Gankdalf_ Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I have provided the link to the article, very interesting read. http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/03/20/world-of-warcraft-admits-subscribers-are-leaving-for-the-old-republic/?partner=yahootix :o:o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOvertone Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Interesting, I had no idea League of Legends had a player base that big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rouge Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Interesting, I had no idea League of Legends had a player base that big. EA&BW does and that's why we are getting the The Wrath of Heroes spin-off from WAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparklehorse Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Interesting, I had no idea League of Legends had a player base that big. I was a bit surprised by that as well. I tried it a while back and it just isn't my cup of tea. I assume the price of admission has a lot to do with the numbers for that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HydeCiel Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Note: This is not entirely confirmed and the following is more of a theorized academic thought on server population; This is how I've seen a number of server farms with load balancing and reporting features on server utilization setup. I have found server farms to be commonly setup this way. It is a very rough, basic explanation. keep in mind while looking at server population status such as "Heavy, Standard, Low." The status is most likely calculated by the max amount of users on a server and the actual number. If you recall from the release. BW was increasing the max user limits on certain servers, probably using server load balancing. You will not be able to determine a total server population solely on the "Heavy, Standard, or Low" status as it is dependent on the server (the set player limit and the actual amount of players active) as to what the status is reported. Rough example: Fatman vs Venzalo Max player limits: Fatman - 10000 Venzalo - 5000 Actual players on: Fatman - 4000 Venzalo - 4000 Rough guess: Low < 40% Standard 41%-79% Heavy > 80% Based off these numbers you can assume the following status: Fatman although having the same actual amount of players can be classified as Low population and Venzalo would be classified as Heavy population. Cheers, Hyde Edited March 20, 2012 by HydeCiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostvein Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 As of right now, almost all European servers are at Standard population. I assume that they do not have low population problems. It is really strange if the majority of SW:TOR's loyal customers are from outside the US. Someone basically proved that standard can be anywhere from 362 to 1829, so "standard" designation really doesn't mean anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andryah Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 You are completely wrong, the numbers are not old and most are out of their free month. A link has been provided to prove you wrong. http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/03/09/star-wars-the-old-republic-subscription-numbers-stabilize-at-1/5 You have to excuse him. Articles like the OP linked make the haters cry out in anguish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottinks Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 That is rubbish! Pepsi IS better than Coke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andryah Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Someone basically proved that standard can be anywhere from 362 to 1829, so "standard" designation really doesn't mean anything. No they did not. I question both their methodology and the accuracy of what they did. Why you say? Because I have tested what STANDARD means on a good number of servers and have never seen it below 1000 or above 1500. You have to run the test in the middle of prime time on a STANDARD server and do a detailed /who population count (with no assumptions, estimations, or shortcuts). WHY, because I do believe here is a lag time on the status flags changing on the status page (which can easily account for outliers from the 1000-1500 figure), so I make sure that I do it in the middle of server prime time when populations are most likely to be stable. It pays to independently veryify things. LIGHT on the other hand can be anywhere from 0 to 1000. And there are some light servers that are really suffering. Edited March 20, 2012 by Andryah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redmarx Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 "World of Warcraft Admits Subscribers are Leaving for The Old Republic" Very good title for SWTOR in Forbes. Good post OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostvein Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) No they did not. I question both their methodology and the accuracy of what they did. Why you say? Because I have tested what STANDARD means on a good number of servers and have never seen it below 1000 or above 1500. You have to run the test in the middle of prime time on a STANDARD server and do a detailed /who population count (with no assumptions, estimations, or shortcuts). WHY, because I do believe here is a lag time on the status flags changing on the status page (which can easily account for outliers from the 1000-1500 figure), so I make sure that I do it in the middle of server prime time when populations are most likely to be stable. It pays to independently veryify things. LIGHT on the other hand can be anywhere from 0 to 1000. And there are some light servers that are really suffering. Fair enough. http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=350700&page=15 Bye's post. What say you? Edited March 20, 2012 by Frostvein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPagano Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Totally. 8 years later, Blizzard acknowledges that people are leaving their game and that the most currently released MMO game with Star Wars in the title might be contributing to some of that loss. BW is not Blizzard when it comes to online games. BW has no online game experience, actually. It shows. For how much people bash ragers for being so dumb, the fanboys are just as hilarious. You guys are taking any whiff of TORs mediocre and underwhelming success as a reason to dance on a mountaintop. I'm not saying this article is exagerrated, I'm sure it's absolutely true. WoW is still the best mainstream MMO on the market by a large margin. It's almost a decade old, and this article is newsworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HydeCiel Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) That is rubbish! Pepsi IS better than Coke. No! Coke > Pepsi! Admittedly and depending on my mood, Dr.Pepper > Coke May the F = M x A be with you! Edited March 20, 2012 by HydeCiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerion Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Neat article. INB4 paid off Listen, Forbes has a reputation to uphold. It's not going to be 'paid off' to report anything favorably (sure, there might be paid political journalist who contribute, but that's another issue). In short, Forbes opinion > your anonymous opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azzras Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 That is rubbish! Pepsi IS better than Coke. He speaks true, Pepsi is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerion Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Totally. 8 years later, Blizzard acknowledges that people are leaving their game and that the most currently released MMO game with Star Wars in the title might be contributing to some of that loss. BW is not Blizzard when it comes to online games. BW has no online game experience, actually. It shows. For how much people bash ragers for being so dumb, the fanboys are just as hilarious. You guys are taking any whiff of TORs mediocre and underwhelming success as a reason to dance on a mountaintop. I'm not saying this article is exagerrated, I'm sure it's absolutely true. WoW is still the best mainstream MMO on the market by a large margin. It's almost a decade old, and this article is newsworthy. And yet here you are, subscribing to our 'mediocre' game, lol. Thanks for the cash. I and BioWare appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevlarto Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) nice read, wow has been on a downhill slide before tor, I sure the next big hit will be gw2, which will effect Tor as well, lets face it, wow is getting old and tired to all but the fanbois of the game, it's time has come and I see wow free to play in a couple of years..not saying anything bad here, it's just the facts.. Edited March 20, 2012 by kevlarto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPagano Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) And yet here you are, subscribing to our 'mediocre' game, lol. Thanks for the cash. I and BioWare appreciate it. Did I say in my post I was still paying a subscription? I paid for one monthly fee after hitting 50. I cancelled it soon thereafter. I only gave BW my cash for as long as they were providing me an experience worth that cash. Leveling was great. But that's all they put in. I make a few points, and you decide to latch on to a baseless assumption and quote my whole thread? Something that wasn't even mentioned in the quote you choose. Interesting! Edited March 20, 2012 by MPagano Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jederix Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Totally. 8 years later, Blizzard acknowledges that people are leaving their game and that the most currently released MMO game with Star Wars in the title might be contributing to some of that loss. BW is not Blizzard when it comes to online games. BW has no online game experience, actually. It shows. For how much people bash ragers for being so dumb, the fanboys are just as hilarious. You guys are taking any whiff of TORs mediocre and underwhelming success as a reason to dance on a mountaintop. I'm not saying this article is exagerrated, I'm sure it's absolutely true. WoW is still the best mainstream MMO on the market by a large margin. It's almost a decade old, and this article is newsworthy. 1.7 mil is not too shabby for an upstart MMO. Of course to you anything less than 10 mil is complete and utter failsauce, amirite? We get it. You love WoW. You should go back to it. They would welcome you with open arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jederix Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Did I say in my post I was still paying a subscription? I paid for one monthly fee after hitting 50. I cancelled it soon thereafter. I only gave BW my cash for as long as they were providing me an experience worth that cash. Leveling was great. But that's all they put in. I make a few points, and you decide to latch on to a baseless assumption and quote my whole thread? Something that wasn't even mentioned in the quote you choose. Interesting! No, you called anyone who doesn't see things your way as a "fanboi". People tend to stop reading what you have to say once this happens. I know I did. Edited March 20, 2012 by Jederix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteis Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Hmm, I feel 1.2 is going to be the deciding patch for a lot of players. Edited March 20, 2012 by Matteis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OddballEasyEight Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Totally. 8 years later, Blizzard acknowledges that people are leaving their game and that the most currently released MMO game with Star Wars in the title might be contributing to some of that loss. BW is not Blizzard when it comes to online games. BW has no online game experience, actually. It shows. For how much people bash ragers for being so dumb, the fanboys are just as hilarious. You guys are taking any whiff of TORs mediocre and underwhelming success as a reason to dance on a mountaintop. I'm not saying this article is exagerrated, I'm sure it's absolutely true. WoW is still the best mainstream MMO on the market by a large margin. It's almost a decade old, and this article is newsworthy. Heh, funny that, because Blizzard had no online experience either when they started WoW but i guess that somehow doesnt matter in your "BW has no online game experience" argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPagano Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 1.7 mil is not too shabby for an upstart MMO. Of course to you anything less than 10 mil is complete and utter failsauce, amirite? We get it. You love WoW. You should go back to it. They would welcome you with open arms. Boy you guys sure know how to turn nothing into something. I'm still trying to figure out where I compared 1.7 million to 10 million. You're good at subtext. Reading things I didn't even know I wrote! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPagano Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 No, you called anyone who doesn't see things your way as a "fanboi". People tend to stop reading what you have to say once this happens. I know I did. It's pretty straightforward, I was referring to the people who are bickering with the haters in this thread. I'll spell it out for you: either you are bickering with the ragers and the statement applies to you and is absolutely accruate, or you aren't bickering with the ragers in which case you would not care that I was addressing fanboys. Please continue to address irrelevant points in my threads and try to paint me as some wow-lover with unreasonable expectations. It's only furthering my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPagano Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Heh, funny that, because Blizzard had no online experience either when they started WoW but i guess that somehow doesnt matter in your "BW has no online game experience" argument? Haha. I know you're just trolling, but I can't help it since I'm sitting at my desk for another 20 minutes. Warcraft I Warcraft II Warcraft III (is this jarring your memory?) Warcraft Frozen Throne Starcraft Starcraft II Sorry, when I said "online game experience" I mean "experience in developing and managing online games". Go ahead and do some research on BWs development portfolio. I'll be here, but only for another 20 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts