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!

Seems like the game has peaked on XFire - Part 2

1222324252628»

Comments

  • krakra70krakra70 karakas, IDPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by tiefighter25
    Originally posted by krakra70

    GW2 drops to an all time low of 28.7k hours, down from 36.5 last tuesday (21.4% drop)

    http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2

     

    It seems GW2's retention rate is even lower than SWTOR's at its launch.

    OH MY GOSH !!!

    I bet this will cause GW2 to abandon P2P and seek a different payment model.

    I'm sure ArenaNet isn't at all proud that the downward curve is linear, even when WoW MoP came out.

    If you want to see a nose dive: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5326787/GW2-Swtor-xfire-numbers-after-1-month-Please-feel-free-to-add-any-other-1st-month-graphs.html#5326787

    SWTOR plummeted right around the Jan.20th resub date.

    Why would you bring this up? If you get enough people to agree with you, will it make you feel better about http://beta.xfire.com/games/swtor ?

    You linked to the GW2 nosedive by mistake ;)

  • tiefighter25tiefighter25 Winchester, MAPosts: 937Member
    Scroll up.
  • stevebmbsqdstevebmbsqd Orlando, FLPosts: 448Member
    Originally posted by Yamota
    Originally posted by krakra70

    GW2 drops to an all time low of 28.7k hours, down from 36.5 last tuesday (21.4% drop)

    http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2

     

    It seems GW2's retention rate is even lower than SWTOR's at its launch.

    Yes surprisingly this seems to be the case. But keep in mind what GW2 is B2P so people who are not playing this month can play the next month without having to resub or anything. Where as in SW:TOR a lost player is pretty much lost as they are more unlikely to come back.

    It really doesn't matter. I would say that SWTOR probably did make some extra change off the few months subs that it did collect as opposed to just having straight box sales. What it shows is the sad state of MMOs. Neither GW2 nor SWTOR had any real staying power.

  • YamotaYamota LondonPosts: 6,620Member
    Originally posted by stevebmbsqd
    Originally posted by Yamota
    Originally posted by krakra70

    GW2 drops to an all time low of 28.7k hours, down from 36.5 last tuesday (21.4% drop)

    http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2

     

    It seems GW2's retention rate is even lower than SWTOR's at its launch.

    Yes surprisingly this seems to be the case. But keep in mind what GW2 is B2P so people who are not playing this month can play the next month without having to resub or anything. Where as in SW:TOR a lost player is pretty much lost as they are more unlikely to come back.

    It really doesn't matter. I would say that SWTOR probably did make some extra change off the few months subs that it did collect as opposed to just having straight box sales. What it shows is the sad state of MMOs. Neither GW2 nor SWTOR had any real staying power.

    Yes... it seems MMORPGs are turning into single player games which you play for 1-2 months and then move on. Agree it is sad.

  • Reas43Reas43 New York, NYPosts: 297Member
    Yeah, it's very hard to deny the Xfire trends for SWTOR and how they've predicted its population patterns.   http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2  ;    At least by today we should see this website's fine undiluted fair review of GW2 which should show how things should have been done by SWTOR from the beginning.
  • stevebmbsqdstevebmbsqd Orlando, FLPosts: 448Member
    Originally posted by Reas43
    Yeah, it's very hard to deny the Xfire trends for SWTOR and how they've predicted its population patterns.   http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2  ;    At least by today we should see this website's fine undiluted fair review of GW2 which should show how things should have been done by SWTOR from the beginning.

    Because GW2's xfire numbers look a whole lot better....... Neither game has any real staying power.....

  • doodphacedoodphace Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,815Member
    Originally posted by stevebmbsqd
    Originally posted by Reas43
    Yeah, it's very hard to deny the Xfire trends for SWTOR and how they've predicted its population patterns.   http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2  ;    At least by today we should see this website's fine undiluted fair review of GW2 which should show how things should have been done by SWTOR from the beginning.

    Because GW2's xfire numbers look a whole lot better....... Neither game has any real staying power.....

    If I were you, I would stop using xfire to boast about GW2....GW2s numbers have almost as big of a droppoff as SWTOR had...

  • Reas43Reas43 New York, NYPosts: 297Member
    GW2's Xfire crash is markedly steeper, more dramatic than SWTOR. Feverish fanaticism burns brightly but briefly. Fanaticism is not fuel for a long term journey. It's a spark. But without meaningful fuel it just putters out. And it's doing so remarkably faster than SWTOR.
  • grimalgrimal Stamford, CTPosts: 2,873Member Uncommon

    Odd we are talking about GW2 on a TOR thread but I'll bite.

    Having played the game and seeing the XFire stats, I think the game (GW2) is more of a niche-type game (MMOE?) than many expected it to be (perhaps even more-so than Sandbox types).   I am starting to think the game will become less played than GW1 as it lacks the complexity of skill sets, IMO.

  • ktanner3ktanner3 lakeland, FLPosts: 4,074Member Common
    Can't believe we're still flogging this xfire thing. 

    Currently Playing: Star Wars The Old Republic

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member

    Tl/dr version:

    OP was right, it turned out SWTOR had peaked.

    Some disagreed because none of their friends in Boondock, Idaho used XFire.

    /endthread

  • stevebmbsqdstevebmbsqd Orlando, FLPosts: 448Member
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by stevebmbsqd
    Originally posted by Reas43
    Yeah, it's very hard to deny the Xfire trends for SWTOR and how they've predicted its population patterns.   http://beta.xfire.com/games/gw2  ;    At least by today we should see this website's fine undiluted fair review of GW2 which should show how things should have been done by SWTOR from the beginning.

    Because GW2's xfire numbers look a whole lot better....... Neither game has any real staying power.....

    If I were you, I would stop using xfire to boast about GW2....GW2s numbers have almost as big of a droppoff as SWTOR had...

    I as being sarcastic.... I realize how big the drop in GW2's numbers are and was saying that both games failed at keeping people for any period of time.

  • tiefighter25tiefighter25 Winchester, MAPosts: 937Member
    Originally posted by RefMinor

    Tl/dr version:

    OP was right, it turned out SWTOR had peaked.

    Some disagreed because none of their friends in Boondock, Idaho used XFire.

    /endthread

    Alternative interpatation of today's necro: X-Fire data is invalid unless it shows a trend I like.

    This necro is hilarious though. (At this point I belive this thread is #876 on X-Fire itself.)

    Adding to the hilarity is the context of it all. http://www.xfire.com/genre/mmo/massively_multiplayer_online/

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member

    I wouldn't trust Xfire numbers - as I said in MANY threads about Xfire - all it does is show trends of Xfire users, not the game itself. You can't prove that Xfire is representative of gamers in general - the only way Xfire numbers would be valid is to knwo the % of a game's palyers which use Xfire and no one knows that.

     

    Xfire numbers show what Xfire users do, nothing more.

    image

    "In 50 years, when I talk to my grandchildren about these days, I'll make sure to mention what an accomplished MMO player I was. They are going to be so proud ..."
    by Naqaj - 7/17/2013 MMORPG.com forum

  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Thereiam, ARPosts: 2,697Member
    Originally posted by botrytis

    I wouldn't trust Xfire numbers - as I said in MANY threads about Xfire - all it does is show trends of Xfire users, not the game itself. You can't prove that Xfire is representative of gamers in general - the only way Xfire numbers would be valid is to knwo the % of a game's palyers which use Xfire and no one knows that.

     

    Xfire numbers show what Xfire users do, nothing more.

    As people have said to your response every time, that is not correct.

     

    First, knowing the percentage of a game's userbase that uses XFire does nothing extra to say that XFire users are decreasing/increasing at the same rate as the others. What you are saying is needed is actually 100% irrelevant. The only point you could try to argue with that extra piece of information is the actual subscriber/player numbers for the title (and you would inevitably argue you couldn't prove that based on XFire numbers anyway).

     

    XFire users are a sample group of the game as a whole, you can easily and correctly use such numbers to show that the number of players in a game are going down or up.

    You would not see a time where XFire users for a specific game shot up as the overall population of the game declined or vice versa.

     

     

    In other words it is a perfectly valid correlation to what is happening in the game. At no point in time could you ever use it to say "The game has this exact number of players" but that isn't what people are using it for.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
    Originally posted by botrytis I wouldn't trust Xfire numbers - as I said in MANY threads about Xfire - all it does is show trends of Xfire users, not the game itself. You can't prove that Xfire is representative of gamers in general - the only way Xfire numbers would be valid is to knwo the % of a game's palyers which use Xfire and no one knows that.   Xfire numbers show what Xfire users do, nothing more.
    As people have said to your response every time, that is not correct.

     

    First, knowing the percentage of a game's userbase that uses XFire does nothing extra to say that XFire users are decreasing/increasing at the same rate as the others. What you are saying is needed is actually 100% irrelevant. The only point you could try to argue with that extra piece of information is the actual subscriber/player numbers for the title (and you would inevitably argue you couldn't prove that based on XFire numbers anyway).

     

    XFire users are a sample group of the game as a whole, you can easily and correctly use such numbers to show that the number of players in a game are going down or up.

    You would not see a time where XFire users for a specific game shot up as the overall population of the game declined or vice versa.

     

     

    In other words it is a perfectly valid correlation to what is happening in the game. At no point in time could you ever use it to say "The game has this exact number of players" but that isn't what people are using it for.




    If you'll read back through this thread, a good many people are using it to predict actual populations of the game(s). They are also using it to predict specific drops in player numbers of percentages of the player base. They are using other game's XFire numbers and using those numbers to predict game populations for the game under discussion as well.

    You might not be using it to do that, but people on this website are.

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

  • VrikaVrika FinlandPosts: 2,583Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by botrytis
    I wouldn't trust Xfire numbers - as I said in MANY threads about Xfire - all it does is show trends of Xfire users, not the game itself....

    Xfire numbers show what Xfire users do, nothing more.

    Assuming that what you say it's true. It's amazing coincidence that game's XFire numbers - which tell nothing of game's population trends - jump up around the time the game is released. I wonder what causes that jump.

This discussion has been closed.