Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

From 214 servers to 20-30, WOW

13567

Comments

  • AmbrosiaAmorAmbrosiaAmor Miami, FLPosts: 915Member
    I remember MMO.Maverick sort of... but he hasn't posted since mid-December of last year. I see his name pop up from different posters though. I wonder why.
     
    O:
     

    image

  • cutthecrapcutthecrap nobusinessofyoursPosts: 600Member
    Originally posted by potapithikos
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    Perhaps my logic has "gone stale" :D

     

    So can you please explain to me how subscriber numbers are irrelevant, but server numbers are important ?

    I bet he means that you will never agree that the actual subscribers of SWTOR are 3 (You, Cutthecrap, and MMOMaverick) and you will keep on stating that they are infact 900k or whatever.

     

    Since neither can be proven the numbers are irrelevant when noone can deny that servers are only going to be X very soon.

    ? I don't sub or play SWTOR at all. Lol, fail bait comment image

  • AusareAusare adamstown, MDPosts: 850Member
    Originally posted by Z3R01
    Originally posted by pierth

    Just goes to show the importance of having a quality, compelling endgame.

    ^

    Rift lost servers too but it didnt start with that many and certainly has more the Swtor does now.

    Why? Because Rift has an endgame.

    People here made a big deal about Rifts questing saying it was shallow but guess what Swtor gave you quite a bit of leveling options and people still left.

    shows you have to have everything ready when you release the game not hope that people will give you a chance to develope it.

  • spizzspizz BlackForrestPosts: 2,587Member

    Servers are big, somwhere the 1.7 million subscriber have to go so people can see them...

  • Z3R01Z3R01 NYC, NYPosts: 2,426Member
    Originally posted by Ausare
    Originally posted by Z3R01
    Originally posted by pierth

    Just goes to show the importance of having a quality, compelling endgame.

    ^

    Rift lost servers too but it didnt start with that many and certainly has more the Swtor does now.

    Why? Because Rift has an endgame.

    People here made a big deal about Rifts questing saying it was shallow but guess what Swtor gave you quite a bit of leveling options and people still left.

    shows you have to have everything ready when you release the game not hope that people will give you a chance to develope it.

    The mmo genre is competitive. Everyone is fighting for those subscriber dollars. When you release you go up against established games with thousands of hours of endgame content. You can not release a game without multiple tiers of content, noone will stay. 

    Why would they? 

    Playing:

    Waiting on:

  • WicoaWicoa LondonPosts: 1,602Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    Lol, if a game has 700K players, what diffirence does it make whether they are spread over 214 servers or 20 servers ? As long as the servers can handle the player numbers.

     

    It sounds like the doomsayers are going to use the character transfer numbers to try to "prove" that the game is finally "dead". Is the subtext here something like: "Wow, if they needed 214 servers for 1 million players, reducing that to 20 servers must mean the game only has 100K players left !!1!!!"

     

    SWTOR had the smoothest launch in MMO history, but it came at quite a steep price in the end. Having so many servers at launch (and aggresively managing server loadings) made for very smooth gameplay during the initial rush, but it has left a large number of servers empty now that the population has stabilised.

    So, what's really important ? The drop in player numbers is important, and we can clearly see that the numbers have dropped substantially (even by the official announcements), so nothing new there. The re-arrangement of remaining players on fewer (but bigger) servers is expected, not headline news...

     

    Stop fooling yourself please.  It would be surprising if the game has greater than 500K active players right now and as soon as GW2/TSW launch they'll be heading down to the 200-300K range. (one man's opinion)

     

    Make that 2 men's opinionata.  I think by the end of the year they will be lucky to stabilise at 50-100k.

  • Trol1Trol1 Kissimmee, FLPosts: 175Member

    Man, it's fun to see that ppl always have something to cry about. *rolls eyes*

    Had SWTOR started with a lower number of server, people would have been in queue for ages getting the hate rollin'...

    so instead BW overcompensated (and added in the "early access" APACs) and now people a crying that the servers are too empty (due to natural reduction of tourism players leaving).

    so BW now sets up a server transfer model (not even a server merger, just a server transfer model!) and ppl start crying that this is SWTOR's end as obviously it'll show how few gamers there are actually playing SWTOR...

    so, what is it that ppl actually want?

    Because I assume with these smart doom-n-gloomers here (who should problably actually sit on the board of every MMO to assure that everything runs perfect) they have the answer that BW doesn't have...

    Right now BW needs to determine what works best... and guess who makes that hard: the gamers!

    There is no point of creating 2 or 3 "overservers" and a dozen or so mid-strong servers and another dozen light-to-mid servers and then say "hey, we are done!"

    Because then suddenly people will start complaining that these "overservers" are too full and that there ain't enough on the mid-light servers and the whole game starts again.

    This is a simple, persistant "let's look at the numbers" game where BW needs to see if one server is in danger of going critical and needs to be dropped as a destination server or not.

    And who knows, out of all those origin servers, at the end of the day there may well be quite a few "rising from the ashes" when BW actuially finds their prime servers saturated and now goes for the "second class" servers that still have a "stronger" population (compared to other low pop servers) on 'em.

    Anyhow, things are in motion, now let 'em progress, will ya? ;-)

     

  • BlackbrrdBlackbrrd KongsbergPosts: 811Member

    It's very good news for SWTOR. Nothing is as lame as playing on a dead MMO-server.

    I played in AoC when they merged the servers there, and it helped a lot gameplay wise and because of that helped retention. The only bad thing is that they waited so long - which goes for both SWTOR and AoC.

  • Pratt2112Pratt2112 Posts: 1,536Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by pierth

     


     


     

    Source? Metrics/Statistics? Any proof whatsoever? Because the last two "forced grouping" games that I played were FFXI and EQ1 both of which have run with profitable amounts of players for years.


    Certainly, if MMO Pubs are only seeking players for less than six months they should focus on soloers- however if they are looking to profit on more than box sales then it shows that it's a stupid, stupid thing to do.

    The problem is you have people on either side of the fence arguing to the extremes of their position, while dismissing or ignoring the other side of the coin.  It's either "All A" or "All B". Too few people dwell in the gray area between that better represents the actual situation. This leads to a complete dead-end in terms of any kind of meaningful discussion taking place, because people on either side refuse to even acknowledge the other.

    What I see happening is bigger name developers finding they can provide what is essentially a forced-online solo-RPG with optional group content. That is, optional in that you don't have to do it, but it's there in case you want to. It's not mission critical to progressing in the game - that includes Raids and PvP in most cases.

    The developers and, to a greater extent, the publishers are steadily working this into a situation where they get to have their cake and eat it, too. It seems to me that this whole genre is steadily moving toward the "standard" of being forced online single-player games with an on-going revenue model.

    Looking at the current crop of MMOs and comparing it to earlier MMOs, even including those that came out earlier in the "WoW Era", fewer and fewer developers are even trying to make them massive anymore.

    The genre's being streamlined, simplified and wittled down into a lean, mean, money-generating machine that barely resembles its roots anymore. It's happening right under people's noses, and those same people are eating it up.

     

     

  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko RotterdamPosts: 3,845Member Uncommon

    Let's assume that in the first week after launch there were 1.5M active players, and they were VERY active. That would mean each server supported around 7K accounts, all of which could play totally smoothly. Of course, some servers supported more and some less, but it shows that the average server could run anywhere between 5K and 10K accounts without breaking a sweat.

     

    It's not unreasonable to say that after 6 months of experience and server/database tuning, that the average server can quite possibly support far more accounts now than it could at launch. I don't really buy the "mega server technology" sales pitch, but I would believe that they were far too conservative with the initial server loadings.

     

    The player distributions by zone are also not as concentrated as they would have been in the first few weeks, because the character level-spread is far greater. And a large number of players at level-cap will be playing in instances most of the time. The amount of hours played by each account will also decrease on average, because few players keep up the fevered pitch of those first few weeks of "new and shiny" gameplay.

     

    So perhaps the new servers are supporting double or even triple the accounts that they did at launch. If a server at launch could support 10K accounts, that could mean they now are loading 20K or even 30K accounts per server, which (with 20-30 remaining servers) could mean a total sub of anywhere between 200K and 900K ! image

  • superniceguysuperniceguy AnchorheadPosts: 2,278Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Trol1

    Man, it's fun to see that ppl always have something to cry about. *rolls eyes*

    Had SWTOR started with a lower number of server, people would have been in queue for ages getting the hate rollin'...

    so instead BW overcompensated (and added in the "early access" APACs) and now people a crying that the servers are too empty (due to natural reduction of tourism players leaving).

    so BW now sets up a server transfer model (not even a server merger, just a server transfer model!) and ppl start crying that this is SWTOR's end as obviously it'll show how few gamers there are actually playing SWTOR...

    so, what is it that ppl actually want?

    Because I assume with these smart doom-n-gloomers here (who should problably actually sit on the board of every MMO to assure that everything runs perfect) they have the answer that BW doesn't have...

    Right now BW needs to determine what works best... and guess who makes that hard: the gamers!

    There is no point of creating 2 or 3 "overservers" and a dozen or so mid-strong servers and another dozen light-to-mid servers and then say "hey, we are done!"

    Because then suddenly people will start complaining that these "overservers" are too full and that there ain't enough on the mid-light servers and the whole game starts again.

    This is a simple, persistant "let's look at the numbers" game where BW needs to see if one server is in danger of going critical and needs to be dropped as a destination server or not.

    And who knows, out of all those origin servers, at the end of the day there may well be quite a few "rising from the ashes" when BW actuially finds their prime servers saturated and now goes for the "second class" servers that still have a "stronger" population (compared to other low pop servers) on 'em.

    Anyhow, things are in motion, now let 'em progress, will ya? ;-)

     

    More content, and a more solid planned future

    When I started playing SWG, it was all quite lame, with running everywhere and not much in sight, but on the horizom, we knew we were gettiing vehicles, mounts, player cities, space etc and with the vast worlds to explore and the crafting system in place, it kept you well occupied.

    When SWGs servers merged, they were all full for a while (except Gorath), and then a year later it was cries for more server merges, as the transfers and merges only fixed the problem temporarily.

    By the time all the transfers are done, servers will become swiftly dead again, and then more merges will be necessary.

    It took SOE 6 years to do transfers/merges and they mainly focussed on content, which is the right thing to do, as it tackles the root of the population decline. Transfer/merges will make some people quit too, if their characters name is the really important to them.

    More content that people want = people return, when people return the servers fill back up again, servers fill back up, then those that quit due to low population will also return.

    These transfers are the beginning of the end

  • pierthpierth San Antonio, TXPosts: 1,503Member


    Originally posted by TangentPoint
    Originally posted by pierthSource? Metrics/Statistics? Any proof whatsoever? Because the last two "forced grouping" games that I played were FFXI and EQ1 both of which have run with profitable amounts of players for years. Certainly, if MMO Pubs are only seeking players for less than six months they should focus on soloers- however if they are looking to profit on more than box sales then it shows that it's a stupid, stupid thing to do.
    The problem is you have people on either side of the fence arguing to the extremes of their position, while dismissing or ignoring the other side of the coin.  It's either "All A" or "All B". Too few people dwell in the gray area between that better represents the actual situation. This leads to a complete dead-end in terms of any kind of meaningful discussion taking place, because people on either side refuse to even acknowledge the other.

    What I see happening is bigger name developers finding they can provide what is essentially a forced-online solo-RPG with optional group content. That is, optional in that you don't have to do it, but it's there in case you want to. It's not mission critical to progressing in the game - that includes Raids and PvP in most cases.

    The developers and, to a greater extent, the publishers are steadily working this into a situation where they get to have their cake and eat it, too. It seems to me that this whole genre is steadily moving toward the "standard" of being forced online single-player games with an on-going revenue model.

    Looking at the current crop of MMOs and comparing it to earlier MMOs, even including those that came out earlier in the "WoW Era", fewer and fewer developers are even trying to make them massive anymore.

    The genre's being streamlined, simplified and wittled down into a lean, mean, money-generating machine that barely resembles its roots anymore. It's happening right under people's noses, and those same people are eating it up.



    I agree, and the sad thing is we'll always see proponents of these poor quality games white knighting them with "Hurr durr it's only $60.00- I can't get that many hours of entertainment elsewhere for the same price." They'll never demand better because of this insipid idea.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,645Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TangentPoint
    Originally posted by pierth

    Source? Metrics/Statistics? Any proof whatsoever? Because the last two "forced grouping" games that I played were FFXI and EQ1 both of which have run with profitable amounts of players for years.


    Certainly, if MMO Pubs are only seeking players for less than six months they should focus on soloers- however if they are looking to profit on more than box sales then it shows that it's a stupid, stupid thing to do.

    The problem is you have people on either side of the fence arguing to the extremes of their position, while dismissing or ignoring the other side of the coin.  It's either "All A" or "All B". Too few people dwell in the gray area between that better represents the actual situation. This leads to a complete dead-end in terms of any kind of meaningful discussion taking place, because people on either side refuse to even acknowledge the other.

    What I see happening is bigger name developers finding they can provide what is essentially a forced-online solo-RPG with optional group content. That is, optional in that you don't have to do it, but it's there in case you want to. It's not mission critical to progressing in the game - that includes Raids and PvP in most cases.

    The developers and, to a greater extent, the publishers are steadily working this into a situation where they get to have their cake and eat it, too. It seems to me that this whole genre is steadily moving toward the "standard" of being forced online single-player games with an on-going revenue model.

    Looking at the current crop of MMOs and comparing it to earlier MMOs, even including those that came out earlier in the "WoW Era", fewer and fewer developers are even trying to make them massive anymore.

    The genre's being streamlined, simplified and wittled down into a lean, mean, money-generating machine that barely resembles its roots anymore. It's happening right under people's noses, and those same people are eating it up.

    Tangent, BadSpock has a blog post on forced soloing that's rather relevant to this discussion. He even has a neat Ihmotepp quote in there. ;)

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • sirphobossirphobos Ames, IAPosts: 614Member Common

    I know this forum needs to get their daily dose of hating SWTOR in, but let me provide some facts from someone who actually plays this game rather than just trolls forums:

    Yes, there are far fewer servers than there was at launch.  However, last night there was also far more players on my new server (Prophecy of the Five) than there was on any single server at launch, approximately 500 people on the Republic Fleet and 900 people on the Imperial Fleet.  No single server came close to this at launch.  Obviously server caps are far higher than they were at launch.

    With that being said, let the hating resume.

  • sleepr27sleepr27 LisbonPosts: 103Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    Lol, if a game has 700K players, what diffirence does it make whether they are spread over 214 servers or 20 servers ? As long as the servers can handle the player numbers.

     

    It sounds like the doomsayers are going to use the character transfer numbers to try to "prove" that the game is finally "dead". Is the subtext here something like: "Wow, if they needed 214 servers for 1 million players, reducing that to 20 servers must mean the game only has 100K players left !!1!!!"

     

    SWTOR had the smoothest launch in MMO history, but it came at quite a steep price in the end. Having so many servers at launch (and aggresively managing server loadings) made for very smooth gameplay during the initial rush, but it has left a large number of servers empty now that the population has stabilised.

    So, what's really important ? The drop in player numbers is important, and we can clearly see that the numbers have dropped substantially (even by the official announcements), so nothing new there. The re-arrangement of remaining players on fewer (but bigger) servers is expected, not headline news...

     

    Stop fooling yourself please.  It would be surprising if the game has greater than 500K active players right now and as soon as GW2/TSW launch they'll be heading down to the 200-300K range. (one man's opinion)

     

    First of all you don't have a clue of how many subs they have. Secondly you don't know the CAP of their servers. And finally with server transfers and 1.3 coming, alot of people are going to resub. I did, alot of my guildies did and more will continue to do so.

    People who are sick of WoW, people who think RIFT is crap, and people who love star wars will all come back. And no, GW2 won't steal players from it, it is just another game. And much less TSW, which is pure garbage.

  • TheCrow2kTheCrow2k Adelaide, AKPosts: 953Member

    I honestly do not think content is the main issue. The biggest problem most players have with the game (even the hold outs I know who defended the game to the last have this complaint) is that it is not an MMO. Massively Multiplayer ? SWTOR is not and people dont want to pay a monthly subscription to play what is essentially a CRPG with small group co-op and vs modes tacked on.

     

  • SoandsosoSoandsoso Richmond Hill, ONPosts: 533Member
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by pierth

    Just goes to show the importance of having a quality, compelling endgame.

    Not really. TOR is just putting all the focus on soloing so people enjoy the game for 1-3 months and then feel done with it like a singleplayer game.

    If you want people to play a long time you need to focus on multiplayer instead or at least have 50/50.

    Very much agree with this.

  • TheCrow2kTheCrow2k Adelaide, AKPosts: 953Member
    Originally posted by Bombzaway

    on december 26 when on official forums you got a thread thats " OMGAD SKILL DELAY PEW PEW PEW" and theres 1000 comments and its been viewed 100k times and devs actually commentate saying that everything was working as intented (who saw it knows the comment im talking about, was left only a few hours untill removed from mods but I saw it) insulting the players telling them they are at fault....really explains everything.

     

    Thats pretty much exactly what the lead dev from Mythic did to to everyone complaining about broken bright wizard DoT stacking & pvp magic resistances not working at all (with evidence). Maybe since biowares been helping them out with WAR the dev in question has been "mentoring" the SWTOR devs ? ;)

  • FadedbombFadedbomb Aiken, SCPosts: 2,081Member
    Originally posted by TheCrow2k
    Originally posted by Bombzaway

    on december 26 when on official forums you got a thread thats " OMGAD SKILL DELAY PEW PEW PEW" and theres 1000 comments and its been viewed 100k times and devs actually commentate saying that everything was working as intented (who saw it knows the comment im talking about, was left only a few hours untill removed from mods but I saw it) insulting the players telling them they are at fault....really explains everything.

     

    Thats pretty much exactly what the lead dev from Mythic did to to everyone complaining about broken bright wizard DoT stacking & pvp magic resistances not working at all (with evidence). Maybe since biowares been helping them out with WAR the dev in question has been "mentoring" the SWTOR devs ? ;)

    All of the half decent Mythic developers left after they were moved to WAR btw. Mythic being blamed for Warhammer is like Bioware being blamed for Mass Effect 3's terrible plot holes and gameplay. We all know that EA outsourced most of the code for ME3 overseas, and then took a slightly "Creative" direction with it after the basework was done. All of the talent from the original Bioware are gone, and now it is EA-Bioware...the name alone.

    The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
    Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

  • AmanaAmana New York, NYPosts: 2,538Moderator Uncommon

    Temporary locking this. The thread has a high volume of things that need to be cleaned up. Will post when reopened.

    To give feedback on moderation, contact community@mmorpg.com

  • AmanaAmana New York, NYPosts: 2,538Moderator Uncommon

    Open again. Apologies for the wait.

    To give feedback on moderation, contact community@mmorpg.com

  • Moaky07Moaky07 Flushing, MIPosts: 2,096Member
    Originally posted by Fadedbomb
    Originally posted by TheCrow2k
    Originally posted by Bombzaway

    on december 26 when on official forums you got a thread thats " OMGAD SKILL DELAY PEW PEW PEW" and theres 1000 comments and its been viewed 100k times and devs actually commentate saying that everything was working as intented (who saw it knows the comment im talking about, was left only a few hours untill removed from mods but I saw it) insulting the players telling them they are at fault....really explains everything.

     

    Thats pretty much exactly what the lead dev from Mythic did to to everyone complaining about broken bright wizard DoT stacking & pvp magic resistances not working at all (with evidence). Maybe since biowares been helping them out with WAR the dev in question has been "mentoring" the SWTOR devs ? ;)

    All of the half decent Mythic developers left after they were moved to WAR btw. Mythic being blamed for Warhammer is like Bioware being blamed for Mass Effect 3's terrible plot holes and gameplay. We all know that EA outsourced most of the code for ME3 overseas, and then took a slightly "Creative" direction with it after the basework was done. All of the talent from the original Bioware are gone, and now it is EA-Bioware...the name alone.

    Damn you havent a clue.

     

    The plot holes are obvious in the ME3 ending, but the game itself is the best of the 3. ME3 is an upgrade to the combat of ME2, and a more RPGish experience that harkens back to ME1. To top it off, the MP  turned out to be a good time.

     

    I understand you wanna call BW the debil, but it would be nice if you dealt in reality. The ending of ME 3 did indeed stink for some, but the game till that point is a very solid RPG experience. The gaming world would be a much better place if all games "stunk" like ME3.

    Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.

  • MetentsoMetentso BarcelonaPosts: 1,436Member Common
    Originally posted by sirphobos

    I know this forum needs to get their daily dose of hating SWTOR in, but let me provide some facts from someone who actually plays this game rather than just trolls forums:

    Yes, there are far fewer servers than there was at launch.  However, last night there was also far more players on my new server (Prophecy of the Five) than there was on any single server at launch, approximately 500 people on the Republic Fleet and 900 people on the Imperial Fleet.  No single server came close to this at launch.  Obviously server caps are far higher than they were at launch.

    With that being said, let the hating resume.

     

    Do you remember aproximatively the figures at launch?

  • BigHatLoganBigHatLogan Bellingham, WAPosts: 688Member

    So how many players fit on 30 servers?  1.3 million?  LOL

    Are you a Pavlovian Fish Biscuit Addict? Get Help Now!
    image
    I will play no more MMORPGs until somethign good comes out!

  • AerowynAerowyn BUZZARDS BAY, MAPosts: 7,928Member
    Originally posted by BigHatLogan

    So how many players fit on 30 servers?  1.3 million?  LOL

    they would probably do just fine with the same number servers as Tera...

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

Sign In or Register to comment.