Massive EA layoff, Mythic reduced by almost half. Effect on UO?

It is clear you are not that business minded. Ok lets say you are correct and they have revenue (not profit as you described it) of a million a month. How much of that do you think it takes to power and maintain 28 shards? How much to pay for GM support, payroll, benefits? How much on development including developers payroll and benefits? How much on networking? How much on marketing (you might think there is none but there is)? How much on legal? how much for hardward upgrades and maintanence? I am betting that during any given month they are eating up a very large part of the revenue from subscriptions.

I would be willing to bet this game is not on the highly profitable list. That is not to say it couldnt be but they have to make some hard decisions to make it work. Shard merges are not viable. Too complex requiring too much development time to make it work. They need to simply announce shard closures. There are 28 shards, give or take, where the subscription base justifies about 10. Offer the players on closing shards free transfer tokens bound to each character on the account and set a dead line to pick a new shard and move. Let them deed up what ever they want. They need to stop trying to develop two clients, pick one and fix it. Several years ago if they had simply purchased uo assist and integrated the functions of one of them into the 2d client no one would be complaining, much. They need to integrate a map like tool as well. They need to do something about the rampant cheating. I think if the cheaters were forced to choose they would continue to play without the cheats. Plus some old timers would return. With a third the number of shards many of ea's costs would be sliced by 2/3's which increases the margin a lot.

They are simply afraid to loose what they have now.

I don't think the most interesting point was adressed.

The most interesting point for a MMORPG is: Who will buy my product in the future?

UO has proven that it can bind customers quite well (don't amuse me with claims on "bugs drove customers away" or "bad customer support" etc.; a lot mmorpg's rest in peace down there, while UO still is up; and YES, they could have handled some of these things a lot better, an therefore lost more than they should have, but still they are alive...). There a quite some people out there who play this game since 12 years; and when they were eg a student when they started, they now are married, have family and still play (like myself, though my ingame-time is very limited now). But we are a generation with "concepts" of art and gameplay we like that are special for OUR generation - and may not be shared by other generations. I relate intense joy with computergames with titles like Baldurs Gate, Fallout, Might & Magic, Civilization etc.; I don't play "modern" titles (perhaps because I am too old now). I don't need beautiful graphics to enjoy a game; I am born 1965, so I am quite resistant to "frustration" and don't feel the need for "easy content" (I like difficult games...). But is this the needs new customers also have? Our concepts of "joy" are perhaps "outdated". Of course we are there and can play this game, but to be honest, if UO would be cancelled, my life wouldn't be touched in any way. When I was intensively playing the game, cancelling UO would have touched me much more; something important would have been taken away, and I am not attached to those feelings any more.

What was my carrier in UO? I am German, so I started on Drachenfels in 1999. The shard was full of players! It was difficult to get a hit on a skeleton in Britain graveyard, since so many Newbies were there trying to get some gold, armor and skillgains. Reds came and killed us, and friendly blues were there to protect us. There were smiths at the forges and crowds were waiting to get a repair. I left, since mit dial-up was too crappy to play and I had other things to do; but it was a nice and intense experience, and it lay in me to be activated later.
I remembered UO and began playing again 2005. To my astonishment, Drachenfels was (compared to the 1999-times) a bit empty (though I think it had the playerbase of eg today's Atlantic in those days), so I went to Europa and started there. Again a full shard with a thriving community, and I went to pvp and this was a hell of fun! Fel despise, deceit, destard, ... - man, I burned (and earned) Millions of insurance! But less and less people played, pvp became a ritual between the same few addicted people, and in 2008 I left for some months. Now I play Atlantic, to at least have the feeling of some community left. And only for the good times I had, I still have my accounts up with homes I don't want to fall. My son plays with me, so we share the joy; but I don't think I should be the focus of UO's efforts to make me play.

So the question to UO is: Who don u want to attract? What is your customer in 5 years? What are his/her needs, his/her concepts of joy? Whom do u want to bind?

For much too long, UO build on the customer binding of the past. These bindings thin out; I don't think that they are a basis for a future business model.

Well, I don't recall a Lum. Might be my failing memory. And yes, there's an engineer that's been here for a very long time, "MrsTroubleMaker." She's not really on the boards much, but she's still with us, and doing fantastic work.

(and Harb, thanks for the shout-out!)

-GO

Lum didn't directly work on UO, so that may be why you don't recall him being there

Lum never worked for Origin/EA.

He ran a fan site for a couple years - that story is an epic in itself - before Mythic hired him on around 2000, iirc.

Hope for the best, expect the worst. I'm in a similar boat on a different sea.

I see your point of view, even if I don't necessarily share your conclusion. I think where we differ is in the fact that you're referring to "maintenance" as in the lack of growth, and I'm referring "Maintenance" as a company mandated direction for a product.

-GO

I seriously dont think that this will affect anything here. I dont have a crystal ball in front of me tho, but I do see a lot of EA Games being advertised here on the television. Including the new EA/Bioware RPG and the NHL2010. Surely if theres enough money to advertise on television there is enough to keep the franchises going.

The games being advertised are seen as profitable... Whether or not an MMO stays running is up to Bean Counters that don't care about anything but ... beans.

Heh.

That said, I think UO is safe. Not like they're sinking 30 million dollars into Dev on it, as it's an established, running game. Much easier/cheaper to keep an existing game running than it is to get a new one off the ground.

Well, still it can be devastating to some of the players playing shards being closed.

Imagine a player having a House in Luna or a Castle or a Keep, perhaps even in a good location and be forced to move onto another shard to find no room for their house or not the location they had ?

How many subscriptions could be at risk of being closed for players not accepting downgrading from what they had on the shard being closed ?

I think at the very least, as in regards to Housing, before attempting the consolidation of shards

#1 global search engine for vendors should be created, thus making the loss of a Luna House for those players coming from a shard being closed, less painfull.
They will still be able to have their wares, wherever their new housing will bem be able to be searched by players. Not the top choice, but at least a compromise of some sort.

#2 the shard that will be chosen to host the players coming from the other shards will at least need to have dedicated areas capable of hosting those large houses like Castles and Keeps that players coming from other shards had so as not to make the move too much a downgrading one.

A possible alternative, as a choice, not mandatory, could be to design special new houses specifically for these players who hold Castles and Keeps that have a smaller footprint than Castles and Keeps but hold more secures and lockdowns than Castles and Keeps.

This, to make it so the newer houses take less space on the destination shard and more room than the originary Castles/Keeps to make it appealing to players so that as many as possible would choose them.

Those players wanting to stick with the Castles and Keeps will have some dedicated areas or pre-placed Castles/Keeps allocated to them.

Just mere ideas, more may be made, but definately I think that the consolidation of servers cannot happen without doing something to protect the players feel less the pain of losing their shard of origin.

I think the big picture here are the QA staff and dedicated individuals who are now out of work in a very competitive market -

Aside from that - UO is fine

I'm shocked and saddened over this news. I hope all that are impacted by the layoffs are able to make a quick rebound. And special thanks to TheGrimmOmen who's presence here is noted and appreciated.

They didn't cancel the EM program.

My take on the subject of whether this spells the end of UO:

Ever since the monthly subscription MMO model emerged more than a decade ago, I believe all the large game companies have realized that this is a very attractive model. Everyone and their neighbours are trying to get a piece of the action.

Selling single player games gives a 1 time payoff. Even if they have a franchise, each sequel is sold separately and gives its own 1 time payoff.

MMOs on the other hand, provides that 1 time payoff, plus, recurring revenue after initial investments. There's also no fear of pirating such games (at least not in the conventional sense).

Seeing that their online games sales/revenue grew, I think EA will be hanging on tight to all their MMO franchises (UO, DoAC, WH) for the time being. Revenue from each title may not be anywhere near WOW, but one also has to remember that a big chunk of the infrastructure (network, backup, datacenter) and manpower (devs, marketing/sales, GM) costs are split between these 3 games.

This means that due to economies of scale, these costs for each of the games are a third of what they would have to pay. If they cut one, the costs for the other 2 would rise. Still, I think the game must maintain a level of revenue or the management may just decide to cut it out like a cancer.

UO is definitely no where near this stage. It has seen and weathered similar situations for the past decade. We were an OSI game, then EA, then Mythic. Everytime there are staff movements, staff layoffs, revenue losses, new games, unliked content, blog posts and sometimes even new exploits, there will be panic and people saying that UO will die. I agree that these aren't helping, but UO is still standing.

Remember, this is a restructure being made to address the poor showings of the global games market. Markets will go down, and it will go up again. When it goes down, the company "restructures" and layoff staff. When it picks up, the company hires back staff. This is the American corporates' "hire and fire" strategy. It sucks, and is debatable if this helps in the long term, but it's still seen as a viable cost management strategy.

I dont want to spend money on Uogamecodes to get a soulstone only to learn they are cancelling UO the next day, don't most mmorpg's that announce to close down give a several month grace period afterwords before they pull the plugs?

1- then the surprized.
2- you really need a reality check if you think those salaries are anywhere close to what people are actually paid, lol.

And I was almost ready to return to UO... not certain what to do now.

There is some information on FB, I don't feel right reposting it here, but you can find some information there if you look.

I didn't see anything out there last night or today, I guess I am just missing it...

FB? Sorry, I'm suffering from memory/data-loss. Is there a link?

Facebook, but I don't see what he is referencing.

http://www.facebook.com/UltimaOnline?v=wall&ref=mf

Thanks.

Do you think my numbers are high or low?

I work in the software industry (a few exits away from EA HQ) and I know we hire college kids at 60-70k/year. UO is at the Mythic studio's which is out east and not in silicon valley like the HQ but the Virginia/DC area is still a decent tech hotbed with decent tech salaries. EA does do things on the cheap so it would not surprise me if their pay scale was lower than average and thus you get what you pay for in terms of talent.

Fully loaded cost includes their salary + benefits. Benefits can run 25% to 50% of the salary you pay a person. When running a budget you need to worry about fully loaded costs - not base salary.

There will be more info today after the all hands EA meetings.

I guess we will have to disagree on this point.

Don't get me wrong -I'd like nothing more than to see this game expand and prosper - but I dont' see much efforts towards that.

I dont' think new Haven has been particularly helpful and take new player creation - you get a horrible suit of armor and 1k in gold. That doesn't get you far in terms of buying an LRC suit or anything else you would need for training.

When I start a new shard - you know what I do? I sell one of the old soulstone frags from gifts for 500k and that 'gets me started' on the shard so I can afford a decent suit of armor, spellbook, runebook etc.

There are a lot of things that could be done to help new players - for example - if the account is 3 months old or less - when they create a new character they get a Virtue suit (all 70's and blessed) a full spellbook and 50k in gold. They should also get one advanced character token.

If they reach one year - on the anniversary - their account should get 2 codes for chargers of the fallen.

They should have a dungeon area with *good* rewards that only characters with less than 500 total skill can go to and less than 1 yr account age. It would make a new player area and random drops could be doom arties, 110 powerscrolls etc.

I am not saying add in WoW leveling -but just tossing new players into the world of 10 and 12 year vets with 100+ million in gold and every arty in the game is like dropping a homeless person in bevery hills. Its hard for them to compete and relate.

Find some ways to make the game more attractive to new players and make the experience fun so it hooks them. After 1 year of account age - they will be strong enough and experienced enough to stick around and then they can be treated like everyone else.

But the first step would have been a decent client. I've had friends take one look at the game, laugh, and dismiss it. It is soo far behind other games it is not funny in terms of graphics. 800x600? Please.

I understand that UO has tried several times to update the client but all have been miserable failures. Once again - great idea - horrible implementation.

So here we sit. Most of the playerbase hanging on to a 10 year old client and playing in a world of Bill Gate's and Warren Buffets with 1 out of 100 players actually being a 'new' player.

The Halloween content was great and has really engaged folks and the SA expansion is not bad - but it is not bringing new people in the game. I just don't see it. Unless we can stem the tide of players leaving and no new players joining - you are in 'maintenance' mode no matter what you call it.

Ill say it again.

UO makes money. The costs are under the gains. Unless EA goes away. UO will continue on. NO business is going to toss away something that is established and makes money. It makes no sense.


First you purge programs that lose money and have no realistic profit potential.

Then you purge programs that lose money but have a realistic profit potential.

If that doesnt work... you go to massive downsizing and hit all programs. HINT: this is where UO is.

I think your numbers are a little off (high). You are not taking into account that all resources listed except the devs are (probably)not UO dedicated staff. QA, graphic artists (save the lead) even GMs are probably a pool of resources shared over many other titles. Their costs would be shared as well. You would not likely see two titles from the same company offer expansions/improvements to their product at the same date. You also very rarely see a publish delayed unless there is a severe issue. This is because resource availability governs implementation.

I was a programmer in another life. Only I work out of Kansas City. The average salary for programmers here is considerably less. (approx 40k out of college) But Middle America cost of living is exponentially less than West coast living. And just like any other corporate America job, the salaries vary widely. But the hierarchy is the same. A few highly paid/desired personalities, a few more seasoned and respected performers (well paid) and a whole lot of low paid grunts clawing their way to the top.

As for the devs, I get the impression that those who work on this game definitely aren't in it for the money. Sak has already admitted this, at least for her part, in other places.

Concerning “fully loaded” costs for a quick ballpark, calculate $1 in overhead for every $1 in gross salary. This would include all facilities, utilities, maintenance, benefits, workman’s comp insurance and unemployment insurance.

Perhaps because if EA spent more time on quality than quantity, they might not be so strongly impacted at the moment. Yeah, the economy's taking its on a lot of places, but you're far more likely to be negatively impacted if you have negative business practices.

No, it's not good that anyone's lost their job.

However, if EA wants to "restructure" their company, they should do so in a manner that encourages quality, makes the "drop date" less of a stranglehold and more of a guideline, and works to release games which are above average instead of less than average. There's a company out there that does this, and strangely, even in these times of economic difficulty, I have yet to read about them laying off people.

This particular line of thought is not about the people but the company involved that caused the loss of these jobs for these people. Yeah, everyone shares some measure of responsibility, but in cases like this, it's usually bad decisions on the management level. Which would, of course, lead to the question, "Why support a gaming company that produces substandard games?"

Me, I still support EA when they release a good game (ie: Dead Space). However, using standard EA logic, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Dead Space 2 was among the cancelled.

Kinda shocked they'd axe the Community Coordinator... but ok. :/

Dont get me wrong. I love uo. I started playing it at the begining and contrary to ea/osi claims UO was not the first MMORPG but the offerings were limited. I chose uo. Since then I have seen a lot of things happen in this game but in the end it is the same game we started with 12 years ago. Nothing has really changed. This is ea's fault. I would not sign up for another ea online game.

From my stand point as someone who works as a bookkeeper: If you want a insurance policy to help UO go REACTIVE YOUR CLOSED ACCOUNTS! Leave em open for say 3 months. So if the bean-counter sees say 200 accounts reopen with 3 months game time (3 x12.99=38.97) 38.97 X 200=7,794. right there in 1 month.

The problem that has always existed for UO is that compared to its console holdings, UO never, ever, ever has made anything even remotely compared to what they make on a console game.

Certainly, UO has been successful. The problem is that no one at EA knows why, and while we finally have some developers (hopefully still with us) on the team who do understand that success, given the dismal failure that is Warhammer, I'd guess that Mythic as a company doesn't understand the success and failure of an MMO, particularly of UO.

I will say, I'm curious what, if any, affect any of this will have on UO and the "future plans" for the game that Calvin Crowner referred to.

Or buy something from the store for an acct. UO desperately needs more fan-wear/gear. Thongs anyone?

A good bean counter would realize that 200 accounts is a drop in the bucket. Id wager that they see that much activity every few days.

5000 accounts? Yea, a good bean counter might look at that. 200 account out of lets say....50k...statistically insignificant to a good bean counter.

Given the proportion of overweight male gamers, the image that creates is not one I wanted....

No doubt.

I dont really think at this stage that is going to be a big consideration. Nor do I really think it is a big risk. People will adapt.

Fansites already provide this.

Under the reduced staffing and I am sure serious budgetary constraints I dont see any real development time being spent on a project like this. It is my guess they will either let the shards dwindle to such a low level that it does not matter. Some shards are already there.

Do we need to go through all this again

UO has 10k to 100k subscribers. Pick your number

10k x $9.95= 100k a month. Yes a month.
100k x $9.95= 1 million a month.

So they make somewhere between 1.2 million a year and 12 million a year.


This does not include upgrades, new content purchase, pixal crack purchases and all the additional $9.99 to $39.99 purchase we all make.

Something tell me it makes money. If the pull the plug, Id love to buy it.


Dont forget it tuff times they went through 2 large modifications. Doom and gloom... Yeah but not for UO. Infact, I predict they beef up care for the game and build on what has worked and survived.

How many MM's have the launched and lost? Lots.

Pops
#1 theyre is not going to be a global search engine ever. Its counter UO.

#2 theyre not going to close shards ever. Why would they? They dont require much care. Besides you act like life would end if a shard closed. It wouldnt.

HEY THIS SHARD IS CLOSING IN 6 MONTHS. A transfer token is available to your account. Enjoy.

Thats it. You move on.

I feel like youre using the loss of all the jobs and the hardships of the employees to move you agenda forward. JMO.

So its been announced that a minimum of 12 projects have been canceled or will be canceled by 2010. None which have been named at this time, but hints to one report saying one of the projects being cut was a long standing mmo.

Balls......

"Change you can believe in"


This kind of news isnt shocking its just the tip of the iceberg.

Don't blame me I voted for the American.

Some perspective perhaps? This is our entertainment, however, it's been and for some it remains their livelihood.

My thoughts are with those we've lost just before the holiday season, and my hopes are simply that they all manage to fall on their feet.

Link to report hinting one of the projects is a long standing mmo?

Funny because the only people I ever see suggesting it are affected players who desperately want it to happen, not to grief others, but out of the grief that comes from watching your shard shrivel up and die while you don't have hundreds of dollars to relocate. This is a really insulting and baseless comment.

Developers have said no to shard merges, but that was before this recent round of EA cutbacks, and merge is a very specific word that doesn't preclude voluntary free transfers or shard combines via moongates etc -- all of which are traditionally done in other games, including other EA games, when budgets (and playerbases) shrink. There's no good reason to assume that these things won't be considered, and therefore it's not derailing -- it's speculation about possible effects on UO, just like the other effects being discussed in this thread.

So with this going on, is it safe to assume that UO is safe, since we havent heard anything from anyone?

For the record the only thing I can find referencing game cuts is the announcement that 12 UNANNOUNCED projects will be canceled, meaning sequels in development, new games in development or on the slate to be developed that have not been announced to the general public. Nothing about games that are currently in a release state.

Um Raven the subcription rate is now 12.99 a month. Its hasn't been $9.95 since 2003. Sorry.

LoL it was a toss up between the phone number or James Earl Joneses "We just don't do that sort of thing."

Either applies.