New updated sub numbers (Official)

[WereMops]

I'm sure you are.

 

 

Your numbers show the average IF people played consistently throughout each 24 hour period - which quite obviously they don't.

 

A server has much more people on at 6pm than 3am (relative to local server time)

 

As they don't do that what you've calculated is meaningless in this context.

 

 

Like I said it's like trying to calculate Public transport capacity, but ignoring that it will be much higher than the average during rush hour and much lower in the middle of the night. Averaging total number out doesn't produce a relevant or realistic picture (it end up with you "needing" 20 buses per hour, when in fact you actually need 100 buses during certain hours and 1 or less during other hours).

 

People that play an average number of hours a day DO NOT play them averaged out over a 24 hour period, there are large peaks and troughs.

 

 

 

 

 

It was mentioned in the 1st feb report and maybe in the last one too (can't remember).

 

But that is exactly what I'm saying, for there still to be 1.7 million subs, the average time played per day per player must be much lower than 4 hours per day now.

 

We aren't talking about the capacity, we are talking about the average, my numbers aren't "this is the fixed number that is always on", my numbers are "this is the average amount of people that would be playing the game simultaneously" considering an average 4 hour playtime (since the 4 hour playtime average is per day I chose to base my calculations on a period of a day, 24 hours), I've also stated that during different times there are more or less than the average number of people playing.

 

My calculations was to "prove" that the "1.7 million active subscribers is a lie, all/most servers are dead" statements are (most likely) false/faulty by showing what number of players per faction per server average would be sufficient to disprove that statement, and the math still holds for that.

 

Average is just that, an average over a period of time, the 24 hours was just to use a day as period of time (since the average playtime per day was 4 hours), could have used a week or a month, wouldn't change a thing in the end but it's easier to check my number every day at different times for a couple of days or a week and see that my average holds quite true for many/most servers (some will be higher populated, some lower, but the global average will/does hold).

 

What you are talking about seems to me to be how many servers would be sufficient during peak/off peak hours which is a totally different thing.

Edited March 9, 2012 by WereMops

[Samborino]

lets wait for the next big holiday break. Easter is about to come, I guess we will again have to queue for playing.

 

Remember they doubled the amount of players that can play on a server at once a week or 2 after launch thats why one day the queue's magically vanished. So really any server that has a "standard" population now is a server that would be full or very heavy had they not increased the max server population a week or so after launch. Alot of people dont realize this and automatically assume the game is "dying"

 

The queue's would still be there on a majority of the servers had they not doubled the max server pop.

[ChicksDigHarleys]

It should be obvious the new Oceanic servers and however many new players that brought in were just enough to keep the net subs around last month's reported 1.7 million.

 

I logged in on my Sith server at 5:15pm eastern yesterday. My server claimed "standard" load and there were six...yes SIX people on Nar Shaddaa. There should be more than that just browsing the neutral GTN if these servers could hold real MMO population numbers. I hate to think how dead my server would be if it were "light" pop.

[Goretzu]

Just goes to show you Torstatus was meaningless as you were told and denied to be used as a tool to estimate subs.

 

 

 

Again though the sub numbers (if correct) show what Torstatus has show, that people just aren't playing.... just for some reason they are still subscribing (accounting those that have unsubbed and been replaced by new sales).

 

Now whether SWTOR will continue to have huge number of very low playing subs...... I honestly have no idea.

[Samborino]

It should be obvious the new Oceanic servers and however many new players that brought in were just enough to keep the net subs around last month's reported 1.7 million.

 

I logged in on my Sith server at 5:15pm eastern yesterday. My server claimed "standard" load and there were six...yes SIX people on Nar Shaddaa. There should be more than that just browsing the neutral GTN if these servers could hold real MMO population numbers. I hate to think how dead my server would be if it were "light" pop.

 

6 players on a low level planet when a majority of players are just finishing their first 50 sounds about right to me.

 

go to a low - mid level zone on a medium population world of warcraft server, the results will be exactly the same.

 

Also your not taking into account faction imbalance, how do you know a majority of the players on your standard server arent playing the opposing faction. Some servers have a 5:1 ratio. Its mostly republic faction that has less players but their are some servers where it is the opposite as well.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Samborino

[Kinrain]

It should be obvious the new Oceanic servers and however many new players that brought in were just enough to keep the net subs around last month's reported 1.7 million.

 

I logged in on my Sith server at 5:15pm eastern yesterday. My server claimed "standard" load and there were six...yes SIX people on Nar Shaddaa. There should be more than that just browsing the neutral GTN if these servers could hold real MMO population numbers. I hate to think how dead my server would be if it were "light" pop.

 

Nope, the 1.7 million was as at the end of February, Asia/Pacific launch was 1st March so not included. Unkess you want to accuse the CEO of EA of being a liar and falsifying information to shareholders?

[Goretzu]

We aren't talking about the capacity, we are talking about the average, my numbers aren't "this is the fixed number that is always on", my numbers are "this is the average amount of people that would be playing the game simultaneously" considering an average 4 hour playtime (since the 4 hour playtime average is per day I chose to base my calculations on a period of a day, 24 hours), I've also stated that during different times there are more or less than the average number of people playing.

 

My calculations was to "prove" that the "1.7 million active subscribers is a lie, all/most servers are dead" statements are (most likely) false/faulty by showing what number of players per faction per server average would be sufficient to disprove that statement, and the math still holds for that.

 

Average is just that, an average over a period of time, the 24 hours was just to use a day as period of time (since the average playtime per day was 4 hours), could have used a week or a month, wouldn't change a thing in the end but it's easier to check my number every day at different times for a couple of days or a week and see that my average holds quite true for many/most servers (some will be higher populated, some lower, but the global average will/does hold).

 

What you are talking about seems to me to be how many servers would be sufficient during peak/off peak hours which is a totally different thing.

 

 

 

Sorry, but you don't understand your own numbers.

 

 

Your first calculation spreads the 4 hours per person out through a 24 hour cycle.

 

As I've repeatedly said that is not how it works.

 

 

 

You are calculating your "20 buses per hour", but ignoring that in rush hour your actually need 100 per hour and at 3 am need 1-0 per hour.

 

So like I said what you've calculated it meaningless (its right, in so far as the maths go, but it isn't showing what you think it does) in this context.

 

Server pop would have to be much higher than what you've stated to account for the average 4 hours played per player per day. That's just how it is.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Goretzu

[Stormnut]

It should be obvious the new Oceanic servers and however many new players that brought in were just enough to keep the net subs around last month's reported 1.7 million.

 

I logged in on my Sith server at 5:15pm eastern yesterday. My server claimed "standard" load and there were six...yes SIX people on Nar Shaddaa. There should be more than that just browsing the neutral GTN if these servers could hold real MMO population numbers. I hate to think how dead my server would be if it were "light" pop.

 

the numbers given were for the end of February. They did not include the Oceanic launch.

 

EA has confirmed that BioWare's first MMO is almost at 2 million users

 

Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello has told investors that BioWare's Star Wars: The Old Republic (SWTOR) is up to nearly 1.7 million monthly subscribers as of the end of February. A "vast majority" of players have passed beyond the free month of playtime that comes with the game and are in full-on paid subscription mode.

 

Cowen and Company analyst Doug Creutz is estimating 2 million monthly subscribers by the end of June 2012.

 

"We continue to feel comfortable with our Star Wars estimates which are an important part of our street-high FY13 non-GAAP EPS estimate of $1.36. We estimate 2MM paying subs by the end of June 2012 (and then sustained for the remainder of the year). We also note that the company plans to launch Star Wars in the Asia-Pacific region later this month," Creutz said in a statement.

 

Overall, the success of SWTOR has Cowen and Company rating EA shares to Outperform

[Goretzu]

I dont think they are lying about their numbers though, they said the average player "when they log in" plays 4 hours in a session ( i beleive)

 

You have to remember, that BW made a key mistake which lead to spreading out the population way to much. First as a quick fix for queue's they added 70-80 or so new servers on day 2 of launch ( i dont know the exact numbers) then a few weeks after that they doubled the max server population of all servers. This lead to problems because suddenly the 700,000 subscribers that came after the new year (roughly) went to the more populated servers because they werent full anymore or they spread themselves out among a bunch of standard servers.

 

This leads to a few servers having very large populations and then a majority having very modest populations, they have a huge amount of servers for the number of players they have. I guess it was neccesarry to do a quick fix but they could have added less servers and they are going to probably have to do something about it soon, because they effectively doubled their server capacity meaning even the most populated servers dont have queue's and new players will flock to those servers. The games subscription base just isnt evident on most servers since its so spread out, and now that BW has the right max server pops they need to consolidate some servers to raise the overall population of servers. They were in a sticky situation at launch with the queue's and they did the best they could by adding new servers , but they should have added just a few and let the customer base deal with it for a week or 2 until they increased the max server pops. A server that is standard now would have been a server that was very heavy or full at launch.

 

Here is a transcript from their conference call where they talk about more than doubling the max server population. http://www.darthhater.com/articles/swtor-news/19915-electronic-arts-q3-fy12-earnings-call

 

 

 

Yeah I think they wouldn't lie about them directly (although that wouldn't preclude indirectly or just a plain mistake).

 

But the strange and worrying thing its that if there are 1.7 million subs, and they are playing 4 hours per day on average, there's an awful lot of those subs that must be playing basically 0 hours.

 

If the average is now less then 4 hours per day, then that in itself is worrying unless SWTOR is going to break the mould of MMORPG (which I guess it might).

[Drewser]

Again though the sub numbers (if correct) show what Torstatus has show, that people just aren't playing.... just for some reason they are still subscribing (accounting those that have unsubbed and been replaced by new sales).

 

Now whether SWTOR will continue to have huge number of very low playing subs...... I honestly have no idea.

 

Not going to rez that horse and beat it again.

[Goretzu]

Not going to rez that horse and beat it again.

 

Too late you already did, and it still died of exactly the same courses it did then.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Goretzu

[Quip]

Wait a minute here.

 

At the end of January there was over 1.7 million subscribers and on March first the game is "almost up to" 1.7 million subscribers?

 

This is exactly why I never listen to market talk, I just worry about whether I'm having fun or not.

[Drewser]

Too late you already did, and it still died of exactly the same courses it did then.

 

Nope, we have the numbers now that prove you and a host of others were wrong in the other thread.

 

I am not going to get into all the reasons why because they have been thoroughly covered.

[ChicksDigHarleys]

I play on two different servers. On both servers, after Jan 20th I didn't see much of a drop, but after Feb 20th I sure did. Maybe these people haven't cancelled yet, but they're not playing. So how long until they *do* cancel?

[Devlonir]

Sorry, but you don't understand your own numbers.

 

Sorry, but you don't seem to understand the concept of averages. Or well, you seem to do as you explain it wonderfully after this, but then use the explaination as a reason for his numbers being bad.

 

Odd..

[madmikeyb]

Yes companies would never lie about numbers to investors or anything. Seriously if the game was doing bad they would come out and say to investors, sorry but our subs are at 250k and dropping.

 

The fact is instances are killing the game, when you have 10 or less peeps on worlds its pretty much single player til end game or pvp wz.

[Devlonir]

Yes companies would never lie about numbers to investors or anything. Seriously if the game was doing bad they would come out and say to investors, sorry but our subs are at 250k and dropping.

 

The fact is instances are killing the game, when you have 10 or less peeps on worlds its pretty much single player til end game or pvp wz.

 

Yeah they would, otherwise they get sued.

 

Now give me back my tinfoilhat! I need it against the aliens.

 

Ps. your usage of the word fact seems mistaken with the definition of opinion.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Devlonir

[zeuseason]

This game is doing great. As more content gets implemented, and features, the population will rise and rise. The game's only been out 5mo? And already it's stable pop with major game releases on the cusp. It'll prolly take a year or more to gain massive popularity, but BW is well on the right track if they keep it up.

[Dezziedc]

Which goes back to the puzzling point, why SWTOR seems to have so many people subbing, yet not playing.

 

I can only make assumptions here but it is something to think about:

 

• Star Wars is what... 35 years old?
  
• This may indicate that a percentage of 'older' gamers are playing this game
  
• Some of these older gamers have a life outside of the game and can't afford (time wise) to spend every waking minute of every day on the game
  
• The game is also focussed heavily on casual gaming
  
• Casual gaming means that you don't have to play 24 hours a day to achive end game or stay up with everyone else. There is no need to be on every night or even every week
  
• Lets face it, it's Star Wars
  
• Just the trademark means you will attract players from other games
  
• And then there are those who don't fit into the above categories, who are enjoying the game, and just want to hang around to see how things pan out
  

 

And if you don't fit into any of those, you are some one who wants to leave but have subbed for 6 months. The numbers add up.

 

I for one grew up with Star Wars, work away from home for weeks at a time, have a family and can't dedicate any more than a few hours a week to the game (if I am lucky). I don't have a 50 yet and am in no hurry to get there. I am enjoying the game as a way to relax when I get a chance. All of my guild are in the same boat - some put in alot of time, others can only get on when they have a chance.

 

I am sure there are many explainations for the 1.7 mil subs. But as so many have said. Who really cares? If you don't like the game, don't play and leave. If you do like the game, continue playing. Nobody should be influenced by anything that is said on these forums.

[Holden_Dissent]

kids don't have the money for a 6 month sub.

[Stormnut]

Found the source for the new sub number:

 

"Star Wars, this is an area that I think has got a lot of people anxious. I've heard from investors today saying that

we must have 800,000 subscribers. I heard 600,000 yesterday. So what I think a lot of people have

misunderstood is we said we had 1.7 million subscribers on the last call, which was about a month ago. What that

was about was the fact that only about – just about half that number had triggered through their 30-day point and

become active subscribers, our definition of recurring subscribers.

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.

What happens from here? So we didn't go backwards like a lot of folks thought we had. Michael pointed out that

would have been mathematically impossible to me in a side-bar conversation. He was, in fact, right in his analysis,

but it doesn't seem that most people had figured that out. Thank you, Michael, for the vote of confidence."

 

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

[Valkirus]

I play on two different servers. On both servers, after Jan 20th I didn't see much of a drop, but after Feb 20th I sure did. Maybe these people haven't cancelled yet, but they're not playing. So how long until they *do* cancel?

 

And your server represents the whole game? I have'nt noticed much difference on mine sence early Dec. There are plenty to play with or socialize with if that is your thing. I mostly solo so I could'nt careless about the server population as long as BW is making enough money to provide content updates and patches.

[Logisitcs]

Why do some want this game to "fail" so hard? Why are you so bitter, jaded and angry?

TOR has it's a problems like any mmo, but it's a good game, and in a year it'll be even better, stop being emo drama-queens

[Calimwulf]

Why do some want this game to "fail" so hard? Why are you so bitter, jaded and angry?

TOR has it's a problems like any mmo, but it's a good game, and in a year it'll be even better, stop being emo drama-queens

This is a question I have speculated about myself. Folks seem heck bent on trying to convince everyone the game sucks and everyone is leaving even though it doesn't and they aren't. It makes no sense to me.

[Meldwyn]

Found the source for the new sub number:

 

"Star Wars, this is an area that I think has got a lot of people anxious. I've heard from investors today saying that

we must have 800,000 subscribers. I heard 600,000 yesterday. So what I think a lot of people have

misunderstood is we said we had 1.7 million subscribers on the last call, which was about a month ago. What that

was about was the fact that only about – just about half that number had triggered through their 30-day point and

become active subscribers, our definition of recurring subscribers.

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.

What happens from here? So we didn't go backwards like a lot of folks thought we had. Michael pointed out that

would have been mathematically impossible to me in a side-bar conversation. He was, in fact, right in his analysis,

but it doesn't seem that most people had figured that out. Thank you, Michael, for the vote of confidence."

 

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

 

What exactly is he trying to say? How many is "vast majority"? Does this relate to a multi-month sub that most folks may have?

Edited March 9, 2012 by Meldwyn