New updated sub numbers (Official)

[Lethality]

Since they have repeatedly told averyone that tehy increased the server cap gradually over time.

 

What was once heavy is now standard, what was once standard is now low.

 

Pretty simple really. Check the dev announcements and Q&A and you will know these things.

 

Changing the cap doesn't change the threshold for capacity levels... if it did, then even their own metrics would be worthless.

 

Answer me this: why do you suppose they even show those capacity levels on the server select screen?

[Syylara]

And none of these revenues have to go to pay current costs, amirite?

 

Heh, I wish people would realize that costs actually go up when approaching launch and beyond compared to pre-production.

[Goretzu]

how do you know the amount of people are considered light, standard, heavy and full by Bioware? The best I have seen is guesstimates made by travelling around and doing a head count (which takes so long to actually do the end result can vary a lot), a very small amount of times.

 

Nobody knows if Standard stops at 500 people online or at 5000. So your argument is, once again, invalid.

 

 

The light average would have to be around 1000 players for the maths mentioned to work.

 

I don't for a second believe average light servers have 1000 players (500 per side or whatever), do you?

[Devlonir]

You are telling me the server average per hour (over 24 hours) is 1639 players?

 

Bearing in mind how low pops go off peak and that even on PT many servers aren't full?

 

If you believe that then fair enough, but I have a bridge to sell you too.

 

Honestly, I don't know what the exact average is. I honestly also do not believe all 1.7 million subscribers are actually actively playing at all times. Heck, i barely make 12 hours a week myself.

 

What i am saying though is that your logic is bad. And you have yet to give me any proof about that statement being false besides saying that I am wrong.

[Blotter]

i dont know how the CEO of EA can make that claim without "hard numbers" to back up what he said... most CEO lie to the media and make their OWN COMPANY look good therefore shares prices goes up make **** load of money off the investors.. i think its outrageous claims, cuz there is so much evidence that the game is slowing down... alone on my server i rarely see anyone in open world questing anymore, FP LFG has been hard to find... and guild mates of 120 only 5-10 comes online periodicly.. claiming 1.7mil and growing to 2mil i think its bogus and its all talk. as long they dont give us "hard fact numbers" i call EA CEO BS claim.

 

Yes, they're all lying about had data to get the price of shares to go up so that they can then be sued for fraud later and prosecuted by the DOJ for violating clear SEC regulations and criminal laws regarding representations to stockholders. Yep. They're ALL doing it ALL the time EVERY day ALL day and this is another example of just fake numbers. Ridiculous. Was there a sale on tinfoil hats at Walmart this week?

[Syylara]

Yes, they're all lying about had data to get the price of shares to go up so that they can then be sued for fraud later and prosecuted by the DOJ for violating clear SEC regulations and criminal laws regarding representations to stockholders. Yep. They're ALL doing it ALL the time EVERY day ALL day and this is another example of just fake numbers. Ridiculous. Was there a sale on tinfoil hats at Walmart this week?

 

The most amazing thing I've seen so far in this thread is that people actually still believe the SEC works to protect investors :9.

 

Meanwhile, all this arguing is taking place between people that can't even agree on whether the numbers reflect pre- or post-Aus/Asia launch.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Syylara

[Kthx]

"New updated sub numbers (official)"

 

Can someone please provide a link to the (official) announcment of these figures please ?

 

as all i see is a games industry site saying it's so.

 

The desparation is palpable. So your argument is that SWTOR is dying because the figures were not announced by EA themselves?

 

The 1.7 million figure is reported by reputable sites citing statements made by EA's CEO John Riccitiello:

 

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-03-08-star-wars-the-old-republic-sitting-at-nearly-1-7-million-paid-subscribers

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/08/electronic-arts-reveals-new-mass-effect-3-and-star-wars-mmo-numbers/

[WereMops]

Yes that is a much better way to do it, however again there is no server average to play time.

 

Because you're completely ignoring that server populations have peaks and troughs you are saying that a server needs to be averaging 819 players per faction per server per hour 24/7 to get the 4 hours a day.

 

No server is averaging that 24/7 (this can easily be determined by the light off peak statuses and the lack of full or even heavy PT statuses).

 

Therefore people must currently be playing on average a lot less than 4 hours per day with 1.7 million subs.

 

No, I'm saying that an average of ~819 players per hour, per faction, per server would prove (and in my experience proves) that the statements saying "1.7 million subscribers are BS/lies" are infact false, nowhere am I stating that every hour of the day there has to be atleast 819 players on, the 4 hours average that they stated players play a day is based on a day (you know, 24 hours), when the players play their average of 4 hours has no bearing on the calculation when you use the same common denominator, even if every single player would play at exactly the same time (leaving the server completely empty the rest of the day) the resulting average over a 24 hour period would still be the same.

[Kthx]

The most amazing thing I've seen so far in this thread is that people actually still believe the SEC works to protect investors :9.

 

So the purpose of the SEC's enforcement actions is to protect corporations?

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases.shtml

Edited March 9, 2012 by Kthx

[XOrionX]

And none of these revenues have to go to pay current costs, amirite?

 

As if the operating costs are any where near the development costs... Operating costs for an MMO are ridculously cheap in comparison.

[Goretzu]

Honestly, I don't know what the exact average is. I honestly also do not believe all 1.7 million subscribers are actually actively playing at all times. Heck, i barely make 12 hours a week myself.

 

What i am saying though is that your logic is bad. And you have yet to give me any proof about that statement being false besides saying that I am wrong.

 

 

That's what I've been saying all along, the average hours per day must be much lower for them to have 1.7 million subs.

 

12 hours a week (1.7 hours a day) would indeed come closer to explaining it, but what that means is that as there are people playing a lot more than X hours a day/week there must be a lot playing less than that too.

[Devlonir]

The light average would have to be around 1000 players for the maths mentioned to work.

 

I don't for a second believe average light servers have 1000 players (500 per side or whatever), do you?

 

Could easilly be so, but I do not 'believe' anything untill I have seen definite proof of it. I prefer to be skeptical than to follow what I believe.

 

But, if being in the realm of possibilities is the way you want to discuss.. I often log on to my server when it still shows as Light. There will be around 60 people on Fleet at that time. I, unlike other people, do not think that the majority of people are on Fleet. Each time I check other areas (and there are dozens of them) I get to think that probably at any one time, on average, only 10% of the people are actively on Fleet. Most will be on other worlds, in their spaceship, or in a flashpoint, warzone or space battle. So that means, following my hypothetical logic (which seems what you follow best) there will be about 600 people on my faction when the server is Light.

 

So.. if I do let my belief take over instead of my logic.. yes: I do believe light servers have 1000 players on them. More even.

 

But yeah.. belief is a bad thing to bring to a discussion.

[Stormnut]

The most amazing thing I've seen so far in this thread is that people actually still believe the SEC works to protect investors :9.

 

Meanwhile, all this arguing is taking place between people that can't even agree on whether the numbers reflect pre- or post-Aus/Asia launch.

 

The reflect Pre oceanic launch there is not argument except by the people that are trying to make it an argument. It is in black and white.

 

and yes the SEC job is to protect investors from corporate greed and fraud.

[Blotter]

Changing the cap doesn't change the threshold for capacity levels... if it did, then even their own metrics would be worthless.

 

Answer me this: why do you suppose they even show those capacity levels on the server select screen?

 

FIrst, yes, changing the server cap changes threshhold levels. Changing the cap is saying "more people can log in concurrently, so we'll redefine light, heavy, standard and full."

 

Second, they don't need to rely on things like "standard" "light" and "heavy" to measure server population the way completely debunked sites like torstatus do: EA/BW have the raw data. NOBODY else does.

 

They show those server capacity levels on the select screen to give people some indication of population and what their login queue times might be, but it's only intended to provide a very rough idea. The raw numbers are quite available to peolpe at EA/BW who make statements like the one at issue here, however, so claiming that EA/BW's "metrics would be wrothless" in terms of them being able to make a statement like this and back it up is completely ridiculous. They can click a button and see precisely how many people are logged in...they can look at YOU and see what YOUR play time looks like...they can run scripts that provide them with the average hours played/logged in across a server or across the entire population of subscribers. The ONLY place the metrics become worthless is when people try to use the information made public, like "lilght" "standard" etc., to claim they are providing a mathematical analysis...they're not...because the labels' definitions change over time and THAT'S DONE ON PURPOSE TO PREVENT PLACES LIKE TORSTATUS FROM PROVIDING A RELIABLE ANALYSIS. It's proprietary informaion and the corporations will protect it.

[Devlonir]

That's what I've been saying all along, the average hours per day must be much lower for them to have 1.7 million subs.

 

12 hours a week (1.7 hours a day) would indeed come closer to explaining it, but what that means is that as there are people playing a lot more than X hours a day/week there must be a lot playing less than that too.

 

Alright, I'll give you that. The exact 4-5 hour quote we are all referring to here is actually possible to be taken differently as well. He could mean that when people log on, they spend on average 4 hours online. This does not mean 4 hours per day, just 4 hours per session.

 

This will greatly change any perceived averages and the amount of people online at one time.

 

Again, just prooving my point that belief and speculation have no place in a factual discussion.

[Blotter]

That's what I've been saying all along, the average hours per day must be much lower for them to have 1.7 million subs.

 

12 hours a week (1.7 hours a day) would indeed come closer to explaining it, but what that means is that as there are people playing a lot more than X hours a day/week there must be a lot playing less than that too.

 

What's hard for you to grasp about EA/BW being able to runa script that tells them the average number of hours per day lpayed or logged in is 4-5 huors per day? You simply don't want to believe that there are 1.7M subs is what it comes down to, so you start from that as your premise and then cook up a rationalization for why either the subs number isn't true or why the number of huors per day isn't true.

 

As for some playing more and some playing less...duh...that's what "average" means.

[Goretzu]

No, I'm saying that an average of ~819 players per hour, per faction, per server would prove (and in my experience proves) that the statements saying "1.7 million subscribers are BS/lies" are infact false, nowhere am I stating that every hour of the day there has to be atleast 819 players on, the 4 hours average that they stated players play a day is based on a day (you know, 24 hours), when the players play their average of 4 hours has no bearing on the calculation when you use the same common denominator, even if every single player would play at exactly the same time (leaving the server completely empty the rest of the day) the resulting average over a 24 hour period would still be the same.

 

 

 

Yes, but to average 819 per faction per hour, when for many of those hours there will be very few on, means that for other parts of that cycle there needs to be MASSIVE numbers on.

 

This just isn't happening, there are no servers with 5000+ players at prime time.

 

So the average number of hours played per day must be much lower than 4 hours per day with those subs and server numbers.

[Ossos]

Please keep in mind that this number INCLUDES THE NEW ASIAN SERVERS.

 

 

This indicates a significant loss in North American and European Subscription numbers.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Ossos

[XOrionX]

Changing the cap doesn't change the threshold for capacity levels... if it did, then even their own metrics would be worthless.

 

Answer me this: why do you suppose they even show those capacity levels on the server select screen?

 

Are you kidding?

 

Changing the cap would obviously change the server capacity levels. Expand the capacity of ther server and now you have increased the window for the server to show as standard vs heavy. It's not event hat hard to figure out.

 

Answer me this: Do you work for BW?

[Dezzi]

FIrst, yes, changing the server cap changes threshhold levels. Changing the cap is saying "more people can log in concurrently, so we'll redefine light, heavy, standard and full."

 

Second, they don't need to rely on things like "standard" "light" and "heavy" to measure server population the way completely debunked sites like torstatus do: EA/BW have the raw data. NOBODY else does.

 

They show those server capacity levels on the select screen to give people some indication of population and what their login queue times might be, but it's only intended to provide a very rough idea. The raw numbers are quite available to peolpe at EA/BW who make statements like the one at issue here, however, so claiming that EA/BW's "metrics would be wrothless" in terms of them being able to make a statement like this and back it up is completely ridiculous. They can click a button and see precisely how many people are logged in...they can look at YOU and see what YOUR play time looks like...they can run scripts that provide them with the average hours played/logged in across a server or across the entire population of subscribers. The ONLY place the metrics become worthless is when people try to use the information made public, like "lilght" "standard" etc., to claim they are providing a mathematical analysis...they're not...because the labels' definitions change over time and THAT'S DONE ON PURPOSE TO PREVENT PLACES LIKE TORSTATUS FROM PROVIDING A RELIABLE ANALYSIS. It's proprietary informaion and the corporations will protect it.

 

I think he was saying that they can raise/lower the population cap without having to change the threshold. They're independent of each other, but they don't have to be exclusively so.

 

I've yet to see them come out and say they've changed the population thresholds (light, standard, heavy), but I haven't read everything...

[Kthx]

Of the 2M+ boxes sold, 300,000 had already cancelled. And it's not like you can cancel a timecard...

 

I woud like you to back up this myth that 300,000 canceled their subsriptions. What EA said was:

 

"As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers. The rest have either not started playing yet or have opted out."

 

This is not quite the same as 300,000 have canceled their subscriptions.

 

Moreover, the more important aspect of the most recent announcement is that despite whatever gap there was initially between sales and subscriptions, the number of new subscriptions since then has nullified any cancelations.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Kthx

[Syylara]

So the purpose of the SEC's enforcement actions is to protect corporations?

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases.shtml

 

I see actions where a corporation sues a corporate board member.

 

I see actions where a corporation is given a slap on the wrist (usually the fines are less than the ill-gotten profit made, similar to auto company "issue recall or settle out-of-court" behavior).

 

I see lots of action prosecuting individuals who made a personal profit from bilking corporate investors.

 

 

Were you living under a rock in 2008 or something?

Edited March 9, 2012 by Syylara

[Stormnut]

Please keep in mind that this number INCLUDES THE NEW ASIAN SERVERS.

 

 

This indicates a significant loss in North American and European Subscription numbers.

 

no it does not.

 

• Most successful subscription MMO launched

• Recently launched in Australia, New Zealand,

Hong Kong and Singapore

• End of February

• More than 1.7M active subscribers

 

Asia Launch was Feb 29th and March 1st

 

source:http://investor.ea.com/common/download/download.cfm?companyid=ERTS&fileid=551496&filekey=6162f638-c8c9-45f2-ab77-463e59f00455&filename=ERTS_Wedbush.pdf

 

We had about half that total still in the 30-day trial period, but they're subscribers because that first month is

including with a package good. What I said a month ago was, just over half. I can now confirm for you today that

the vast majority of the 1.7 is now triggered through that point and they're recurring subscribers.

 

Q: Just on the subs for Star Wars, because you said that the vast major of recurring, is that – does recurring mean

paid?

.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

John S. Riccitiello

Chief Executive Officer, Electronic Arts, Inc.

A: A recurring means that they've paid for and committed to more time beyond the initial trial period.

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

 

Source:http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/1691146240x0x551670/86a5c9a0-1ee8-480f-887b-04bf50c8d268/ERTS_Wedbush_03082012_Transcript.pdf

Edited March 9, 2012 by Stormnut

[Goretzu]

Could easilly be so, but I do not 'believe' anything untill I have seen definite proof of it. I prefer to be skeptical than to follow what I believe.

 

But, if being in the realm of possibilities is the way you want to discuss.. I often log on to my server when it still shows as Light. There will be around 60 people on Fleet at that time. I, unlike other people, do not think that the majority of people are on Fleet. Each time I check other areas (and there are dozens of them) I get to think that probably at any one time, on average, only 10% of the people are actively on Fleet. Most will be on other worlds, in their spaceship, or in a flashpoint, warzone or space battle. So that means, following my hypothetical logic (which seems what you follow best) there will be about 600 people on my faction when the server is Light.

 

So.. if I do let my belief take over instead of my logic.. yes: I do believe light servers have 1000 players on them. More even.

 

But yeah.. belief is a bad thing to bring to a discussion.

 

 

 

It couldn't be. There is no way 1000 player are on an average light server.

 

Just looking at warzone pops would cement this, 500 per side is a very healthy PvP pool and 1000 for x-factional ones is an incredible pool.

 

 

 

 

Alright, I'll give you that. The exact 4-5 hour quote we are all referring to here is actually possible to be taken differently as well. He could mean that when people log on, they spend on average 4 hours online. This does not mean 4 hours per day, just 4 hours per session.

 

This will greatly change any perceived averages and the amount of people online at one time.

 

Again, just prooving my point that belief and speculation have no place in a factual discussion.

 

 

Well he said averaging 4 hours per day.

 

If that is incorrect then yes it would be......well.... incorrect.

 

 

But just looking at the maths means that for 1.7 million subs and the number of servers people must be playing significantly less than an average of 4 hours per day.

[Blotter]

So the purpose of the SEC's enforcement actions is to protect corporations?

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases.shtml

 

Seriously. These guys will come up with anything to convince themselves that their dooom doom dooom dire predictions and ranting are not being throoughly disproven as time goes on with this game. Here's another fun link:

 

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