Here's what Nathan sold us: * one game, paid for with a one-time payment * regular updates * all the new content that will come from now until forever will be for free It seemed to me like a horrible business-model back then and it's still a horrible business-model. * Let's assume, bE's plan was to make EC last for 5+ years, with major updates once a year or so. That means, all of the running costs from now until the death of the game must be covered by that one one-time payment of the player. If a player buys this game for $50, bE must make ends meet for the next 5+ years with those $50. * What happens, when the devs run out of money? They cannot ask the players for money. They need FRESH players. The entire business-modell is based on the premise that there is an endless supply of customers willing to buy your product. If customers refuse to buy your product because of bad reviews, you are dead. If customers refuse to buy your product because there are better games, you are dead. * So, the business-modell of EC says that they need a permanent influx of new customers. PAYING customers. So, what do they do? They handed out free game-keys and free RTCs during Alpha like there was no tomorrow. And then they disincentiviced it even more for players to buy the game, by offering 90% of the half-finished game for free, thinking that players would be willing to pay the full price for a full half-finished game. To repeat: What EC needs to survive is paying customers, and bE is giving away the game for free. Now, I'm not working in finance, but... 1. Covering long-term costs with short-term income is stupid. 2. Giving something away for free when you need the money from sales is stupid. 3. Anybody working in marketing will tell you that if you want customers to value your product, you have to make your product seem of high value. If you give your product away for free, you are subconsciously telling your customers that your product is worthless. What if EC had used a subscription-model? Or if they had charged extra for new content? There is no incentive for bE to invest into EC because they will have to give all of the added value away for free to the players. However, if EC still had the option to charge players for content, bE could invest the money from selling current content into developing the next content. ----------------------------- By my count, that's now 4 areas where bE and its devs have proven that their incompetence is at fault for EC's demise: - They don't know what they are doing in terms of finances or marketing. - They don't know that a game based on existing canon needs game-mechanics that reflect that canon. - They don't know that balancing is nothing more than a mathematical optimization problem and that during optimization you can end up in a "local minimum", meaning you can balance the game only up to a certain maximum degree, and that if you want to make it more balanced, it could be necessary to move to a different "local minimum" (which is hopefully deeper/more balanced) by trying out radical new measures you haven't tried before . - They don't know how to plan ahead, because if you want to add radically different game-content in the future (like background-story, campaigns, missions, PvPvE ...), you have to take this into account now, or else you will need massive re-coding of core parts of your game at a time when everything is supposed to be set in stone already.