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!

So what are Rift's numbers lately?

PaddyspubPaddyspub mcpherson, KSPosts: 104Member

Topic. Anyone know?   Last I heard is was kinda stable, but i could be wrong.   

Tbe Repopulation will be what SWTOR shouldve been.

«1

Comments

  • OSF8759OSF8759 Riverside, CAPosts: 284Member

    It's #22, just behind DCUO on Xfire among MMORPGs. Its played graph is indeed looking very stable.

  • KahnrayKahnray Devon, PAPosts: 12Member
    It has felt pretty stable for the last several months, though with the introduction of free server transfers, the populations can fluxuate from time to time, but the overall population is steady, and I've noticed a good number of newer players joining as well (and levelling up to 50).
  • AstraeisAstraeis AmsterdamPosts: 331Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Paddyspub

    Topic. Anyone know?   Last I heard is was kinda stable, but i could be wrong.   


    The servers have become a bit unstable since the last major update.

    And I am not going to answer what the topic is.

    It takes one to know one.

  • Crazy_StickCrazy_Stick Privacy Preferred, NCPosts: 1,059Member
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)
  • AlyvianAlyvian NoesPosts: 342Member
    a note, a lot of people forget that they did launch in a few places in asia and are still launching in a few other asian regions (as far as i know)
  • silverreignsilverreign Whitehouse, TXPosts: 402Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)
    that graph is old and only goes yearly. sub numbers change drastically in a month or so. swtor isnt even on the list and launched in dec last year. that graph is useless

    image

  • silverreignsilverreign Whitehouse, TXPosts: 402Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by OSF8759
    It's #22, just behind DCUO on Xfire among MMORPGs. Its played graph is indeed looking very stable.
    x-fire means absolutely nothing in terms of judging sub numbers. hell, i didnt even know people still use it

    image

  • GormokGormok memphis, TNPosts: 379Member

    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

  • VaelgardVaelgard Boston, MAPosts: 59Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gormok

    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

    How in hell did you get 8 months out of SWTOR?  I got insanely bored in less than two.

  • jacklojacklo BlackpoolPosts: 570Member
    Originally posted by silverreign

     


    Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)

    that graph is old and only goes yearly. sub numbers change drastically in a month or so. swtor isnt even on the list and launched in dec last year. that graph is useless

     

    You'll find the graph is actually quite accurate. SWTOR is in another category, take a look at the source mmodata.net

    The resolution is low so it's only good for looking at subscriptions over a long period.

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

    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

    How in hell did you get 8 months out of SWTOR?  I got insanely bored in less than two.

    well i got about 9 months enjoyment from Rift and mainly because of the soul system and couldn't even get 3 weeks enjoyment from swtor. But I'm sure many had the exact opposite play times on the two games as me.. differn't tastes that's all.

    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

  • GormokGormok memphis, TNPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by Vaelgard
    Originally posted by Gormok

    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

    How in hell did you get 8 months out of SWTOR?  I got insanely bored in less than two.


    Well I am not one of those people that rush to max level, I took my time doing things and different stories on different classes. Once I hit endgame however the fun stopped, I hate gear grinding the same instances. I hate themepark pvp, because it's class based, and raiding is just a heart attack waiting to happened. So I decided if that's all that's waiting at the end of journey, than my trip was pretty much over. Plus the gear is so ugly there really was no drive to go after it, Im a looks over stats type of guy.

  • AlotAlot BredaPosts: 1,948Member


    Originally posted by Gormok
    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down. The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

    Rift had ~600,000 subscribers at it's peak and has stabilized around 250,000 subscribers, and it's still P2P. SW:TOR possibly had 1,7 million subs at it's peak and is now between 500,000 and 1 million. After once server merge it went from ~220 to 19 servers. It is going Freemium and the population, which was stabile for a short period, is now declining. And it had a couple of masssive lay-offs on top of all this.

    No double standard here.

  • GormokGormok memphis, TNPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by Alot

     


    Originally posted by Gormok
    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.


     

    Rift had ~600,000 subscribers at it's peak and has stabilized around 250,000 subscribers, and it's still P2P. SW:TOR possibly had 1,7 million subs at it's peak and is now between 500,000 and 1 million. After once server merge it went from ~220 to 19 servers. It is going Freemium and the population, which was stabile for a short period, is now declining. And it had a couple of masssive lay-offs on top of all this.

    No double standard here.


    @Alot, another trend I have noticed as well, is that people do not give these games a chance to settle in. They expect millions from the outset. The mmo community isnt as loyal as it used to be, back in the day EQ was the king of MMOs. But there were other mmos that people played that they were content with. Hell people and devs a like were happy if their game had 10k subs. Well except EA and im directing this at Earth and Beyond.

  • rodingorodingo Posts: 2,346Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gormok
    Originally posted by Alot

     


    Originally posted by Gormok
    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.


     

    Rift had ~600,000 subscribers at it's peak and has stabilized around 250,000 subscribers, and it's still P2P. SW:TOR possibly had 1,7 million subs at it's peak and is now between 500,000 and 1 million. After once server merge it went from ~220 to 19 servers. It is going Freemium and the population, which was stabile for a short period, is now declining. And it had a couple of masssive lay-offs on top of all this.

    No double standard here.


    @Alot, another trend I have noticed as well, is that people do not give these games a chance to settle in. They expect millions from the outset. The mmo community isnt as loyal as it used to be, back in the day EQ was the king of MMOs. But there were other mmos that people played that they were content with. Hell people and devs a like were happy if their game had 10k subs. Well except EA and im directing this at Earth and Beyond.


    This is true. My first mmo was Neocron, which I think had at the most of about 500-700 English speaking subscribers.  Of course I didn't know any better and thought that was fine.  They might have had more, but I think it always showed that there were about 100-200 people on the server whenever I logged in.  Earth and Beyond was my second mmo.  Talk about gameplay that got old quickly. There is only so many giant space shrimp you can kill before it just gets tedious.

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by Vaelgard
    Originally posted by Gormok

    Each time I check Rift's shard status it alwas looks like this http://www.riftgame.com/en/shardstatus/. Sometimes only one server has a meduim pop. As of now there are 4 out of 16 NA servers setting at meduim. For some odd reason people consider this a successful game. Now on that same token ToR has about 12 servers that sit at heavy during peak times and standard during non peak times. However people consider ToR a failure altough they have 12 servers at damn near full, where as Rift is setting at about half full. Now I can back the ToR failure argument due to ToR having over 100 NA servers and only 12 hitting heavy or full status. But the same can be said for RiFT as well, because they to launched with well over 100 NA servers, and had to shut most of them down.

     

    The problem with MMO players today and dev companies, is that they want to see a game with WoW numbers. Before they consider it a success depending on the game. So in Rift's case 260k subs is a success, where as in ToR's case 500k-600k is considered a failure. Trion is also not a public traded company so they do not have to publish there sub numbers or their gains and losses, where as EA does. I am not bashing or backing either game, just pointing out the double standards that players hold when it comes to certain games. I played Rift for 2 months and quit due to bordom, I played ToR for 8 months and cancelled due to the F2P annoucement and the same dried up endgame that's in every other themepark game.

    How in hell did you get 8 months out of SWTOR?  I got insanely bored in less than two.

    I got bored of ToR in 2 months. I got bored of RIFT in 2 weeks. Each to their own.

  • Crazy_StickCrazy_Stick Privacy Preferred, NCPosts: 1,059Member
    Originally posted by silverreign

     


    Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)

    that graph is old and only goes yearly. sub numbers change drastically in a month or so. swtor isnt even on the list and launched in dec last year. that graph is useless

     

    *Grumbles.* I only linked the chart containing RIFT because it's what was asked for. I'd advise you to go into the full website, see how it's all collected, and reconsider your claim. as noted by another poster. SWTOR is on another chart due to its population totals last update. For determining a population trends over time, it's pretty solid. Like it or not... You want real time tracking? You go pay for it. 

  • rdrakkenrdrakken Gotham, FLPosts: 426Member

    seriously...page 2 and not one person has answered with 42 yet...

    MMORPG, I am disappoint.

  • erictlewiserictlewis Cottondale, ALPosts: 3,026Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jacklo
    Originally posted by silverreign

     


    Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)

    that graph is old and only goes yearly. sub numbers change drastically in a month or so. swtor isnt even on the list and launched in dec last year. that graph is useless

     

    You'll find the graph is actually quite accurate. SWTOR is in another category, take a look at the source mmodata.net

    The resolution is low so it's only good for looking at subscriptions over a long period.

    What happened to the everquest II numbers they stop in 2010 and I know the game is still going on as I play it daily.

  • itgrowlsitgrowls newport news, VAPosts: 2,951Member

    I think it's fine, i haven't researched numbers but I've not seen anything in the news either.

     

    I would love to have played this again however, the subscription thing is just outside of what i can do. 

  • Crazy_StickCrazy_Stick Privacy Preferred, NCPosts: 1,059Member
    Originally posted by erictlewis
    Originally posted by jacklo
    Originally posted by silverreign

     


    Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
    Currently Rift is at roughly 245K players. Here is a link to my source. They do have a free to play component but by and large they likely have a higher number of subscription paying players than LOTRO (which has a slightly larger population) due to the way it is handled as a trial. In my view, that makes RIFT a healthy game at face value. (ie not every game needs WOW like numbers to make it.)

    that graph is old and only goes yearly. sub numbers change drastically in a month or so. swtor isnt even on the list and launched in dec last year. that graph is useless

     

    You'll find the graph is actually quite accurate. SWTOR is in another category, take a look at the source mmodata.net

    The resolution is low so it's only good for looking at subscriptions over a long period.

    What happened to the everquest II numbers they stop in 2010 and I know the game is still going on as I play it daily.

     

    You would have to ask the site operator regarding that to be sure. I am thinking EQ2 Extended (launched 2010) plays a roll in that or marks when SOE stopped providing sub figures and just went to noting accounts and overall profit in reports making it much harder to tell. But I am just speculating so take it with a grain of salt.

  • The_GekkoThe_Gekko Calgary, ABPosts: 28Member Uncommon
    Not sure about sub numbers, but I just resubbed a couple days ago. I have a level 15 Bahmi warrior on the Deepwood (?) server, and the first area after the intro zone (I think it's called Freemarch) on the Defiant side is pretty active, seeing lots of people running around.  The instant adventure thing is pretty cool, puts you right where there's groups of people already if you're feelin lonely!
  • WarriorNeedsWarriorNeeds Kansas City, KSPosts: 34Member
    Originally posted by Aerowyn

    well i got about 9 months enjoyment from Rift and mainly because of the soul system and couldn't even get 3 weeks enjoyment from swtor. But I'm sure many had the exact opposite play times on the two games as me.. differn't tastes that's all.

    Yep, got 3 weeks out of Rift and about 7 months out of TOR.  Goes to show you.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
         I wouldn't say that Rift is stable.. The bleeding of subs in 2011 has greatly slowed down since then.. Last reliable numbers I saw were about 250 first of the year 2012, but things have changed since then in the market such as SWTOR, TSW and Tera.. EU servers dropped again to 10 servers and only 6 of the 16 NA servers are active... I would honestly guess that subs have leveled off to about 150-200K at most... Nothing wrong wtih those numbers as long as the players keep getting the content they want.. I'm sure once GW2 comes out, Rift will take another hit on the sub base..
  • thinktank001thinktank001 oasisPosts: 2,027Member Uncommon

    Not all games/publishers are the same, but for most of themeparks;

     

    1 server =  12000 account capacity

     

    Heavy Load =  4k concurrent players

     

    This won't be an accurate number, but will roughly be in the ball park.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.