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!

Salient shortcomings from Oct 2011, why Funcom thought TSW was ready, and guesstimate player numbers

2

Comments

  • Pale_FirePale_Fire San Antonio, TXPosts: 360Member Uncommon

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jdnyc
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by jdnyc

    EVE online started with 250k subs didn't it and has since grown to about 600k?

     

    I think anyone whom expected huge sub numbers from TSW is fooling themselves.  To begin with the game has been overshadowed and most advertising has been word-of-mouth.  /shrug

    I figured around 400k subs at best...thought 250k subs was possible for a niche game like this.

    Eves got 600k subs?? can you link?

    You're right.  It's 400k.  Thought for sure I read somewhere that it was 600k.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Online

    600k seemed like a lot. And if you do a bit more searching you see that 400k is from this article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/252940/inside_eve_onlines_fanfest_2012.html

    No clue were that guy got that number.

    image


    image

  • jdnycjdnyc Long Island City, NYPosts: 1,696Member
    Originally posted by Orphes
     

    EVE Online perhaps started with a 250 subs and have grown to a bit over 300 000. (Notice the lack of k for kilo.)

     

    Still why not move past the constant fixation at the tits, errr, subscription numbers.

    k = 1000 no?  so 250 x 1000 would be 250,000 no?

    EvE has 400k or 400,000 subs. 

    As for the fixation, my post is response to the OP of this thread.  I honestly don't care about subs as long as I have friends to play with, which I always do.  I'm lucky that way.

  • OrphesOrphes TrePosts: 3,048Member
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Xfire has not been recording for about 3 weeks. 

    Is that why their graphs correlate and corroborate TSW activity before, during, and after the weekend event?

    Not sure. I do know that previous users prior to this weeked and for about three weeks since one of the updates have not had their time recorded.

     

    I'm one of them.

    Not to bash your experience but anecdotal evidence is at best, interesting at worst, misleading. 

     

    But you are obviously lying about your facts, that is not better.

    I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
    "You have the right not to be killed"

  • ariestearieste toronto, ONPosts: 3,308Member Common
    Originally posted by Abor
     Spending more time in development rather than releasing might have garnered a larger and more stable subscription base.  

    Considering TSW has had the most stable and polished MMO launch of the past few years - and possibly in the entire history of the genre - I doubt that additional development time would have had a significant impact.

     

    I think the retention deficit - if such exists - is simply due to the game's story/themepark nature, which is rather similar to TOR in terms of structure and "main benefit" to subscriber.   (The "main benefit" being going through the entire PvE game ONCE.)

    "I’d rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."

    - Raph Koster

    Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
    Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2
    Currently Playing: EQ2, Firefall

  • AborAbor Denver, COPosts: 59Member
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

    You're right. But considering this is a forum for informing people about MMORPGs anyone who might be interested in my post can read it. Just like how you're free to not read it. For your cirticism regarding naysayers about games you enjoy, if you enjoy them, don't worry too much about other people's opinions or make a post yourself to tout how awesome it is. 

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,146Member Uncommon

    From my perspective TSW was always going to be kind of a niche game.  I figured with a strong core of users, if anything it is overperforming, imo.  Hard to compare it to WoW or SWToR as WoW did/does rule the world despite it's crumbling throne and SWToR aspired to rule the world of MMOs.

    Still interesting read, I like analysis of this sort.  As disclosure I keep what I am playing in my profile here so not a current player on any of these three.

    image
  • OrphesOrphes TrePosts: 3,048Member
    Originally posted by jdnyc
    Originally posted by Orphes
     

    EVE Online perhaps started with a 250 subs and have grown to a bit over 300 000. (Notice the lack of k for kilo.)

     

    Still why not move past the constant fixation at the tits, errr, subscription numbers.

    k = 1000 no?  so 250 x 1000 would be 250,000 no?

    EvE has 400k or 400,000 subs. 

    As for the fixation, my post is response to the OP of this thread.  I honestly don't care about subs as long as I have friends to play with, which I always do.  I'm lucky that way.

    Perhaps it is 400 000.

    But the point being is that they grew from alot lower population than 250 000, saying 250  is an exegeration of course.

    The lack of kilo was intentional and made overly obvious by me pointing it out. To really make it clear that I was not talking about 250 000 but 250 as in two hundred and fifty.

    I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
    "You have the right not to be killed"

  • OrphesOrphes TrePosts: 3,048Member
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

    You're right. But considering this is a forum for informing people about MMORPGs anyone who might be interested in my post can read it. Just like how you're free to not read it. For your cirticism regarding naysayers about games you enjoy, if you enjoy them, don't worry too much about other people's opinions or make a post yourself to tout how awesome it is. 

     

    How come you don't post in 4 years and suddenly pop up like a ninja now?

    I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
    "You have the right not to be killed"

  • Pale_FirePale_Fire San Antonio, TXPosts: 360Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

    You're right. But considering this is a forum for informing people about MMORPGs anyone who might be interested in my post can read it. Just like how you're free to not read it. For your cirticism regarding naysayers about games you enjoy, if you enjoy them, don't worry too much about other people's opinions or make a post yourself to tout how awesome it is. 

    What concerns me is when people post information that is factually untrue.  Which, by the way, has been brought up by myself and several other posters. 

    Why do you not provide a reason for the incorrect information you posted regarding the number of positive reviews for TSW?

    Do you not believe that damages the credibility of the rest of your commentary?

    If you cannot post factual information about an item in your post that is quite easily verifiable, were you mistaken or dishonest? 

    Regardless, why should anyone trust the rest of your analysis if you can't get that one simple piece correct?

  • gurugeorgegurugeorge LondonPosts: 480Member Uncommon

    In conclusion I think TSW is not meeting Funcom's expectations. People are rightfully upset because the game is not polished. It seems the game was released due to Funcom's unrealiable indicators of game interest; they thought the retention rate would be much higher than it actually is. The game will be patched and fixed, however it may be too late to regenerate interest in the game. Spending more time in development rather than releasing might have garnered a larger and more stable subscription base. Regardless Funcom is still making a profit even if subscriptions drop below 200k. I suspect as much as Funcom wanted to  avoid a repeat of the AoC imbroglio, it'll still happen, and that would be a sign that the company has certain habits it needs to break out of if it wants to avoid another future repeat with their next MMORPG. 
     

    Interesting post. 

    All I can say is, it was pretty obvious in-game that and when SWTOR was losing subs.  I don't get the same feeling from TSW, it feels as busy and buzzing now as when I started on the first day of live.

    However, that doesn't address total subs.  They may have been fairly low to start with.  The game wasn't exactly over-hyped.

    But yeah, I suspect the game will have relatively high retention.

  • retye50retye50 Toulon, ILPosts: 49Member Uncommon
    Pretty long winded write up .... to sum it all up, you don't like the game?




    Can I have your stuff?
  • MardukkMardukk Posts: 1,556Member Uncommon
    This game has a lot of what people were bitching about in SWTOR.  Collision detection, high rez textures, good engine performance, great overall graphics that are not cartoon styled, yet people still bitch.  It will never end...if it's not high rez textures it's something else.
  • BigRock411BigRock411 Barrington, ILPosts: 299Member
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

    You're right. But considering this is a forum for informing people about MMORPGs anyone who might be interested in my post can read it. Just like how you're free to not read it. For your cirticism regarding naysayers about games you enjoy, if you enjoy them, don't worry too much about other people's opinions or make a post yourself to tout how awesome it is. 

    What concerns me is when people post information that is factually untrue.  Which, by the way, has been brought up by myself and several other posters. 

    Why do you not provide a reason for the incorrect information you posted regarding the number of positive reviews for TSW?

    Do you not believe that damages the credibility of the rest of your commentary?

    If you cannot post factual information about an item in your post that is quite easily verifiable, were you mistaken or dishonest? 

    Regardless, why should anyone trust the rest of your analysis if you can't get that one simple piece correct?

    First of all there is NEVER any credibility on these forums by any poster..to think otherwise is crazy

    Secondly anyone who spends this much time and tries this hard to sway peoples opinion has obvious motives.  In fact i can only think of one poster who has a serious issue with all of funcoms games who takes this amount of effort...and he went missing a few weeks ago...same writing style and same try-hard approach.

    Finally...the goal isnt to be factual, it isnt togain credibility...the goal is to turn every positive thread into an unrelated argument while flooding the forum with negative titled reviews and topics.  

     

    I have no doubt that this game would not only piss off a lot of gamers, but also draw a lot of people looking for revenge on funcom for "bweaking their wittle hawts" over the aoc launch.  Game was set as something that would appeal to a niche crowd and they did just that.  I honetly could care less if the game never grew from this point on as the community is fantastic, and the more corwded the game the less enjoyable the community is with a 100% accuracy. 

     

    Honestly, i was warned by my roomates about this website, its a fantastic site if your jaded or hate just about any launched game, if your someone with a elvel head who can enjoy just about any game this site and its community drive you mad.

    Its really become more of a political site than a gaming site.  People act like games are political parties, hence you see the types of tactics you would expect on a political site during an election year.

    I really feel bad for unwitting gamers who may come across this site who would get the impression that the only decent and playable game is one that hasnt been launched yet...since this site only likes games before they come out...which i find beyond comical.

    Anyway i think its time for me to stop with this site, its just not a site thats tolerant of people who LIKE mmorpgs.  I know...i was somewhat recently accused as being a paid poster and then immediately banned and all my posts deleted...the posters called me scum and those guys are still posting. Should have taken that as my first warning this site certainly isnt for mmorpg fans like its URL would suggest.

  • L0C0ManL0C0Man Puerto OrdazPosts: 1,065Member Uncommon

    I don't think Xfire is a good way to measure players for TSW, mainly because the xfire client wasn't correctly detecting TSW when it came out. It was aparently fixed with an update but reading the forums (if you have access to them, not sure whether only registered members can use it, search for xfire and go to the last page of results to see the ones at release) it was still glitchy, some people couldn't take screenshots with it, others didn't record the hours correctly, and others couldn't even launch the game with it running. That will skew the statistics, as we have no way to know how many people bothered to tweak around Xfire to keep it running, and how many just decided it wasn't worth the trouble and either uninstalled it or didn't run it when they played TSW.

    An informal poll (that according to the poster didn't have enough votes for it to really be significant) put it at about 36% of responders that had Xfire working, 39% that "had to work for it" and 25% that plainly didn't work.

    We'll have a better idea on the investor report that's due to come on august 28th, anyway.

    Some threads about it:

    http://forums.thesecretworld.com/showthread.php?t=40790

    http://forums.thesecretworld.com/showthread.php?t=39398

     

    What can men do against such reckless hate?

  • BlackbrrdBlackbrrd KongsbergPosts: 811Member

    Xfire is usually a good for looking at trends for games. I have used it for AoC and SWTOR to guesstimate the number of players and such. The thing is that you usually need at least one point of data to start the extrapolation to actual player numbers with any level of confidence. Anyway, Funcom said they would come with an update on the performance of the game on friday.

  • dellirious13dellirious13 Lancaster, PAPosts: 205Member
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Im sure we will know the numbers soon enough. The only real data from all of that post is that xfire users have been playing it less and that the general xfire population for TSW is very small. The other things are more so opinions.

    Well, I'm just hoping that they made their decisions about TSW for themselves and not according to shareholders desires (which are for more money not better gaming experience for customers)...NOT a good sign that Funcom stock is down almost 20% after the shareholders meeting (1.58 points).

     

    EDIT: some shareholders sold for just over 5 points, which was decently lower than fair market price at that point. And this is after AoC had some positives happening recently, too. I say points because I don't feel like searching for Norway's currency name if it is not the euro....(I also think of the US stock market in points too...go figure lol)

  • AborAbor Denver, COPosts: 59Member
    Good discussions. I will update on or after Aug 28th after Funcom posts it's Quarter 3. Up until then your spectulation is as good as mine. I tried to backup my reasoning with things I've noticed so see you guys in a few weeks. 
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    The op was fine until the poster veared off into silliville with Xfire numbers. I don't understand how people can approach things in a well thought out manner, and then use Xfire numbers for anything.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • dellirious13dellirious13 Lancaster, PAPosts: 205Member

    This is interesting too: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?ticker=FUNCOM:NO

    Losing that much money on their bottom line (16.3 mill)  means that they needed to sell 280,000 copies of TSW (just to make up last years cost), then include this year's costs, probably closer to 350,000 copies needed to break even. They probably need around 750,000 subs between their games to stay a viable company and continue to make games (which they should have close to that with TSW subs). Just wanted to illustrate just how important every sub in TSW is to them (especially for the first 2 years after release).

    On the reverves, Acti/Blizz is: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ATVI/financials

    Hundreds of millions gain in their bottom line, even with production costs from new games.  And other bigger conglomerates (NCSoft, EA, etc) have even larger bottom lines.

    As surprising as it might be to the general public, if TSW were to go bottom up (as SWTOR kind of has), they would probably be bought out or go bust. Again, I highly doubt this would happen, BUT with economies the way they are you never know...just giving warning :P

     

    EDIT: Hadn't looked at the slide show before...apparently I wasn't far off with the 750,000 subs overall XD Thought more than 280,000 still played AoC though. Regardless, FUNCOM NV stock and the financials on the 28th will be telling for the furture :)

  • IstrebiteIIstrebiteI SpbPosts: 266Member
    Thank you for your work on the topic, OP. You hardly get appreciated for that. Good guesswork and sound logic.
  • saxifrsaxifr East Hartford, CTPosts: 381Member Common
    Originally posted by Orphes
    Originally posted by jdnyc
    Originally posted by Orphes
     

    EVE Online perhaps started with a 250 subs and have grown to a bit over 300 000. (Notice the lack of k for kilo.)

     

    Still why not move past the constant fixation at the tits, errr, subscription numbers.

    k = 1000 no?  so 250 x 1000 would be 250,000 no?

    EvE has 400k or 400,000 subs. 

    As for the fixation, my post is response to the OP of this thread.  I honestly don't care about subs as long as I have friends to play with, which I always do.  I'm lucky that way.

    Perhaps it is 400 000.

    But the point being is that they grew from alot lower population than 250 000, saying 250  is an exegeration of course.

    The lack of kilo was intentional and made overly obvious by me pointing it out. To really make it clear that I was not talking about 250 000 but 250 as in two hundred and fifty.

    They grew their sub base from two five zero as in 249+1 customers up to 400,000 customers? YOu know that's kinda sorta impressive actually

    RELAX!@!! BREATHE!!!

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    If Funcom actually thought they would have one million people on day one, wouldn't they have spun up more servers than they did on day one? It seems like they brought up enough servers for the population they got, whatever that population was.

    It seems likely to me that their financial statements were crafted to make sure the financial status of the company remained 'OK', and not crafted as a prediction of the subs they would get. It seems even more likely to me that the people crafting the financials were a separate bunch of people from the people who needed to know how many people would show up on day one.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • JohnnymmoJohnnymmo Salt lake, UTPosts: 99Member
    I don t see what you Are trying to achieve OP? Discredit the game? Discredit mmorpg.com
    You obviously one of them shady investors trying to Get people not to buy the game so that you can make money on the company going down ? Shame on you
  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,966Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Deleted User
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire
    Originally posted by Abor
    Originally posted by Pale_Fire

    I'm only going to focus on a few points in your "analyis".

    1. XFire.  Using XFire is a blind guess.  Period.  Most people realize this by now.  I'm not saying that the conclusion is wrong, but XFire is not gonna prove anything.

    2.  Your quote, "Yet the game is falling short even on that predictor. Moreover the only relatively postive review of TSW comes from MMORPG which also just so happens to have an ingame item you can redeem."  You didn't really do much homework on this, apparently.  Metacritic identifies 22 reviews ranked as positive.  You state MMORPG has the only relatively positive review.  That is patently false.  Yes, there are mediocre scores and several poor scores, but more positive than mediocre and negative combine.   It should be noted that the aggregate gamer score is 8.4.

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world/critic-reviews

    Much of this is pure conjecture based on questionable "evidence".  No one is going to know anything about subscription numbers or the games success until they release the numbers in a quarterly or annual report.

    Any credibility you would have had is pretty much destroyed by your comments I touched on in item 2.  If you can't be trusted to get that simple piece correct, why should I trust any of your other conclusions?

    Every launch of every game has the same conspiracy theorists and doomsayers.  Give it a rest and let people play the games they enjoy.

    You're right. But considering this is a forum for informing people about MMORPGs anyone who might be interested in my post can read it. Just like how you're free to not read it. For your cirticism regarding naysayers about games you enjoy, if you enjoy them, don't worry too much about other people's opinions or make a post yourself to tout how awesome it is. 

    What concerns me is when people post information that is factually untrue.  Which, by the way, has been brought up by myself and several other posters. 

    Why do you not provide a reason for the incorrect information you posted regarding the number of positive reviews for TSW?

    Do you not believe that damages the credibility of the rest of your commentary?

    If you cannot post factual information about an item in your post that is quite easily verifiable, were you mistaken or dishonest? 

    Regardless, why should anyone trust the rest of your analysis if you can't get that one simple piece correct?

    First of all there is NEVER any credibility on these forums by any poster..to think otherwise is crazy

    Secondly anyone who spends this much time and tries this hard to sway peoples opinion has obvious motives.  In fact i can only think of one poster who has a serious issue with all of funcoms games who takes this amount of effort...and he went missing a few weeks ago...same writing style and same try-hard approach.

    Finally...the goal isnt to be factual, it isnt togain credibility...the goal is to turn every positive thread into an unrelated argument while flooding the forum with negative titled reviews and topics.  

     

    I have no doubt that this game would not only piss off a lot of gamers, but also draw a lot of people looking for revenge on funcom for "bweaking their wittle hawts" over the aoc launch.  Game was set as something that would appeal to a niche crowd and they did just that.  I honetly could care less if the game never grew from this point on as the community is fantastic, and the more corwded the game the less enjoyable the community is with a 100% accuracy. 

     

    Honestly, i was warned by my roomates about this website, its a fantastic site if your jaded or hate just about any launched game, if your someone with a elvel head who can enjoy just about any game this site and its community drive you mad.

    Its really become more of a political site than a gaming site.  People act like games are political parties, hence you see the types of tactics you would expect on a political site during an election year.

    I really feel bad for unwitting gamers who may come across this site who would get the impression that the only decent and playable game is one that hasnt been launched yet...since this site only likes games before they come out...which i find beyond comical.

    Anyway i think its time for me to stop with this site, its just not a site thats tolerant of people who LIKE mmorpgs.  I know...i was somewhat recently accused as being a paid poster and then immediately banned and all my posts deleted...the posters called me scum and those guys are still posting. Should have taken that as my first warning this site certainly isnt for mmorpg fans like its URL would suggest.

    Score, another "victim" in the FFA PVP forum wars.  image  Who gets credit on the killboard?

    I've seen some estimates where Funcom seems to believe they'll do far better in holding subs with TSW than AOC did, somewhere in the neighborhood of 500K.

    That seems unrealistic, since that pretty much would be in excess of every P2P title in the past 8 years with the exception of WOW of course.

    Perhaps they think they'll carve out a loyal niche of players, much like EVE does, and while I'm currently playing TSW and enjoying it, I don't see it as a long term game due to the lack of open content that a sandbox style title like EVE has.

    I suspect TSW will settle in the normal niche of around 150-250K subs until they decide to flip it to a more F2P model much like they did with AOC.

    Heck, this game is designed to go F2P from the start, the conversion will be easy.

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

2
Sign In or Register to comment.