amounts of profit then they will lose support from player base IF it's not be reinvested.
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    edited January 9
    Monel wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    No

    And yet you insist that this is the case? If you want the game to continue, why outright deny evidence to the contrary?

    I don’t believe that the spending evidence necessarily correlates to game health.

    How does the spending evidence not correlate to the game's health though?
    Or maybe a better question, how do you define the health of the game?

    Oh come on, you are smarter than that. Here are a few POSSIBLE reasons.

    1. Small percentage of people actually contributing while larger percentage are not.
    2. Happened to coincide with a movie release which generated new customers seeking out Star Wars games and then they bought the HD bunble.
    3. Top line sales dont equal profit.
    4. EA doesnt care how much money it makes they want to move on to their next project to make even more!

    While I will say I am not sure if any of these are true I will say sales does not equal health. It helps, but the only number that really matters is profit and that is a number CG will not be showing us anytime soon.

    I'm afraid i don't follow. None of those reasons show that there isn't a correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    Post edited by leef on
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Monel wrote: »
    4. EA doesnt care how much money it makes they want to move on to their next project to make even more!

    If they're good at what they do, and they are, they want to make as much money out of the GoH investment as they can. Would you spend a little money to keep consumers paying on an existing game or spend a lot of money creating a new game that might or might not be successful?
    The revenue data clearly indicates that people are still spending, and yes to varying extents, sometimes up and sometimes down relative to other time periods, more or less arbitrarily.
    We can speculate as to why, and it's not exactly rocket science to correlate December spend with Hyperdrive, holidays and GS' return, but it's just speculation without looking at the receipts.
    This game has a long way to go before they turn the servers off, and probably several iterations of revenue model changes prior to that happening.
  • Im going to start using completely random charts from now on in any post. Not that the OP used a random chart, but the mere fact its there is a catalyst for argument. This is all hysterical, its off the charts.

    a0h14rz29hlo.png

    Depending on how you define facts you got right, that's either a really good or really bad rate.

    See! Shots fired! B)
    HUTT TANK: YOU HAVE TO BRIBE WITH CRYSTALS TO PASS MY TAUNT!!!
  • Monel
    1718 posts Member
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    No

    And yet you insist that this is the case? If you want the game to continue, why outright deny evidence to the contrary?

    I don’t believe that the spending evidence necessarily correlates to game health.

    How does the spending evidence not correlate to the game's health though?
    Or maybe a better question, how do you define the health of the game?

    Oh come on, you are smarter than that. Here are a few POSSIBLE reasons.

    1. Small percentage of people actually contributing while larger percentage are not.
    2. Happened to coincide with a movie release which generated new customers seeking out Star Wars games and then they bought the HD bunble.
    3. Top line sales dont equal profit.
    4. EA doesnt care how much money it makes they want to move on to their next project to make even more!

    While I will say I am not sure if any of these are true I will say sales does not equal health. It helps, but the only number that really matters is profit and that is a number CG will not be showing us anytime soon.

    I'm afraid i don't follow. None of those reasons show that there isn't a correlation between sales and the health of the game.

    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.
  • Monel
    1718 posts Member
    Monel wrote: »
    4. EA doesnt care how much money it makes they want to move on to their next project to make even more!

    If they're good at what they do, and they are, they want to make as much money out of the GoH investment as they can. Would you spend a little money to keep consumers paying on an existing game or spend a lot of money creating a new game that might or might not be successful?
    The revenue data clearly indicates that people are still spending, and yes to varying extents, sometimes up and sometimes down relative to other time periods, more or less arbitrarily.
    We can speculate as to why, and it's not exactly rocket science to correlate December spend with Hyperdrive, holidays and GS' return, but it's just speculation without looking at the receipts.
    This game has a long way to go before they turn the servers off, and probably several iterations of revenue model changes prior to that happening.

    Youd think that. However, if they have something that they think would generate even more then resources would be diverted to the newer/larger project. Companies do this all the time. It's why phone companies release new models every year.
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    edited January 9
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.
    Post edited by leef on
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • We should definitely revisit this topic in 5 years when we all have R400 Baby Yodas.
  • Monel
    1718 posts Member
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Oh good, we are in the mood for ridiculous analogies. I can generate a bunch of sales by selling 10 million dollar Bill's for 75 cents. Then I have generated 7.5 million dollars in sales, wow! Oh wait, my profits are down 2.5 million.

    And yes, just because you eat healthy doesnt make you healthy. Its helps, but doesnt makerbot true. Just like a reasonable sales plan will help you generate revenue but doesnt make you profitable. Looking at you Uber!
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    Monel wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Oh good, we are in the mood for ridiculous analogies. I can generate a bunch of sales by selling 10 million dollar Bill's for 75 cents. Then I have generated 7.5 million dollars in sales, wow! Oh wait, my profits are down 2.5 million.
    a clear correlation between sales and the health of your company ;)
    And yes, just because you eat healthy doesnt make you healthy. Its helps, but doesnt makerbot true. Just like a reasonable sales plan will help you generate revenue but doesnt make you profitable. Looking at you Uber!

    Still a clear correlation between sales and the health of the company. Just because a company isn't profitable doesn't mean there isn't a correlation between the sales and the health of the company.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Monel wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    Does Game health = it’s engagement factor?

    The amount of money they are making doesn’t matter, at least to the players, when it’s clearly not being put back into the game.

    Well that's just false also. The game has to make a certain amount of money to justify its existence. So to say it doesnt matter to someone that plays the game is ridiculous. Now, if it is taking huge amounts of profit then they will lose support from player base IF it's not be reinvested.

    Isn’t that what’s happening? I’m not the first nor the last to remark on the lack of dev support and throw around phrases like “cruise control” and “life support” to describe their activity level.
  • Thread is still going strong!!
  • Gifafi
    2867 posts Member
    Monel wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    TheRHOMBUS wrote: »
    No

    And yet you insist that this is the case? If you want the game to continue, why outright deny evidence to the contrary?

    I don’t believe that the spending evidence necessarily correlates to game health.

    How does the spending evidence not correlate to the game's health though?
    Or maybe a better question, how do you define the health of the game?

    Oh come on, you are smarter than that. Here are a few POSSIBLE reasons.

    1. Small percentage of people actually contributing while larger percentage are not.
    2. Happened to coincide with a movie release which generated new customers seeking out Star Wars games and then they bought the HD bunble.
    3. Top line sales dont equal profit.
    4. EA doesnt care how much money it makes they want to move on to their next project to make even more!

    While I will say I am not sure if any of these are true I will say sales does not equal health. It helps, but the only number that really matters is profit and that is a number CG will not be showing us anytime soon.

    I, for one, am going to assume they aren’t spending over, or near, the 17 mil they pulled in in December, so profits should be pretty decent imo. I mean, they have one computer and it’s not like they are paying people overtime to work on holidays or weekends, so...
  • CCyrilS
    4166 posts Member
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.
  • TVF
    19592 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Depends on mods.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • CCyrilS
    4166 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Depends on mods.

    Personally, I go all health
  • Gifafi
    2867 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Depends on mods.

    Finally defense mods get their day!
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Well, you are what you eat right?
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Looooki
    305 posts Member
    edited January 10
    It's getting boring... There is literally nothing to do... Nothing to do in the game...
  • Nauros
    3137 posts Member
    leef wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Well, you are what you eat right?

    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    Nauros wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    Monel wrote: »
    Then apparently I was wrong in my first statement. Such is life.

    There being other reasons for the game to be healthy/unhealthy besides sales doesn't mean there isn't a clear correlation between sales and the health of the game.
    There's a correlation between smoking and cancer. However, not everyone who smokes gets cancer and not everyone with cancer smokes. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying smoking isn't necessarily bad for your health because some smokers don't get cancer.
    edit: not a great analogy in hindsight because there are other reasons besides potentialy getting cancer why smoking is bad for your health, but i assume you understand the point anyway.

    Next try:
    There's a correlation between eating healthy and being healthy. However, not everyone who eats healthy is also healty and not everyone who is unhealthy eats unhealthy. Your argument for there not necessarily being a correlation between sales and the health of the game is basically the same as saying eating healthy isn't necessarily good for your health because some people who do eat healthy are unhealthy.

    Hold on now... first we have to define what we mean by a healthy person.

    Well, you are what you eat right?

    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jeffrey Lionel Dahmer ofcourse, a prime example of a healthy human being both physically as well as mentally.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • TVF
    19592 posts Member
    "I don't know what I was expecting."
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • jfears2
    165 posts Member
    edited January 10
    Im going to start using completely random charts from now on in any post. Not that the OP used a random chart, but the mere fact its there is a catalyst for argument. This is all hysterical, its off the charts.

    a0h14rz29hlo.png

    I disagree with your random chart based on my own random personal data collection that I did by myself with no actual scientific method behind it. In fact my data is not off the charts but rather underneath the chart, because that's where it likes to live. However, because I disagree with your data, based on my own non-scientific approach to data collection, I will now rabble rabble at you about how you are wrong and I am the greatest social scientist to have ever lived and you are nothing but a phony.. a big fast phony. Good day sir.

    410xo7vcs3lj.jpg
    You can probably assume the majority of what I post is sarcasm, feel free to skip and move along rather than reading...
  • Nauros wrote: »
    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jesus.... there's tons of people out there who literally eat his body and drink his blood.

    You can probably assume the majority of what I post is sarcasm, feel free to skip and move along rather than reading...
  • TVF
    19592 posts Member
    jfears2 wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jesus.... there's tons of people out there who literally eat his body and drink his blood.

    Literally?
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Nadebotfm wrote: »
    Thread is still going strong!!

    The forums will outlast the game.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • TVF wrote: »
    jfears2 wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jesus.... there's tons of people out there who literally eat his body and drink his blood.

    Literally?

    Might want to brush up on your Catholicism. Yes, literally.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Nihion
    2424 posts Member
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Nadebotfm wrote: »
    Thread is still going strong!!

    The forums will outlast the game.

    And then it will come back in 40 years for no apparent reason, only to die miserably in the hands of its granddaughter game.
  • leef
    13358 posts Member
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    jfears2 wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jesus.... there's tons of people out there who literally eat his body and drink his blood.

    Literally?

    Might want to brush up on your Catholicism. Yes, literally.

    uh, whut?
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Gifafi
    2867 posts Member
    leef wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    jfears2 wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    So when a healthy person is someone who eats healthy people, who was the first healthy person?

    Jesus.... there's tons of people out there who literally eat his body and drink his blood.

    Literally?

    Might want to brush up on your Catholicism. Yes, literally.

    uh, whut?

    it's the religion Catholics follow.
Sign In or Register to comment.