How un-subbing doesn't help population

[Callianna]

 

Blizzard is exactly what a company (both in the real world, and game development) should strive to be when it comes to taking "that which works" and tossing "that which does not work". It's simple.

 

What Blizzard does, that Bioware/EA do not do. Survey their consumers until there's no end to it.

 

Notice polling has been stripped from the forums a while back. Incredibly bad move. That's where they get their progression surveys from.

 

This game is failing because BW/EA doesn't care. The lack of polls showed me that.

 

So please tell me if Blizzard doing such a great job with WoW why are their subs declining by the millions? I played WoW for years and finally quit last year because the game was boring. The incoming pokemon and farmville plus the dumbing down of everything made it just not fun to play anymore. I currently enjoy SWTOR, and am looking forward to watching the game develop into something fantastic. I do not need to dye my gear, be able to change my hairdo, battle with my non-combative pets or grow my own flowers to enjoy the content. Sure there are some things in the game I would like to see and expect to see in the future.

 

But the most important aspect of any game is that I have fun and enjoy myself. After reading these forums for a few months now I've come to the conclusion that there isn't a MMO in existence or ever will be, that will get people to stop complaining that they don't have this, they don't have that. omg you fail "insert company name". It isn't possible to please 100 people at the same time let alone a million.

[GalacticKegger]

You assume that it wouldn't have cost more subs. People who leave becasue they have to wait hours for warzones are also going to leave if they have to wait hours to play at all for something they have paid for.

I make no such assumption. There would have been a loss in subs within that first month, probably a significant loss. But the servers would have been populated & healthy sans maybe 50k impatient players. Compared to the sub loss and PR grief that is being carpet bombed now ... I think that would have been a viable ROI sacrifice. Edited May 29, 2012 by GalacticKegger

[Wolfeisberg]

You assume that it wouldn't have cost more subs. People who leave becasue they have to wait hours for warzones are also going to leave if they have to wait hours to play at all for something they have paid for.

 

This, he doesn't quit understand that. he seems to think that people would stick around for 1+ months waiting for the massive queues to go down, considering there were lots of servers that had 4+ hour queues, nearly all servers had queues for a few weeks, some still had them even after a month, can you imagine what it would be like if they had less servers? He doesn't realize that casuals make up the massive number of people who play this game, and massive queues would have taken up all their playing time, if not most of it.

 

Releasing during a major holiday forced them to create more servers then what really was needed, but Bioware failed at having a contingency plan and the tools in place for what would happen after the holidays.

 

ZERO blame can be placed on the players for the current population problems, all that lays 100% on Bioware. They failed to plan, so they planed to fail.

[Dokar]

I make no such assumption. There would have been a loss in subs within that first month, probably a significant number. But the servers would have been populated & healthy sans maybe 50k impatient players. Compared to the sub loss and grief that is being carpet bombed now ... I think any decision maker would consider that a viable ROI sacrifice.

 

You are making the assumption it would only be 50,000. It could just as easily have cost them hundreds of thousands.

 

What about heavy servers going to standards and standards going to light in the last 8 weeks well after your 4 week window.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Dokar

[illgot]

Since World of Warcraft, name one major MMO that has not had to consolidate servers with in six months of release.

 

Bioware made the right move, they opened additional servers to compensate for the population influx at release.

 

Bioware dropped the ball by not having server merge protocol set up in beta. Did they honestly feel that Star Wars IP would be enough to make them the next World of Warcraft?

Edited May 29, 2012 by illgot

[TUXs]

Look, before you ask, it's not only Bioware's fault, but the community's. Just my 2 cents here.

 

Yeah...not quite there buddy. Don't blame US for Bioware's failures. EVER! Don't blame the "community" for not liking the game. Don't blame the "community" for becoming frustrated with the continual "soon", "very soon" or "very very soon" BS comments. Enough is enough already. Servers are dead, ONE server is viable. And Bioware moves like they have ONE programmer who types with his index finger.

[Wolfeisberg]

Since World of Warcraft, name one major MMO that has not had to consolidate servers with in six months of release.

 

Bioware made the right move, they opened additional servers to compensate for the large initial population influx at release.

 

Bioware dropped the ball by not having server merge protocol set up in beta. Did they honestly feel that Star Wars IP would be enough to make them the next World of Warcraft?

 

yes they did, that is absolutely what they believed. There were interviews where they stated they were aiming for WoW. Guess they should have stated they were aiming for 2006 WoW.

 

This is how the Pay to Play MMO market is today. The highest number of subscribers is going to be at the start, and it will drop by nearly half with in 4 months.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Wolfeisberg

[xandax]

I make no such assumption. There would have been a loss in subs within that first month, probably a significant loss. But the servers would have been populated & healthy sans maybe 50k impatient players. Compared to the sub loss and PR grief that is being carpet bombed now ... I think that would have been a viable ROI sacrifice.

 

I'd love to see the source for your numbers and the analysis which states that people who left over the last couple of months wouldn't have left 'populated & healthy sans maybe 50K impatient players' servers.

Edited May 29, 2012 by xandax

[GalacticKegger]

You are making the assumption it would only be 50,000. It could just as easily have cost them hundreds of thousands.

 

What about heavy servers going to standards and standards going to light in the last 8 weeks well after your 4 week window.

Using your concept with current numbers, they could have lost 400,000 to drop the total subs to 1.3 million during that first month while they were fixing the queue problem. At that point, 1.3 million would have remained and playing on healthy populated servers, rendering today's server population issues nonexistent. Today's biggest problem would have been addressed 4 months ago, which means they wouldn't be 4 months behind in adding fresh content, introducing LFG, adding ranked WZs, etc. They wlikely would have already been in. Put the here and now in late January and today's landscape (as well as the game's player population) changes significantly. Edited May 29, 2012 by GalacticKegger

[Dokar]

Using your concept with current numbers, they could have lost 400,000 to drop the total subs to 1.3 million during that first month while they were fixing the queue problem. At that point, 1.3 million would have remained and playing on healthy populated servers, rendering today's server population issues nonexistent. Today's biggest problem would have been addressed 4 months ago, which means they wouldn't be 4 months behind in adding fresh content, introducing LFG, adding ranked WZs, etc. They wlikely would have already been in. Put the here and now in late January and today's landscape (as well as the game's player population) changes significantly.

 

Not really since 1.1 and 1.2 have had nothing to do with population issues but bug fixes and content. We would be where we are now with servers going from heavy to standard and standard to light. you would still have people on servers that have gone from standard to light calling for transfers.

 

Just bcause you put 12 leaking buckets into 6 doesn't mean they don't still leak.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Dokar

[Wjjq-]

Look, before you ask, it's not only Bioware's fault, but the community's. By un-subbing, the population lowers, in which ironically people un-sub about there being low population *Chuckles*. However, this is also bioware's fault by spreading out the community in having too many servers. Just my 2 cents here.

 

The content is bad. The game is buggy. People quit because of this. Bioware drags their feet dealing with the population on many servers making the problem worse. Release a terrible product and take months fixing problems and you can certainly blame the developers. Can't blame the community at all for it.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Wjjq-

[Wolfeisberg]

Using your concept with current numbers, they could have lost 400,000 to drop the total subs to 1.3 million during that first month while they were fixing the queue problem. At that point, 1.3 million would have remained and playing on healthy populated servers, rendering today's server population issues nonexistent. Today's biggest problem would have been addressed 4 months ago, which means they wouldn't be 4 months behind in adding fresh content, introducing LFG, adding ranked WZs, etc. They wlikely would have already been in. Put the here and now in late January and today's landscape (as well as the game's player population) changes significantly.

 

IF they projected at the time a loss of 400,000 subscribers before the end of the first month, EA would have said "Hell no!!!" Open up more servers. EA was in fact aiming for WoW, they really thought they had a WoW killer on their hands, they really had no reason to believe in their minds that this game wasn't going to grow over time, and not decline after the first month and keep declining. Bioware developers themselves I think knew they wouldn't grow after the first month, but EA, the boss, absolutely believed they had a WoW killer on their hands and they were aiming for WoW subscribers.

 

The population problems are 100% EA/Bioware fault. They failed at making a competitive product as compared to what is already on the market, and what has already been announced for shortly after SWTOR released. They failed to have a plan and tools in place for the population decline.

 

Since they were aiming for WoW, then they should have made a Star Wars version of the current WoW, not the 2005/6 version of WoW. If they would have done that, then perhaps the populations wouldn't have been so bad by now, and merging servers would not have been needed.

[Shayde]

This reminds me of a thread on SWG's forums that blamed the players for not rolling over and accepting the NGE for the reason that SWG failed.

 

Not realizing that the NGE was the reason SWG failed.

[xandax]

Using your concept with current numbers, they could have lost 400,000 to drop the total subs to 1.3 million during that first month while they were fixing the queue problem. At that point, 1.3 million would have remained and playing on healthy populated servers, rendering today's server population issues nonexistent. Today's biggest problem would have been addressed 4 months ago, which means they wouldn't be 4 months behind in adding fresh content, introducing LFG, adding ranked WZs, etc. They wlikely would have already been in. Put the here and now in late January and today's landscape (as well as the game's player population) changes significantly.

 

Bioware stated the people leaving were 'casual' players etc, so they didn't leave because of low population but because of game issues. The low population issue is a direct result of these game issues.

 

Therefore we can fabricate numbers with ease - that would state your theory would have more people leaving this game than now if wanting to keep them from playing the game, only just earlier in the game life-cycle.

Preventing people from accessing a service they paid for is bad no matter how many numbers are assumed in defense.

Edited May 29, 2012 by xandax

[Itukaaj]

Just a heads up. One of the largest threads in wow general forums is about........ Wow server mergers. And guess what people are threatening to leave that game as well.

 

The difference is there is a CM post there acknowledging the problem.

[GalacticKegger]

Bioware stated the people leaving were 'casual' players etc, so they didn't leave because of low population but because of game issues. The low population issue is a direct result of these game issues.

 

Therefore we can fabricate numbers with ease - that would state your theory would have more people leaving this game than now if wanting to keep them from playing the game, only just earlier in the game life-cycle.

Preventing people from accessing a service they paid for is bad no matter how many numbers are assumed in defense.

Was fun until the discussion went from the origin of server pop issues to one-sided opinions of the game having few (if any) redeeming qualities. Since it is obvious your mind is set that the game will fail miserably, and that no aspect of the game or its community will save it, my input diminishes considerably in value. Cheers! Edited May 29, 2012 by GalacticKegger

[Dosvidaniya]

Using your concept with current numbers, they could have lost 400,000 to drop the total subs to 1.3 million during that first month while they were fixing the queue problem. At that point, 1.3 million would have remained and playing on healthy populated servers, rendering today's server population issues nonexistent. Today's biggest problem would have been addressed 4 months ago, which means they wouldn't be 4 months behind in adding fresh content, introducing LFG, adding ranked WZs, etc. They wlikely would have already been in. Put the here and now in late January and today's landscape (as well as the game's player population) changes significantly.

 

So, your business model is not that you have a back up plan for lost subs, you actually plan to lose them? That's crazy man. If BW took your approach, the way you appease the queue issues was to make them quit and alleviate the queue. You guys keep talking about a plan that actually relied on dropped subs for a solution! That's the worst business model ever. Forcing people to quit because you think they might quit is dumb. It's like burning down your house because you are afraid it will catch fire.

[Esquire]

This reminds me of a thread on SWG's forums that blamed the players for not rolling over and accepting the NGE for the reason that SWG failed.

 

Not realizing that the NGE was the reason SWG failed.

 

/agree

 

Altho no1 wants to lose their game. And when it starts, as we seen in SWG, some people will come up with just about anything or any excuse to put it off on some1 else to try and save "their game". To be honest, SWG's NGE and TOR have the exact same problem. The WoWification of a Star Wars game by some of the exact same developers. And the fact that these developers have the mindset that they're right and everyone else, including the lost subscriptions, is just wrong.

 

Want to fix the problem? Get rid of these people who made the decisions then and now, bring in a new team that will actualy listen and develope to the playerbase.

[GalacticKegger]

So, your business model is not that you have a back up plan for lost subs, you actually plan to lose them? That's crazy man. If BW took your approach, the way you appease the queue issues was to make them quit and alleviate the queue. You guys keep talking about a plan that actually relied on dropped subs for a solution! That's the worst business model ever. Forcing people to quit because you think they might quit is dumb. It's like burning down your house because you are afraid it will catch fire.

It's called contingency planning for those situations that do not go as forecast. Businesses who operate without plans that address both perfect and dire circumstances are relying more on chance than business intelligence for survival.

[xeenz]

So please tell me if Blizzard doing such a great job with WoW why are their subs declining by the millions? I played WoW for years and finally quit last year because the game was boring. The incoming pokemon and farmville plus the dumbing down of everything made it just not fun to play anymore. I currently enjoy SWTOR, and am looking forward to watching the game develop into something fantastic. I do not need to dye my gear, be able to change my hairdo, battle with my non-combative pets or grow my own flowers to enjoy the content. Sure there are some things in the game I would like to see and expect to see in the future.

 

But the most important aspect of any game is that I have fun and enjoy myself. After reading these forums for a few months now I've come to the conclusion that there isn't a MMO in existence or ever will be, that will get people to stop complaining that they don't have this, they don't have that. omg you fail "insert company name". It isn't possible to please 100 people at the same time let alone a million.

 

WoW is almost 8 years old... its expected that subs will drop after so many years. There are still 8 million people playing it, which say something. They may have done a couple of bad moves in the past years but its still superb compared to any other MMO today.

[Drakkip]

So, your business model is not that you have a back up plan for lost subs, you actually plan to lose them? That's crazy man. If BW took your approach, the way you appease the queue issues was to make them quit and alleviate the queue. You guys keep talking about a plan that actually relied on dropped subs for a solution! That's the worst business model ever. Forcing people to quit because you think they might quit is dumb. It's like burning down your house because you are afraid it will catch fire.

 

Thanks a lot... I just spit out my coffee on my keyboard... <wipes tear from eye> The things I find humorous in the mornings lol...

[Dokar]

It's called contingency planning for those situations that do not go as forecast. Businesses who operate without plans that address both perfect and dire circumstances are relying more on chance than business intelligence for survival.

 

That means plan to fill them all and have the tools to deal with the fall off. Kinda like installing fire sprinklers instead of just burning a building down because you might have a fire.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Dokar

[islander]

RIFT stayed afloat for roughly 5months. After that the pop declined quickly and down to it's current state. It is pretty steady now I do believe with somewhere in the neighborhood of 250k subbers? Don't quote me on that, but pretty sure that close to right, which frankly if condensed to just 10-12servers isn't bad.

 

I can't speak for RIFT's currently health status. I stopped playing after 2-ish months out of disinterest (no particular reason). Around the time I left, however, they had server transfers up and running. I forget the conditions were active then, but I didn't quit RIFT due to a low pop server. I just couldn't stay interested in a WoW clone with an IP I didn't care about.

See, even if someone wants to argue SW:TOR is a WoW clone with a Star Wars IP, for me that's perfectly fine. I don't hate WoW. Really its the player base of WoW I can't stand, combined with the continual nerfing of player choices in character design.

Edited May 29, 2012 by islander

[JollyRogers]

Sorry, but I simply refuse to stay subbed (i.e. spending even MORE money) on a game that I do not really enjoy. I'm not here to "help" the game, but to enjoy it. It is Bioware's task to produce an enjoyable game - for me, they failed.

 

^^ This. It's a business.

[pmeeps]

is this a real thread?

 

holy hell.