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!

3 million copies sold since august general consensus so far

11819212324

Comments

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    It amazes me how little about statistics the GW2 fans in this thread know.

    Unless my Stat 101 book is suddenly out of date, XFire meets the criteria of a 'random sample' for decline / incline of games.

    No selection bias and a sufficient sample size.

    Whether the ANALYSIS of the sample is statistically sound or not is another issue.

    No, I think the question is whether it provides a statistiacally biased sample.  

    Last I checked, Xfire doesn't report one game more favorably over the other.

    There is no 'bias' when installing Xfire amongst gamers cause any gamer can install the program.

    Unless we go down the 'But you have to DO STUFF' argument again (thus voiding every survey / poll done ever), it is statisitically a sound sample.

     

    The problem with all survey's is that they ignore the apathetic masses.  The installation of XFire connotes an above average interest imo.  

    It is not a problem when the non-apathetic part of the population think more or less the same as the apathetic part of the population, which has been shown to be true at least in case of political voting polls.

    citation please? 

    Do you have an example of any major polling institute that was extremely wrong when it came to the Obama re-election voting percentages?

    I live in the UK, and I have seen parties come into power against polls due to voter apathy, repeatedly.  

    I see. To what extent were the polls wrong? Did they get  over twice as many votes as the polls had indicated?

    Splitting hairs now. The point stands.  

    I do not know how the UK election works. If for example, a system requires 5% of the votes for a party to enter the government, then a poll showing that a party has 4.5% of the votes would not be inaccurate if the party gained 5.1% of the votes in the real election. If, however, that party gained 9% of the votes despite polls showing 4.5%, then I would consider that to be an inaccurate poll. 

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Nadia

    i Blizzard reacts to Xfire - Blizzard also validates Xfire

    why should Blizzard give Xfire any press?

    So you are saying that proving someone wrong, validates the results of what was proven wrong?

    when i say validate

    i mean it shows that Blizzard cares about Xfire and takes it seriously (which they dont)

     

    when DFC claimed LOL was the #1 online PC game in the world

    http://www.prweb.com/releases/dfc/xfire/prweb9684487.htm

    i dont recall Blizzard reacting at all - they ignored it

     

    Blizzard has never discussed Xfire to the public, why should they start now?

    Were DFC wrong though? I wouldn't see the point in reacting to the statement unless they could prove them wrong. Given the upswing of social media and community, I wouldn't see it as a wrong path for them to have a form of PR staff to get engaged in such situations. Even if it is to just simply congratulate the competitors. 

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Nadia

    i Blizzard reacts to Xfire - Blizzard also validates Xfire

    why should Blizzard give Xfire any press?

    So you are saying that proving someone wrong, validates the results of what was proven wrong?

    when i say validate

    i mean it shows that Blizzard cares about Xfire and takes it seriously (which they dont)

     

    when DFC claimed LOL was the #1 online PC game in the world

    http://www.prweb.com/releases/dfc/xfire/prweb9684487.htm

    i dont recall Blizzard reacting at all - they ignored it

     

    Blizzard has never discussed Xfire to the public, why should they start now?

    Were DFC wrong though? I wouldn't see the point in reacting to the statement unless they could prove them wrong. Given the upswing of social media and community, I wouldn't see it as a wrong path for them to have a form of PR staff to get engaged in such situations. Even if it is to just simply congratuate the competitors. 

    WOW used to the #1 game on Xfire until  LOL overtook it

    from your reasoning, Blizzard should have cared when that happened - and downplay why it happened

     

    personally, I saw the whole DFC / Xfire announcment as nothing more than self promotion for both their services

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Nadia

    i Blizzard reacts to Xfire - Blizzard also validates Xfire

    why should Blizzard give Xfire any press?

    So you are saying that proving someone wrong, validates the results of what was proven wrong?

    when i say validate

    i mean it shows that Blizzard cares about Xfire and takes it seriously (which they dont)

     

    when DFC claimed LOL was the #1 online PC game in the world

    http://www.prweb.com/releases/dfc/xfire/prweb9684487.htm

    i dont recall Blizzard reacting at all - they ignored it

     

    Blizzard has never discussed Xfire to the public, why should they start now?

    Were DFC wrong though? I wouldn't see the point in reacting to the statement unless they could prove them wrong. Given the upswing of social media and community, I wouldn't see it as a wrong path for them to have a form of PR staff to get engaged in such situations. Even if it is to just simply congratuate the competitors. 

    WOW used to the #1 game on Xfire until  LOL overtook it

    from your reasoning, Blizzard should have cared when that happened - and downplay why it happened

     

    personally, I saw the whole DFC / Xfire announcment as nothing more than self promotion for both their services

    If LoL's actual activity is indeed lower than Blizzards activity, then yeah Blizzard could have stepped in and shown them to be wrong. Given that it takes max 30 minutes for a PR person to do a such statement: why not? However, if LoL has indeed higher activity, then Blizzard has no good reason to downplay it. 

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common

    from that report link:

    The new report is part of an ongoing initiative between DFC Intelligence and Xfire to better understand the products that core PC gamers interact with.

     

    sorry everyone about going way offtopic but thats how all Xfire discussions go  ;)

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Nadia

    from that report link:

    The new report is part of an ongoing initiative between DFC Intelligence and Xfire to better understand the products that core PC gamers interact with.

     

    sorry everyone about going way offtopic but thats how all Xfire discussions go  ;)

     

    It is very much on topic since the opening topic post stated following: "So now that the game has sold 3 million, what are peoples opinions on it's relative success or dissapointments in comparison to recent themepark mmo's and people, still playing there views on the state of the game."

    The relative success of GW2 is dependant on WOW's success. WOW's success, is in my opinion to an extent dependant on how its PR staff works. So yeah, it is on topic.

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common

    threads in the past were often closed when Xfire was brought up

     

    theres a current sticked thread in the pub for discussion of Xfire

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/373008/XFire-As-MMO-population-estimation-tool.html

     

    I think Gaihunters post is good example of the flaws of Xfire

    WOW Jan 2013 showing a huge drop since Jan 2012

    - yet Blizzard has approx the same amount subs around 10m  (as seen from Nov 2012)

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120552-World-of-Warcraft-Subscriptions-Rise-to-10-Million

     

    I reposted this discrepancy to the Xfire discussion link

  • ScaryMonkScaryMonk LondonPosts: 97Member
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    It amazes me how little about statistics the GW2 fans in this thread know.

    Unless my Stat 101 book is suddenly out of date, XFire meets the criteria of a 'random sample' for decline / incline of games.

    No selection bias and a sufficient sample size.

    Whether the ANALYSIS of the sample is statistically sound or not is another issue.

    No, I think the question is whether it provides a statistiacally biased sample.  

    Last I checked, Xfire doesn't report one game more favorably over the other.

    There is no 'bias' when installing Xfire amongst gamers cause any gamer can install the program.

    Unless we go down the 'But you have to DO STUFF' argument again (thus voiding every survey / poll done ever), it is statisitically a sound sample.

     

    The problem with all survey's is that they ignore the apathetic masses.  The installation of XFire connotes an above average interest imo.  

    It is not a problem when the non-apathetic part of the population think more or less the same as the apathetic part of the population, which has been shown to be true at least in case of political voting polls.

    citation please? 

    Do you have an example of any major polling institute that was extremely wrong when it came to the Obama re-election voting percentages?

    I live in the UK, and I have seen parties come into power against polls due to voter apathy, repeatedly.  

    I see. To what extent were the polls wrong? Did they get  over twice as many votes as the polls had indicated?

    Splitting hairs now. The point stands.  

    I do not know how the UK election works. If for example, a system requires 5% of the votes for a party to enter the government, then a poll showing that a party has 4.5% of the votes would not be inaccurate if the party gained 5.1% of the votes in the real election. If, however, that party gained 9% of the votes despite polls showing 4.5%, then I would consider that to be an inaccurate poll. 

    It is first past the post.  Like the US there are swing states (counties).  The conservatives generally appeal to the more affluent regular voters (although they have a smaller share of the overall vote) and Labour appeal to the less affluent more apathetic majority.   Gross generalisation but true.  Similar to Republicans and Democrats.  

    But I see your point.  

  • CatibrieCatibrie Posts: 36Member Uncommon
    Servers are still heavy or full. No low population on any server. I am still loving the game and dont see me leaving any time soon. Lots to do end game and by far one of the best MMOs ever to come out. Its in my top 4, EQ1, WoW, DAoC and GW2. 
  • eye_meye_m Notta Chance, ABPosts: 3,133Member Uncommon
    I remember posting in a thread about how many accounts we estimated that GW2 would have after a few months. Did that thread ever get dug up and the results compared?

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,652Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by eyelolled
    I remember posting in a thread about how many accounts we estimated that GW2 would have after a few months. Did that thread ever get dug up and the results compared?

     

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4634697#4634697

     

     

    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

  • LarsaLarsa NurembergPosts: 990Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by eyelolled
    I remember posting in a thread about how many accounts we estimated that GW2 would have after a few months. Did that thread ever get dug up and the results compared?

     http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4634697#4634697

    Good joke, Loktofeit! :)

    I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,473Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter
    Originally posted by waynejr2
    Originally posted by Warband
    Guild Wars 2 has sold over 3 million copies since its August, according to an update on the MMO’s website from director Colin Johanson, who also outlined the team’s 2013 plans for the title starting with expanding and leveraging the achievement system.
     
     
    So now that the game has sold 3 million, what are peoples opinions on it's relative success or dissapointments in comparison to recent themepark mmo's and people, still playing there views on the state of the game.

     Well, it's only 3million.  In a pre-wow universe it would be amazing.  In a post-wow universe, well, not so much.

    Still no other western MMORPG was able to gather that many in the west.

     Still, if that is good enough for you.

  • IPolygonIPolygon ViennaPosts: 707Member Uncommon
    I think this is the most important piece of information we can get from an official source:
    "*Guild Wars 2 has sold way past their expectations. They reached their core user base around a month back, and the population has been steadily growing each week."
    Taken from here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/16utsi/mmoftw_livestream_with_colin_johanson_notes/

    I haven't watched the livestream, but this sounds pretty solid. Retention rate is all that matters for any mmo.
  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,806Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by ScaryMonk
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    It amazes me how little about statistics the GW2 fans in this thread know.

    Unless my Stat 101 book is suddenly out of date, XFire meets the criteria of a 'random sample' for decline / incline of games.

    No selection bias and a sufficient sample size.

    Whether the ANALYSIS of the sample is statistically sound or not is another issue.

    No, I think the question is whether it provides a statistiacally biased sample.  

    Last I checked, Xfire doesn't report one game more favorably over the other.

    There is no 'bias' when installing Xfire amongst gamers cause any gamer can install the program.

    Unless we go down the 'But you have to DO STUFF' argument again (thus voiding every survey / poll done ever), it is statisitically a sound sample.

     

    You keep confusing the subject.

    No one is saying GW2 should be number 1  or number 10 in XFire.

    People are (I am) saying XFire isn't a random sample of GW2 population.

    You are saying XFire is random sample of XFire users across games.

    For each individual gaming population it doesn't matter that XFire has the same chance of being installed by hardcores in every game.

     

    An example:

    You go to party A internal elections.

    And you are asked 2 questions:

    1) Who is going to win the general elections, Party A or Party B?

    2) Who is going to win Party A nomination, candidate X or candidate y?


    You can claim the population answering question number 2 is a random population.

    You can't claim that the same population answering question number 1 is a random population.

    And basically XFire is a random population when answering the question "Which online PC game is most popular" but it isn't a random population when answering the "What has been the evolution of playing habits and the population size of X game population".

    The proper and valid tools depends of what we are trying to do, it isn't one size fits all.

     

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • mikahrmikahr ZagrebPosts: 1,066Member
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

    You keep confusing the subject.

    No one is saying GW2 should be number 1  or number 10 in XFire.

    People are (I am) saying XFire isn't a random sample of GW2 population.

    You are saying XFire is random sample of XFire users across games.

    For each individual gaming population it doesn't matter that XFire has the same chance of being installed by hardcores in every game.

     

    An example:

    You go to party A internal elections.

    And you are asked 2 questions:

    1) Who is going to win the general elections, Party A or Party B?

    2) Who is going to win Party A nomination, candidate X or candidate y?


    You can claim the population answering question number 2 is a random population.

    You can't claim that the same population answering question number 1 is a random population.

    And basically XFire is a random population when answering the question "Which online PC game is most popular" but it isn't a random population when answering the "What has been the evolution of playing habits and the population size of X game population".

    The proper and valid tools depends of what we are trying to do, it isn't one size fits all.

     

    Uh, not really.

    People dont join XFire to only play GW2. Anyone that has XFire can play any game.

    To prove its not random you would have to prove that people that play GW2 joined XFire and play exlusively GW2.

    And it has been proven that numbers cannot be correlated among different games, that means your A question cannot be aswered through XFire anyway (meaning if game A has x XFire users and known total number of players is known you cannot correlate total number of players game B has based on y XFire users).

    What you can do with XFire is look at individual trend of number of users for a single game individually as its nicely represented by spikes when certain major events occur (expansion, content patch, "free weekend" etc), and ONLY by number of different users, NOT hours played.

  • azurreiazurrei Phoenix, AZPosts: 93Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Catibrie
    Servers are still heavy or full. No low population on any server. I am still loving the game and dont see me leaving any time soon. Lots to do end game and by far one of the best MMOs ever to come out. Its in my top 4, EQ1, WoW, DAoC and GW2. 

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

  • mayito7777mayito7777 Saint Cloud, FLPosts: 636Member Uncommon
    3 millions, hmmm I wander how many returns have been given too. I am playing less and less because the game has become Fractals, Fractals and more Fractals, I think A-NET should rename the game Fractals instead of GW2.

    want 7 free days of playing? Try this

    http://www.swtor.com/r/ZptVnY

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member
    Originally posted by azurrei
    Originally posted by Catibrie
    Servers are still heavy or full. No low population on any server. I am still loving the game and dont see me leaving any time soon. Lots to do end game and by far one of the best MMOs ever to come out. Its in my top 4, EQ1, WoW, DAoC and GW2. 

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

    No - if that is the case then the server populations would not go up and down during the day and they do. If they were only based on the accounts - they WOULD NEVER BOUNCE UP AND DOWN!!

    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

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common
    Originally posted by azurrei

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

    from my experiences, for doing Server Transfers at least, its based on whos playing

     

    when I transferred to Stormbluff Isle, it was always full -- every morning and evening

    until Sunday morning around 5am (when I was able to transfer)

    after 7 am Sunday it was full again because I had friends that tried to transfer but couldnt  (until the following weekend)

  • azurreiazurrei Phoenix, AZPosts: 93Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by azurrei
    Originally posted by Catibrie
    Servers are still heavy or full. No low population on any server. I am still loving the game and dont see me leaving any time soon. Lots to do end game and by far one of the best MMOs ever to come out. Its in my top 4, EQ1, WoW, DAoC and GW2. 

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

    No - if that is the case then the server populations would not go up and down during the day and they do. If they were only based on the accounts - they WOULD NEVER BOUNCE UP AND DOWN!!

    lol, believe what you want - if that were the case you could transfer to any server in the middle of the night and that is never the case.  Perhaps they have changed it to base population + currently logged in, but they are most definitely keeping people from freely transferring to any server they want to avoid overpopulation...unless every server is full of bots, which would not be surprising.

  • XthosXthos Columbus, OHPosts: 2,628Member

    I have to try it again, I played during headstart, and I found it very bland and boring, I have never been a big quest person, and it seems like they are shoved down your throat and its like a all quest, all the time thing...So hopefully just the overcrowding of headstart hurt the emersion or feeling of the game. 

     

    PRobably give it another go soon.

     

  • MaephistoMaephisto somewhere, DCPosts: 632Member
    Originally posted by azurrei
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by azurrei
    Originally posted by Catibrie
    Servers are still heavy or full. No low population on any server. I am still loving the game and dont see me leaving any time soon. Lots to do end game and by far one of the best MMOs ever to come out. Its in my top 4, EQ1, WoW, DAoC and GW2. 

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

    No - if that is the case then the server populations would not go up and down during the day and they do. If they were only based on the accounts - they WOULD NEVER BOUNCE UP AND DOWN!!

    lol, believe what you want - if that were the case you could transfer to any server in the middle of the night and that is never the case.  Perhaps they have changed it to base population + currently logged in, but they are most definitely keeping people from freely transferring to any server they want to avoid overpopulation...unless every server is full of bots, which would not be surprising.

    You speak with such certainty, obviously you read something distributed from Anet on how server population works.  You mind linking it?

    Surely you wouldnt just make stuff up like this.....who does that?

    image

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,806Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mikahr
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

    You keep confusing the subject.

    No one is saying GW2 should be number 1  or number 10 in XFire.

    People are (I am) saying XFire isn't a random sample of GW2 population.

    You are saying XFire is random sample of XFire users across games.

    For each individual gaming population it doesn't matter that XFire has the same chance of being installed by hardcores in every game.

     

    An example:

    You go to party A internal elections.

    And you are asked 2 questions:

    1) Who is going to win the general elections, Party A or Party B?

    2) Who is going to win Party A nomination, candidate X or candidate y?


    You can claim the population answering question number 2 is a random population.

    You can't claim that the same population answering question number 1 is a random population.

    And basically XFire is a random population when answering the question "Which online PC game is most popular" but it isn't a random population when answering the "What has been the evolution of playing habits and the population size of X game population".

    The proper and valid tools depends of what we are trying to do, it isn't one size fits all.

     

    Uh, not really.

    People dont join XFire to only play GW2. Anyone that has XFire can play any game.

    To prove its not random you would have to prove that people that play GW2 joined XFire and play exlusively GW2.

    And it has been proven that numbers cannot be correlated among different games, that means your A question cannot be aswered through XFire anyway (meaning if game A has x XFire users and known total number of players is known you cannot correlate total number of players game B has based on y XFire users).

    What you can do with XFire is look at individual trend of number of users for a single game individually as its nicely represented by spikes when certain major events occur (expansion, content patch, "free weekend" etc), and ONLY by number of different users, NOT hours played.

    If you play GW2 do you have a random chance of being selected by XFire?

     

    And there is no proof of anything since data is so scarce.

    But one thing is obvious - if a game isn't popular it will probably not register in XFire.

    Again if a game flops it is obvious it will register in XFire.

    But a game losing players in XFire doesn't have to relate with the game - I gave the example of WoW it lost around 66% of its played hours since last year. It lost half the players since september.

    We will see if that correlates.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • fiontarfiontar Dana, MAPosts: 3,719Member
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by azurrei

    It has already been established that server status is based on number of active accounts, not people actually playing at any given moment.

    Therefore, full servers mean nothing other than john gamer logs in once a week to see if the game has magically become more interesting.  The game has promise, but it is a long ways off from being fixed.

    from my experiences, for doing Server Transfers at least, its based on whos playing

     

    when I transferred to Stormbluff Isle, it was always full -- every morning and evening

    until Sunday morning around 5am (when I was able to transfer)

    after 7 am Sunday it was full again because I had friends that tried to transfer but couldnt  (until the following weekend)

    Nadia is correct and Azurrei is wrong. It's clearly based on who is logged in, not on the number of accounts tied to the given server. This is why people looking to transfer to a different server almost always have to wait until off peak hours to do the transfer. (With a non-sub game, this couldn't really be done any other way, as there is no subscription status by which to determine whether an account is active or dormant).

    It's bad enough to post inaccuracies, worse to then claim that something is "established" when it clearly is not.

    BTW, some might question how a server can be full, based on active players, even outside of prime time, when clearly the number of players on at that time is lower than during prime time. You can't transfer to a server while it's full, but once you are established on your server, you can always log in to that server. During peak prime hours, if capacity is exceeded in a zone, the excess goes to an overflow server. So, yes, you can be full before peak and still be full during peak with twice as many logged in players.

    Apparently, the server "caps" are set to minimize the reliance on overflows during the most active hors of the week, while also being mindful of off peak player experience. IMO, they have managed this very well, resisting the urge to add new servers as the playerbase expands, while trying to minimize the amount of overflow server use during peak play times.

    Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
    image

Sign In or Register to comment.