I think that SWTOR should have 5 servers. That would fit all of the current players.
There were more than 5 servers (9 or 10) today that hit heavy loads. Your statement is then saying that the other 113~ servers combined do not make up one full server? Even though about 80~ of those other servers were standard population?
1.2(the nerfs and under delivering in other aspects)pretty much insured that I am leaving, but the game is far from unplayable and I am not leaving just yet. I am personally going to play it until something better comes along, something without a cash shop, I'd much rather deal with those horribly outdated subscription fees.
So you would rather spend $50-$60 for the game plus $15 a month ($180 per year)? Well... its your money.
"something better without a cash shop". Does that mean that no matter the game it could never be better so long as it has a CS? (even if it were a better Star Wars game?). If that's a reference to GW2 its a pretty bold (foolish) statement without having any facts or any substantial disclosure as to the items in the CS. Sounds more like an antinquated droid banging its head against the wall refusing to be updated or even consider the available options.
If you oppose CS on principle then that's at least somewhat respectable, but to fall back to paying subs (aka getting ripped off) makes no sense at all.
I have made my opinions about cash shops known, I've gone round and round with the gw2 fanbois about it. It is about principal. And what i saw in that beta leak pretty much amounted to p2w for me, some people disagree, and that's fine but they're only ignoring it because they want gw2 to succeed and be the next big thing desperately. I personally don't want to see a used car type add promoting double cash tuesdays before i log in. I come to these games to get away from the real world. when you have a cash shop you're making real world economics part of my fantasy/escape.
And a sub fee is in no way shape or form a rip off, for the amount of entertainment one gets for the dollar, it is beyond comparison. Going to the movies cost well over that for one movie, when i go to the pub I spend enough for 3 sub fees at a shot, its actually a good deal if the game is good and well done. And more importantly it keeps everyone on an equal playing field and keeps the game a game and mostly independant of your rl.
Look, in a p2w scenario I could do very, very well.................I just don't want it, I feel like a cash shop taints my game experience in most cases. This is just me, I don't care what you choose to do with your money/time. So yes, any game with a cash shop that can impact actual game play is off of my list. And you do understand it HAS to cross that line, because why would you spend money on anything that didn't effect actual game play. If CS is their business model then they have to put attractive items in it so that you'll buy them, it may be tame to start, but it can only end one way. Refusal to acknowledge that in any way shape or form as a possibility is much more like your droid scenario than anything i've ever wrote on the topic.
1.2(the nerfs and under delivering in other aspects)pretty much insured that I am leaving, but the game is far from unplayable and I am not leaving just yet. I am personally going to play it until something better comes along, something without a cash shop, I'd much rather deal with those horribly outdated subscription fees.
So you would rather spend $50-$60 for the game plus $15 a month ($180 per year)? Well... its your money.
"something better without a cash shop". Does that mean that no matter the game it could never be better so long as it has a CS? (even if it were a better Star Wars game?). If that's a reference to GW2 its a pretty bold (foolish) statement without having any facts or any substantial disclosure as to the items in the CS. Sounds more like an antinquated droid banging its head against the wall refusing to be updated or even consider the available options.
If you oppose CS on principle then that's at least somewhat respectable, but to fall back to paying subs (aka getting ripped off) makes no sense at all.
I have made my opinions about cash shops known, I've gone round and round with the gw2 fanbois about it. It is about principal. And what i saw in that beta leak pretty much amounted to p2w for me,
Agreed 100%. I don't care whether this game falls to 10-20 servers, but PLEASE bioware do not go the way of Anet and implement a pay to win cash shop.
I think I have to give Bioware/EA credit for listening to players. It's obvious that Character Transfers and Server Mergers are something that the community really wants to see happen. I don't think that what he said was a lie. At least, I'm not going to make the jump to questioning somebody's character in the way that so many people are so quick to do. It doesn't matter what he says though. If he comes out and say that there are 1.3 million active players....you're going to have people who are going to call him a liar and say that there's NO WAY the numbers are that hight. It's really a lose-lose situation, in my opinion.
As austerity bites into business and people's incomes, putting them off subbed games, I am expecting more merger talks to emerge as well as other drastic measures & not just with SWTOR. Yes people have disposable incomes but that does not mean they will be spending it if consumer confidence is at an ebbing low, especially after GAME and GameStation collapsing as a sign of the times.
The server I'm on is heavy from 5 est to Midnight every day of the week......So in my world, this doesn't affect me....They won't be merging mine with anybodies anytime soon.....Cheers
Wow, this "subscription number" discussion is still raging on, lol
I can't wait to see the equivalent threads once GW2 is launched. That will be really entertaining, because there is no accurate external way to measure players for GW2, seeing as there are no subscriptions as such. ArenaNet can simply say they sold 2 million boxes, therefore they have 2 million players, regardless of whether they actually login or not. So speculation will be rife, and XFire numbers will rule the day, hehe
As with all recent AAA MMO launches, the number of SWTOR players is declining post-release. The vast number of release-day servers are not evenly populated, and there has to be some consolidation. This is common sense. It will be exacerbated by the upcoming release of new big titles, which will inevitably pull away players who will go to explore the "next best thing". many of those players will return after a month or two, once the "shiny" wears off of whatever new game they went to. Again, common sense.
The SWTOR server I play on is luckily not one of those in the "outlands", and I can quite easily find groups for heroic's and FP's anytime that I play.
I'm not saying EA is going to do anything. You were asking if major investors get fooled. I'm saying major investors have been fooled regulary and specatularly.
Wow, this "subscription number" discussion is still raging on, lol
I can't wait to see the equivalent threads once GW2 is launched. That will be really entertaining, because there is no accurate external way to measure players for GW2, seeing as there are no subscriptions as such. ArenaNet can simply say they sold 2 million boxes, therefore they have 2 million players, regardless of whether they actually login or not. So speculation will be rife, and XFire numbers will rule the day, hehe
As with all recent AAA MMO launches, the number of SWTOR players is declining post-release. The vast number of release-day servers are not evenly populated, and there has to be some consolidation. This is common sense. It will be exacerbated by the upcoming release of new big titles, which will inevitably pull away players who will go to explore the "next best thing". many of those players will return after a month or two, once the "shiny" wears off of whatever new game they went to. Again, common sense.
The SWTOR server I play on is luckily not one of those in the "outlands", and I can quite easily find groups for heroic's and FP's anytime that I play.
We can use XFire in the same way that's it been used to accurately show trends in other games: the most recent being SWTOR. It won't tell us the total population, but it can be an indicator of how popular a game is or isn't over a span of time.
"One of the problems we’re running into right now is kind of a classic MMO problem, which is that our overall population of players has not changed, but our peak concurrent users has changed."
If it's the same 'classic MMO problem' every other game has, of course the overall population has decreased after the first month, and in this case, substancially so.
Think about it. The game released just before Christmas with massive amounts of advertising and hype. Anybody who was going to buy this game had already bought it months ago.
Sales figures (I can't be bothered finding them right now) since December have been poor and they have lost players hand over fist once they reached level 50.
How can they possibly be retaining the same overall population, especially considering the criticism the game has received over the last 3 months?
""One of the problems we’re running into right now is kind of a classic MMO problem, which is that our overall population of players has not changed, but our peak concurrent users has changed.""
Players=active account.
Users=people that have logged into the game.
Thus the reason for the free month and free legacy pets some are talking about if they log in to get it, even though they have a paid 6 month sub.
Wow, this "subscription number" discussion is still raging on, lol
I can't wait to see the equivalent threads once GW2 is launched. That will be really entertaining, because there is no accurate external way to measure players for GW2, seeing as there are no subscriptions as such. ArenaNet can simply say they sold 2 million boxes, therefore they have 2 million players, regardless of whether they actually login or not. So speculation will be rife, and XFire numbers will rule the day, hehe
As with all recent AAA MMO launches, the number of SWTOR players is declining post-release. The vast number of release-day servers are not evenly populated, and there has to be some consolidation. This is common sense. It will be exacerbated by the upcoming release of new big titles, which will inevitably pull away players who will go to explore the "next best thing". many of those players will return after a month or two, once the "shiny" wears off of whatever new game they went to. Again, common sense.
The SWTOR server I play on is luckily not one of those in the "outlands", and I can quite easily find groups for heroic's and FP's anytime that I play.
Yes, but when the initial rush wears off and numbers decline, anyone who says anything to that effect will be labled as a SWTOR fanboy because they will assume it is revenge for what they have been doing for the last year.
Yea then he went on to say "So, it means they did one of two things. They gave us a credit card, which is now in our system,[/color] or they went into a retailer and gave cash to buy cards to put those in the system." Your credit card is still in their 'system' even if you cancel your subscription. That's what the EA CEO said in front of shareholders. [/quote] Makes sense since you can only subscibe to an MMO with a game card of a credit card. And just because it is in their system with your cancel does not change his definition of a recurring subscription. [/quote]
Ok, but also sounds to me like they're counting accounts that aren't completely cancelled. According to that statement, if your account information is still in their system they're counting you as a 'reaccuring subscriber'. [/b][/quote]
Thats just because thats what you want to hear. People on this site only hear what they want and twist things to fit their agenda. Peole just want to run around and be able to say I told you so like they are in third grade again. Bioware knows the real number the investors I am sure know the real number of subs and thats all. The rest of us are trying to skew any infromation we can find to fit some agenda we have.
Doh, I shouldn't have posted the OP, seeing that the subscription debate is going on although there's absolutely no information about subscriptions in the linked article.
The EA BioWare guy is not talking about subscriptions, instead he talks about server population. That's an entirely different beast. They can have boatloads of active accounts but if those people login only for a couple hours per week to watch a cutscene or login one evening to raid with their guild the servers will feel empty, no matter how many active accounts they have.
The real news in the quotes from the article is that EA BioWare discusses population problems on their servers, as far as I know for the first time.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
Thats just because thats what you want to hear. People on this site only hear what they want and twist things to fit their agenda. Peole just want to run around and be able to say I told you so like they are in third grade again. Bioware knows the real number the investors I am sure know the real number of subs and thats all. The rest of us are trying to skew any infromation we can find to fit some agenda we have.
Their overall population of players has not changed?
Why do they lie?
This statement would apply ref: me, but I doubt it applies across all players or tons of players?
I am still subscribed, but I play a few times a week, couple hours each time is it now. When game was first out, I like many others was at it a lot more often :P
Comments
There were more than 5 servers (9 or 10) today that hit heavy loads. Your statement is then saying that the other 113~ servers combined do not make up one full server? Even though about 80~ of those other servers were standard population?
You guys are really bad at this.
I have made my opinions about cash shops known, I've gone round and round with the gw2 fanbois about it. It is about principal. And what i saw in that beta leak pretty much amounted to p2w for me, some people disagree, and that's fine but they're only ignoring it because they want gw2 to succeed and be the next big thing desperately. I personally don't want to see a used car type add promoting double cash tuesdays before i log in. I come to these games to get away from the real world. when you have a cash shop you're making real world economics part of my fantasy/escape.
And a sub fee is in no way shape or form a rip off, for the amount of entertainment one gets for the dollar, it is beyond comparison. Going to the movies cost well over that for one movie, when i go to the pub I spend enough for 3 sub fees at a shot, its actually a good deal if the game is good and well done. And more importantly it keeps everyone on an equal playing field and keeps the game a game and mostly independant of your rl.
Look, in a p2w scenario I could do very, very well.................I just don't want it, I feel like a cash shop taints my game experience in most cases. This is just me, I don't care what you choose to do with your money/time. So yes, any game with a cash shop that can impact actual game play is off of my list. And you do understand it HAS to cross that line, because why would you spend money on anything that didn't effect actual game play. If CS is their business model then they have to put attractive items in it so that you'll buy them, it may be tame to start, but it can only end one way. Refusal to acknowledge that in any way shape or form as a possibility is much more like your droid scenario than anything i've ever wrote on the topic.
Agreed 100%. I don't care whether this game falls to 10-20 servers, but PLEASE bioware do not go the way of Anet and implement a pay to win cash shop.
I think I have to give Bioware/EA credit for listening to players. It's obvious that Character Transfers and Server Mergers are something that the community really wants to see happen. I don't think that what he said was a lie. At least, I'm not going to make the jump to questioning somebody's character in the way that so many people are so quick to do. It doesn't matter what he says though. If he comes out and say that there are 1.3 million active players....you're going to have people who are going to call him a liar and say that there's NO WAY the numbers are that hight. It's really a lose-lose situation, in my opinion.
'Open World PVP on Ilum; when you get to the high levels prepare to be blown away!'
cutting out the ranked wzs from 1.2 one day before release, 'the key piece of PVP'
'our overall population of players has not changed'
i see what they did there.
hilarious to see though that those naive swtor fanbois believe every word those spin doctors from ea/bw spit out.
In the EU, only 1 server ever reaches heavy in prime time.
All the others are dropping despite people logging in a bit more since 1.2 out of curiosity.
It's not looking good.
people still play war outside of the free to play demo?
As austerity bites into business and people's incomes, putting them off subbed games, I am expecting more merger talks to emerge as well as other drastic measures & not just with SWTOR. Yes people have disposable incomes but that does not mean they will be spending it if consumer confidence is at an ebbing low, especially after GAME and GameStation collapsing as a sign of the times.
You talk as if you already know whats gonna be in the cash shop.
Isn't SWTOR pay to win? You have to PLAY to WIN, and PAY to PLAY, thus by logic it is PAY to WIN?
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
The server I'm on is heavy from 5 est to Midnight every day of the week......So in my world, this doesn't affect me....They won't be merging mine with anybodies anytime soon.....Cheers
The oceanic servers are doing ok. Heavy/Heavy/Full is the norm for them.
The Enlightened take things Lightly
Wow, this "subscription number" discussion is still raging on, lol
I can't wait to see the equivalent threads once GW2 is launched. That will be really entertaining, because there is no accurate external way to measure players for GW2, seeing as there are no subscriptions as such. ArenaNet can simply say they sold 2 million boxes, therefore they have 2 million players, regardless of whether they actually login or not. So speculation will be rife, and XFire numbers will rule the day, hehe
As with all recent AAA MMO launches, the number of SWTOR players is declining post-release. The vast number of release-day servers are not evenly populated, and there has to be some consolidation. This is common sense. It will be exacerbated by the upcoming release of new big titles, which will inevitably pull away players who will go to explore the "next best thing". many of those players will return after a month or two, once the "shiny" wears off of whatever new game they went to. Again, common sense.
The SWTOR server I play on is luckily not one of those in the "outlands", and I can quite easily find groups for heroic's and FP's anytime that I play.
I'm not saying EA is going to do anything. You were asking if major investors get fooled. I'm saying major investors have been fooled regulary and specatularly.
We can use XFire in the same way that's it been used to accurately show trends in other games: the most recent being SWTOR. It won't tell us the total population, but it can be an indicator of how popular a game is or isn't over a span of time.
Re: SWTOR
"Remember, remember - Kakk says 'December.'"
"We have a ton of registered accounts, but only a tiny fraction are actually playing our game"
"One of the problems we’re running into right now is kind of a classic MMO problem, which is that our overall population of players has not changed, but our peak concurrent users has changed."
If it's the same 'classic MMO problem' every other game has, of course the overall population has decreased after the first month, and in this case, substancially so.
Think about it. The game released just before Christmas with massive amounts of advertising and hype. Anybody who was going to buy this game had already bought it months ago.
Sales figures (I can't be bothered finding them right now) since December have been poor and they have lost players hand over fist once they reached level 50.
How can they possibly be retaining the same overall population, especially considering the criticism the game has received over the last 3 months?
I can honestly believe their statement
""One of the problems we’re running into right now is kind of a classic MMO problem, which is that our overall population of players has not changed, but our peak concurrent users has changed.""
Players=active account.
Users=people that have logged into the game.
Thus the reason for the free month and free legacy pets some are talking about if they log in to get it, even though they have a paid 6 month sub.
Yes, but when the initial rush wears off and numbers decline, anyone who says anything to that effect will be labled as a SWTOR fanboy because they will assume it is revenge for what they have been doing for the last year.
[/quote]
Yea then he went on to say "So, it means they did one of two things. They gave us a credit card, which is now in our system,[/color] or they went into a retailer and gave cash to buy cards to put those in the system."
Your credit card is still in their 'system' even if you cancel your subscription.
That's what the EA CEO said in front of shareholders.
[/quote]
Makes sense since you can only subscibe to an MMO with a game card of a credit card. And just because it is in their system with your cancel does not change his definition of a recurring subscription.
[/quote]
Ok, but also sounds to me like they're counting accounts that aren't completely cancelled. According to that statement, if your account information is still in their system they're counting you as a 'reaccuring subscriber'.
[/b][/quote]
Thats just because thats what you want to hear. People on this site only hear what they want and twist things to fit their agenda. Peole just want to run around and be able to say I told you so like they are in third grade again. Bioware knows the real number the investors I am sure know the real number of subs and thats all. The rest of us are trying to skew any infromation we can find to fit some agenda we have.
Doh, I shouldn't have posted the OP, seeing that the subscription debate is going on although there's absolutely no information about subscriptions in the linked article.
The EA BioWare guy is not talking about subscriptions, instead he talks about server population. That's an entirely different beast. They can have boatloads of active accounts but if those people login only for a couple hours per week to watch a cutscene or login one evening to raid with their guild the servers will feel empty, no matter how many active accounts they have.
The real news in the quotes from the article is that EA BioWare discusses population problems on their servers, as far as I know for the first time.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
You're on this site, too.
Just sayin'
.
This statement would apply ref: me, but I doubt it applies across all players or tons of players?
I am still subscribed, but I play a few times a week, couple hours each time is it now. When game was first out, I like many others was at it a lot more often :P