Does Disney have a say in SWTOR now ?

#11pyber80Posted 2/14/2013 3:47:32 PM
Velesco posted...
I don't pretend to be privy to this sort of information, but I don't believe Lucasarts has anything to do with this game. Bioware/EA purchased the Star Wars liscence from them and that's it...

Perhaps, though with how picky they can be over what gets created with their IP i do kind of doubt that they're totally uninvolved. At the least i could see certain things having to be run by the powers-that-be at LA just to ensure Bioware/EA don't mess with their universe too badly.
---
http://i.imgur.com/pdoYu.png
#12rowgue34Posted 2/15/2013 8:48:09 AM
pyber80 posted...
rowgue34 posted...
Cubbiesboy22 posted...
Bioware/EA is working on TOR. Lucasarts is working on other games such as the bounty hunter game. Again, TOR will not be shutting down anytime soon. If anyone honestly thinks this then I have a bridge to sell you.


It's...I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you. If you're going to make lame attempts to insult people's intelligence at least get the insult right.

Um, it isn't a requirement that you be specific about the bridge. Rarely have I ever heard anyone mention the Brooklyn Bridge itself, just "a bridge". You're just nitpicking in a lame attempt at making yourself look superior. And anyways, its less an insult than a comment on someone's gullibility.

On-topic, as long as the current license agreement is in place there's very little Disney will have to do with TOR, if anything at all. Once the license comes up for renewal, then things may change, assuming the game is doing well enough to warrant a renewal of course.


The only reason the saying exists is because some con men once sold somebody the brooklyn bridge. That's where it comes from and why it makes no sense whatsoever if it's left out.

And yes telling someone they are as gullible as the idiots that thought the brooklyn bridge was actually for sale is in fact an insult.
#13VasDeferens(Topic Creator)Posted 2/15/2013 11:35:30 AM
There was a good back and forth on my server chat last night about how the new TRON outfits might be some of the Disney influence seeping into the game .
#14pyber80Posted 2/15/2013 2:04:49 PM
rowgue34 posted...
The only reason the saying exists is because some con men once sold somebody the brooklyn bridge. That's where it comes from and why it makes no sense whatsoever if it's left out.

And yes telling someone they are as gullible as the idiots that thought the brooklyn bridge was actually for sale is in fact an insult.

You must have some pretty thin skin if you find that to be such a terrible insult, heh. And I know very well the origins of it, and its not a requirement that the bridge be named, except to someone that feels the need to seriously nitpick over it, such as yourself apparently.


VasDeferens posted...
There was a good back and forth on my server chat last night about how the new TRON outfits might be some of the Disney influence seeping into the game .

Perhaps, but I find that doubtful. The sale to Disney wasn't all that long ago and its entirely possible these pieces were already being worked on before pen was put to paper on the deal. Still, I suppose it could be seen as such regardless.
---
http://i.imgur.com/pdoYu.png
#15TluhdatsiPosted 2/15/2013 2:22:18 PM
Velesco posted...
I don't pretend to be privy to this sort of information, but I don't believe Lucasarts has anything to do with this game. Bioware/EA purchased the Star Wars liscence from them and that's it...


Yeah, but I'm pretty sure anything (or at least anything major) Bwea wants to add has to be run by Lucas's people for approval first. It's a common stipulation in licensing agreements, meant to ensure the licensee doesn't do anything to violate the spirit of the IP.

Now that LucasArts is a Disney subsidiary, Disney gets to have some input on what's approved or disapproved.
---
"We have a Constitution to protect us from the rule of 'most reasonable people'." -Butters (not the one from South Park)
#16happyscrub1Posted 2/15/2013 2:53:52 PM
rowgue34 posted...
Cubbiesboy22 posted...
Bioware/EA is working on TOR. Lucasarts is working on other games such as the bounty hunter game. Again, TOR will not be shutting down anytime soon. If anyone honestly thinks this then I have a bridge to sell you.


It's...I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you. If you're going to make lame attempts to insult people's intelligence at least get the insult right.


What?
---
Happyscrub's league of legends rank is higher than 95% gamefaqs posters. This is why gamefaqs jealous of him. That's why they troll him. So sad, So bad, so mad.
#17HolyKnight199Posted 2/15/2013 4:33:07 PM
I don't see why Disney would have any reason to shut SW:TOR down. The losses are EA's, not theirs, and if SW:TOR ever makes money, they'll get their part for free.

Unless Disney, for some reason, thinks that SW:TOR damages the brand, or, as SoulTrapper said, LA wants to make their own MMO. (But they would be idiots to make a new Star Wars MMO after such a massive failure.)

But shutting down the MMO altogether? EA could totally do this if the game keeps failing. Disney? They don't care.
---
Peace!
#18PulpPosted 2/15/2013 11:12:33 PM
HolyKnight199 posted...
I don't see why Disney would have any reason to shut SW:TOR down. The losses are EA's, not theirs, and if SW:TOR ever makes money, they'll get their part for free.

Unless Disney, for some reason, thinks that SW:TOR damages the brand, or, as SoulTrapper said, LA wants to make their own MMO. (But they would be idiots to make a new Star Wars MMO after such a massive failure.)

But shutting down the MMO altogether? EA could totally do this if the game keeps failing. Disney? They don't care.


It's not a question of LA shutting it down, it's a question of how LA gets it's cut going into year 2 and if that amount will encourage EA to shut it down. It could be percentage based, but it could also include a minimum base value (which is my guess, and helps explain the actions I noted earlier).

LA needs to make a profit here (or benefit in some other way). If all EA is offering is 20% of nothing and bad press...well, lets just say that doesn't seem like a licensing deal LA would historically enter into. Don't forget, they shutdown SWG for this deal...
---
Contest Abuse - You have lost the right to dispute or appeal further moderations.
#19rowgue34Posted 2/16/2013 1:56:25 AM
pyber80 posted...
rowgue34 posted...
The only reason the saying exists is because some con men once sold somebody the brooklyn bridge. That's where it comes from and why it makes no sense whatsoever if it's left out.

And yes telling someone they are as gullible as the idiots that thought the brooklyn bridge was actually for sale is in fact an insult.

You must have some pretty thin skin if you find that to be such a terrible insult, heh. And I know very well the origins of it, and its not a requirement that the bridge be named, except to someone that feels the need to seriously nitpick over it, such as yourself apparently.


VasDeferens posted...
There was a good back and forth on my server chat last night about how the new TRON outfits might be some of the Disney influence seeping into the game .

Perhaps, but I find that doubtful. The sale to Disney wasn't all that long ago and its entirely possible these pieces were already being worked on before pen was put to paper on the deal. Still, I suppose it could be seen as such regardless.


I never said it was a "horrible" insult. I was just clarifying that it is in fact an attempt to insult someone. People don't get to pretend their attempts to insult people aren't what they are, especially people that spend the vast majority of their time trying to call other people trolls.

And sorry but it is a requirement to include the name of the bridge. The fact that many people use the phrase incorrectly doesn't magically mean the incorrect way is now legitimate. The phrase is literally meaningless without reference to the actual event that illustrates a stunning level of gullibility.
#20celanthilPosted 2/16/2013 2:35:00 AM
rowgue34 posted...
pyber80 posted...
rowgue34 posted...
The only reason the saying exists is because some con men once sold somebody the brooklyn bridge. That's where it comes from and why it makes no sense whatsoever if it's left out.

And yes telling someone they are as gullible as the idiots that thought the brooklyn bridge was actually for sale is in fact an insult.

You must have some pretty thin skin if you find that to be such a terrible insult, heh. And I know very well the origins of it, and its not a requirement that the bridge be named, except to someone that feels the need to seriously nitpick over it, such as yourself apparently.


VasDeferens posted...
There was a good back and forth on my server chat last night about how the new TRON outfits might be some of the Disney influence seeping into the game .

Perhaps, but I find that doubtful. The sale to Disney wasn't all that long ago and its entirely possible these pieces were already being worked on before pen was put to paper on the deal. Still, I suppose it could be seen as such regardless.


I never said it was a "horrible" insult. I was just clarifying that it is in fact an attempt to insult someone. People don't get to pretend their attempts to insult people aren't what they are, especially people that spend the vast majority of their time trying to call other people trolls.

And sorry but it is a requirement to include the name of the bridge. The fact that many people use the phrase incorrectly doesn't magically mean the incorrect way is now legitimate. The phrase is literally meaningless without reference to the actual event that illustrates a stunning level of gullibility.


Lmao required

"I have a bridge to sell you" or "if you believe that then I have a bridge to sell you" are the two sayings. Never have have I heard Brooklyn put in there before and even after your history lesson I would still never put Brooklyn in the saying. just google it man no one ever says "I have the Brooklyn bridge to sell you"
---
sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!