Yeah, this game sure is losing people...

[Vandicus]

 

That's why I don't plan on buying any games this year except maybe Rome Total War 2, but the rest are over hype and never up to standards of computing power of modern and latest computer hardware. I was so disappointed in the graphics and game play of crysis 2 that I refuse to buy any game that isn't exclusively made for pc only. Any other games are just ports from console systems.

 

By the gods my time on this forum wasn't a waste. I hadn't heard about RTW2 yet. I absolutely love the Total War series, especially the original RTW. I too was disappointed when Blizzard was taken over by Activision, though I have some hope that Bioware retains its quality. ME3 was by far the best game they've ever released, with the exception of its ending which was a result of rushing the game by EA. So far besides rushing games EA hasn't been too overbearing(current handling of SWTOR aside). People often forget that EA owned Bioware for DA:O, DA2, and ME2. I personally think most of the people who disliked DA2 disliked it because it was misadvertised. Bioware/EA did the same thing for DA:O, advertising it as dark fantasy. When we're promised epic fantasy in DA2 we get a nihilistic dark fantasy perspective(something I personally liked and was expecting in DA:O). Oh Bioware and your silly marketing team.

[Cubed_Art]

By the gods my time on this forum wasn't a waste. I hadn't heard about RTW2 yet. I absolutely love the Total War series, especially the original RTW. I too was disappointed when Blizzard was taken over by Activision, though I have some hope that Bioware retains its quality. ME3 was by far the best game they've ever released, with the exception of its ending which was a result of rushing the game by EA. So far besides rushing games EA hasn't been too overbearing(current handling of SWTOR aside). People often forget that EA owned Bioware for DA:O, DA2, and ME2. I personally think most of the people who disliked DA2 disliked it because it was misadvertised. Bioware/EA did the same thing for DA:O, advertising it as dark fantasy. When we're promised epic fantasy in DA2 we get a nihilistic dark fantasy perspective(something I personally liked and was expecting in DA:O). Oh Bioware and your silly marketing team.

 

Yeah, right now I'm the most excited about Rome Total War 2. I probably played Rome Total War more than any other game in my life since Pirates for my Amiga 500. I hope Rome TW2 isn't a let down. I can only take so many letdowns in the gaming world anymore.

[LordArtemis]

I am an admittingly harsh critic of this game. But even I can concede a few things.

 

a) The market is saturated with choices

b) The economy worldwide is on a downturn

c) Rarely if ever does a game launch in a perfect state

d) This game launched (as far as I am aware) with a record number of launch subs

e) WoW was probably an anomaly, and remains a special case probably because "people go where people are".

f) Before WoW the powerhouses in the market were Everquest and Lineage. The mighty can fall, and the meek can inherit.

g) Development costs, EA control, etc. could have influenced how and when this game was launched.

 

Now, those things conceded, I would say a few things.

 

1) There were expectations. Realistic or not (I still fail to see how the lion's share of expectations were unrealistic at this point) the public seemed to have an idea of what they wanted. Full VO did not seem to be one of those things. it was a perk...it was a great part of the game design intent, but the expectations existed DESPITE the VO design. Simply put, VO was Bioware's decision. It was not a result of giving "the fans what they wanted".

 

2) VO was expected to be a 4th pillar, and though it is impressive, perhaps it has not reached that weathermark. That is a problem perhaps, since it is likely it was a rather good portion of the development cost. It also limits additional content in that it is almost REQUIRED to be of the expensive VO kind.

 

3) The game launched without features most players probably believe to be standard features for an MMO at this point in time. For better or worse this is likely an indisputable fact. Folly or not it may have contributed to sub loss.

 

4) Quite a few gameplay bugs, glitches and other problems still exist 9 months after launch. In addition, content has been on the light side, communication has not apparently been up to player expectations for the most part, and it seems many of the features that were added have had or still do have problems.

 

Losing over 50 percent (speculative) of a game's playerbase under ANY circumstances would and should be alarming and substantive. The message is clear...those that left did not desire to remain with the game as it stands at present, one reason or another.

 

You could speculate as to the reasons, but isn't it likely that flaws that are apparent in the game at present at least contributed in some part to the losses? And if one could come to that conclusion based on logic, doesn't logic also indicate that changes need to be made?

 

The thing is, web wide and here in the very forum the biggest complaints do not seem to be "paying a sub". They seem to be a lack of "sandboxy" repeatable content and customization, engine problems, PVP and space combat. These 4 things seem, at least in a general sense, to be the issue most often cited by those that have played the game.

 

So what does one conclude? The game is fine as is? The game is doomed?

 

I say neither. What one should conclude perhaps is that a change in design direction is warranted. Perhaps those features most often mentioned and cited should be implemented. Perhaps adding more content to end game is NOT the answer.

 

Maybe the game will continue to lose subs. One thing is sure...it will likely not gain any substantive numbers in it's current state, F2P or not.

[Cordelia]

 

The thing is, web wide and here in the very forum the biggest complaints do not seem to be "paying a sub". They seem to be a lack of "sandboxy" repeatable content and customization, engine problems, PVP and space combat. These 4 things seem, at least in a general sense, to be the issue most often cited by those that have played the game.

 

This is very much the case with friends that have left the game, particularly the lack of 'sandbox' features and the space combat. In fact not one of them cited paying a sub as a reason to leave. I know there are people for whom paying a sub is a problem, particularly in the current economic climate, but I would be very surprised if it was in fact a major reason for most people. I mean playing an MMO would be way down on your list of priorities if you were really struggling with money.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Cordelia

[Karquile]

The central mistake they made was believing that with a gorgeous enough game, they could get and keep a multimillion player STAR WARS MMO audience - and investing accordingly. That audience doesn't exist - never did, never will. You can make a lot of people buy boxes, but you can't keep them for long. Everything else that has happened stems from this. The game is amazing - but it cost too much. So now they will take their lumps and work out a modestly profitable contract term, by cutting costs (more to come) and writing off the development nut. We will enjoy the game, which is all that counts in the end.

[SilentKitty]

Well, I hope we get something new fun in the following 2 week or so. Quite a few quildies are taking a look at other games right now. They haven't left us, they come back for some Ops and such but one way to entice them would be new content. A new difficult Ops that you really had to struggle with would be nice and rewarding. Since I'm more of a storyplayer than many others in the guild I'm staying put. But I do miss their company.

[Soluss]

Well, I hope we get something new fun in the following 2 week or so. Quite a few quildies are taking a look at other games right now. They haven't left us, they come back for some Ops and such but one way to entice them would be new content. A new difficult Ops that you really had to struggle with would be nice and rewarding. Since I'm more of a storyplayer than many others in the guild I'm staying put. But I do miss their company.

 

There isnt going to be anything new, in the next two weeks. It will take atleast 2 to 3 weeks on the PTS and that isnt even open yet.

[Vandicus]

I am an admittingly harsh critic of this game. But even I can concede a few things.

 

a) The market is saturated with choices

b) The economy worldwide is on a downturn

c) Rarely if ever does a game launch in a perfect state

d) This game launched (as far as I am aware) with a record number of launch subs

e) WoW was probably an anomaly, and remains a special case probably because "people go where people are".

f) Before WoW the powerhouses in the market were Everquest and Lineage. The mighty can fall, and the meek can inherit.

g) Development costs, EA control, etc. could have influenced how and when this game was launched.

 

Now, those things conceded, I would say a few things.

 

1) There were expectations. Realistic or not (I still fail to see how the lion's share of expectations were unrealistic at this point) the public seemed to have an idea of what they wanted. Full VO did not seem to be one of those things. it was a perk...it was a great part of the game design intent, but the expectations existed DESPITE the VO design. Simply put, VO was Bioware's decision. It was not a result of giving "the fans what they wanted".

 

2) VO was expected to be a 4th pillar, and though it is impressive, perhaps it has not reached that weathermark. That is a problem perhaps, since it is likely it was a rather good portion of the development cost. It also limits additional content in that it is almost REQUIRED to be of the expensive VO kind.

 

3) The game launched without features most players probably believe to be standard features for an MMO at this point in time. For better or worse this is likely an indisputable fact. Folly or not it may have contributed to sub loss.

 

4) Quite a few gameplay bugs, glitches and other problems still exist 9 months after launch. In addition, content has been on the light side, communication has not apparently been up to player expectations for the most part, and it seems many of the features that were added have had or still do have problems.

 

Losing over 50 percent (speculative) of a game's playerbase under ANY circumstances would and should be alarming and substantive. The message is clear...those that left did not desire to remain with the game as it stands at present, one reason or another.

 

You could speculate as to the reasons, but isn't it likely that flaws that are apparent in the game at present at least contributed in some part to the losses? And if one could come to that conclusion based on logic, doesn't logic also indicate that changes need to be made?

 

The thing is, web wide and here in the very forum the biggest complaints do not seem to be "paying a sub". They seem to be a lack of "sandboxy" repeatable content and customization, engine problems, PVP and space combat. These 4 things seem, at least in a general sense, to be the issue most often cited by those that have played the game.

 

So what does one conclude? The game is fine as is? The game is doomed?

 

I say neither. What one should conclude perhaps is that a change in design direction is warranted. Perhaps those features most often mentioned and cited should be implemented. Perhaps adding more content to end game is NOT the answer.

 

Maybe the game will continue to lose subs. One thing is sure...it will likely not gain any substantive numbers in it's current state, F2P or not.

 

First off I disagree that WoW inherited its subscribers. Most of those subs did not exist before WoW/ WoW's time period. A lot of new gamers entered the market during that time period.

 

Second, the attrition curve in the game is normal. Its happened in every other MMO, with the exception of WoW. Yes, a lot of people left because what they wanted wasn't in the game, but that's partially due to the fact that MMO players are a diverse lot. We've all got different things we're seeking in an MMO. End game content is one of those features that people have been complaining about since beta that is now being addressed. Just cause you don't think it should be prioritized doesn't mean the rest of the player base wants sandbox(or the other suggestions) over content right now. I personally am fine with the current amount of end game content, but i don't consider myself a hardcore pver(my BiS gear aside) and I recognize my views on what is desirable aren't necessarily the majority's views.

[SOULCASTER]

Every pvp server status at "STANDARD" during prime time every night says subscriptions have dropped.

 

They used to all say Very Heavy of Full a month after the server mergers.

[CorellianWannabe]

By the gods my time on this forum wasn't a waste. I hadn't heard about RTW2 yet. I absolutely love the Total War series, especially the original RTW. I too was disappointed when Blizzard was taken over by Activision, though I have some hope that Bioware retains its quality. ME3 was by far the best game they've ever released, with the exception of its ending which was a result of rushing the game by EA. So far besides rushing games EA hasn't been too overbearing(current handling of SWTOR aside). People often forget that EA owned Bioware for DA:O, DA2, and ME2. I personally think most of the people who disliked DA2 disliked it because it was misadvertised. Bioware/EA did the same thing for DA:O, advertising it as dark fantasy. When we're promised epic fantasy in DA2 we get a nihilistic dark fantasy perspective(something I personally liked and was expecting in DA:O). Oh Bioware and your silly marketing team.

 

DA2 was a railroad plot and the same dungeon over and over. The choices really didn't matter because the ending was always going to be the same no matter who you sided with. That and dead Leliana came back because Gaider apparently likes her (Anders somehow came back to life as well).

 

ME2 and 3 were wannabe shooters-to get the 'best' ending in ME3 you even have to engage in their multiplayer. If the ME3 ending (not plural since there is only one with different colors) was rushed why did they defend it so strongly as artistic choice instead of admitting it wasn't quite what they wanted to do? Why did one writer talk about it on Penny Arcade before being forced to deny it (which apparently means his account was hacked, even though no one would actually say that). Seems like Casey Hudson had plenty of time to come up with his idea for the Catalyst.

 

Bioware has believed their own hype for far too long-it's not EA's fault the games are getting worse, it's Bioware arrogance. TOR is just another example-MMO players want to create alts endlessly, not participate in any endgame activities, right?

[CorellianWannabe]

There isnt going to be anything new, in the next two weeks. It will take atleast 2 to 3 weeks on the PTS and that isnt even open yet.

 

Why would they bother to test a new operation? They obviously haven't done so in the past.

[matapat]

 

Second, the attrition curve in the game is normal. Its happened in every other MMO, with the exception of WoW. Yes, a lot of people left because what they wanted wasn't in the game, but that's partially due to the fact that MMO players are a diverse lot. We've all got different things we're seeking in an MMO. End game content is one of those features that people have been complaining about since beta that is now being addressed. Just cause you don't think it should be prioritized doesn't mean the rest of the player base wants sandbox(or the other suggestions) over content right now. I personally am fine with the current amount of end game content, but i don't consider myself a hardcore pver(my BiS gear aside) and I recognize my views on what is desirable aren't necessarily the majority's views.

 

With the massive amount of people that have left the game since it's launch, I'd say the majority's views definitely are in line with this. Rift lost a boatload of subscribers in the same timeframe too, but the game was produced with a fraction of the budget this one was and the population eventually stabilized. By the slowly dwindling populations I'm seeing on the merge servers I'd say we're still dropping here, and it's looking increasingly likely Terror From Beyond is not coming out before MoP hits on 9/25.

 

When I think of the things I can do on my character here at max level compared to what I can do in WoW, it's kind of depressing. Yeah I know WoW has 8 years worth of content stacked up but the difference between sandbox and themepark MMOs is pretty blatant. Here you have these options:

 

Run Ops (one week lockout)

Run HMs (become superfluous once you have all the BH comms you need)

Run WZs (which have plenty of people abusing hacks because BW barely polices it, a half-implemented bracket system, and 4 repetitive maps with no world PvP since Ilum was killed)

Run dailies (which get incredibly old insanely fast because of how few there are)

 

In WoW you have:

 

Run Raids (same as here)

Run HMs (same as here, but a bigger variety of dungeons)

Run BGs or Arena (with tons of different maps for both, and a bit of world pvp too even though it's been marginalized)

Run dailies (of which there are a pretty big variety, including dailies from previous expansions which people still do because they provide special mounts/tabards/pets you can't get elsewhere)

Run old raids for transmogrification gear

Run old dungeons & raids for achievements and mount drops

Fly around doing archaeology for fun while waiting for a Raid/Dungon/Pvp queue to pop...oh and after the instance/battleground is over you're deposited right back where you were

Fishing or hunting for useful stat boosting consumables

 

WoW because of it's sandboxy nature provides plenty for it's players to do at max level, and it's frequently arranged in such a way to be convenient to the player. Bioware's missed on a lot of little things like this and it all eventually added up and drove people away:

 

-no moddable UI and click casting making healers jobs take twice the button pushes than games with clickcasting

-no dual spec making GF have a critical shortage of heals and tanks

-running back to where you were before after a HM/Op

 

and one of the biggest peeves of many:

 

-In WoW you are actively encouraged to use the transmogrification system. The cost of transmogging items is cheap, you just have to have the proper armor piece farmed from the desired tier of content. This encourages players to play MORE by running old raids for drops they want so they can have a customized armor look they desire. And since it works like a "paint it on" feature you never have to sacrifice a set bonus or stats on whatever armor you're using.

 

-in TOR you're almost discouraged from using different looking armors. Set bonuses don't carry over from the opening tiers of gear which are the most common and probably 95%+ players don't bother to raid HM EC where the armor bonuses do transfer. Moreover the cost of extracting the mods is obscene, running days worth of credits from dailies just to change your appearance once when a BW rep stated how poor the typical TOR player is. It makes no sense.

 

In WoW when a character reaches max level I always am able to find stuff to do on them, and don't feel pressed to get on my alt. On TOR there's been so little to do at max level I've almost leveled as many characters in 8 months than I did in WoW in 8 years. That's kind of absurd.

Edited August 30, 2012 by matapat

[Soluss]

Why would they bother to test a new operation? They obviously haven't done so in the past.

 

Oh they test them, they just dont fix them before they hit live.

[Vandicus]

DA2 was a railroad plot and the same dungeon over and over. The choices really didn't matter because the ending was always going to be the same no matter who you sided with. That and dead Leliana came back because Gaider apparently likes her (Anders somehow came back to life as well).

 

ME2 and 3 were wannabe shooters-to get the 'best' ending in ME3 you even have to engage in their multiplayer. If the ME3 ending (not plural since there is only one with different colors) was rushed why did they defend it so strongly as artistic choice instead of admitting it wasn't quite what they wanted to do? Why did one writer talk about it on Penny Arcade before being forced to deny it (which apparently means his account was hacked, even though no one would actually say that). Seems like Casey Hudson had plenty of time to come up with his idea for the Catalyst.

 

Bioware has believed their own hype for far too long-it's not EA's fault the games are getting worse, it's Bioware arrogance. TOR is just another example-MMO players want to create alts endlessly, not participate in any endgame activities, right?

 

You're welcome to your own opinions. I'll not derail this thread into a debate about other the strengths and weaknesses of other games. I doubt you played ME2 or ME3 though, or know anything about Retake ME3 or the endings besides what you copy/pasted from a skim the surface complaint. I can tell you however that the majority definitely do not share your beliefs about ME2 or ME3. Every person identifying themselves as part of Retake ME3 acclaimed the rest of ME3 as great(beautiful, amazing, and incredible in fact), bar the ending(which had been changed just prior to shipping according to development logs that were released, and can immediately be verified by listening to the dialogue, which is still sort've nonsensical with the extended cut since it was designed for a different ending) .

[Vandicus]

With the massive amount of people that have left the game since it's launch, I'd say the majority's views definitely are in line with this. Rift lost a boatload of subscribers in the same timeframe too, but the game was produced with a fraction of the budget this one was and the population eventually stabilized. By the slowly dwindling populations I'm seeing on the merge servers I'd say we're still dropping here, and it's looking increasingly likely Terror From Beyond is not coming out before MoP hits on 9/25.

 

Scorpienne's numbers indicate we're losing PvPers and gaining RPers(if we quantify by server type). PvE has remained about stable. As of yet we haven't recieved news of TFB being pushed back from September so we're still expecting it to release in the same month as MoP.

[matapat]

Scorpienne's numbers indicate we're losing PvPers and gaining RPers(if we quantify by server type). PvE has remained about stable. As of yet we haven't recieved news of TFB being pushed back from September so we're still expecting it to release in the same month as MoP.

 

There are two days left in August and it's still not on PTS with no word from the Devs when it will be. Considering how long 1.2 was testing EC there's no way it's hitting before October unless they rush the heck out of it.

[Vandicus]

There are two days left in August and it's still not on PTS with no word from the Devs when it will be. Considering how long 1.2 was testing EC there's no way it's hitting before October unless they rush the heck out of it.

 

Yeah they're probably going to rush it. I'm guessing last couple days of September it comes out. The way I see it, regardless of how buggy it is we can at least get our tier 2.5 earlier than if they delay it.

[Reble-Dog-Squad]

I would REALLY be surprised it any new content comes out before F2P, with so much silence and little time left it doesn't seem logical that they would release any content for us, instead they will keep it for F2P so that they have something to entice new players to the F2P model.

[Tuscad]

Here is the way I see things: I believe the test server is done. They supposedly don't know if they are going to charge subbers for Makeb or not, if they are going to charge then why would the put it up on the test server to where people could play it for free? Just my thoughts on the matter.

[Vandicus]

I would REALLY be surprised it any new content comes out before F2P, with so much silence and little time left it doesn't seem logical that they would release any content for us, instead they will keep it for F2P so that they have something to entice new players to the F2P model.

 

Except that much of the content announced is not for f2p or is end game content(which f2p will take a good while to reach).

 

Ancient Hypergates

Terror From Beyond

Nightmare Denova

Makeb

HK-51

 

You're not entirely incorrect in your assessment that some finished or near finished content is being withheld. Ancient Hypergates for example is currently in a playable state. I have no doubt that you will be "Really Surprised" when some of this content comes out pre-November.

[Cordelia]

I would REALLY be surprised it any new content comes out before F2P, with so much silence and little time left it doesn't seem logical that they would release any content for us, instead they will keep it for F2P so that they have something to entice new players to the F2P model.

 

I think this is the most likely scenario depending on when F2P is actually implemented. I think it would be a waste of the content to release it around the time of MoP, as despite what people say about pandas, many will be enticed by the idea of a new class and continent. This would totally overshadow anything TOR releases at the time.Then, as you say it can be used to entice the new F2P crowd.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Cordelia

[Valkirus]

With the massive amount of people that have left the game since it's launch, I'd say the majority's views definitely are in line with this. Rift lost a boatload of subscribers in the same timeframe too, but the game was produced with a fraction of the budget this one was and the population eventually stabilized. By the slowly dwindling populations I'm seeing on the merge servers I'd say we're still dropping here, and it's looking increasingly likely Terror From Beyond is not coming out before MoP hits on 9/25.

 

When I think of the things I can do on my character here at max level compared to what I can do in WoW, it's kind of depressing. Yeah I know WoW has 8 years worth of content stacked up but the difference between sandbox and themepark MMOs is pretty blatant. Here you have these options:

 

Run Ops (one week lockout)

Run HMs (become superfluous once you have all the BH comms you need)

Run WZs (which have plenty of people abusing hacks because BW barely polices it, a half-implemented bracket system, and 4 repetitive maps with no world PvP since Ilum was killed)

Run dailies (which get incredibly old insanely fast because of how few there are)

 

In WoW you have:

 

Run Raids (same as here)

Run HMs (same as here, but a bigger variety of dungeons)

Run BGs or Arena (with tons of different maps for both, and a bit of world pvp too even though it's been marginalized)

Run dailies (of which there are a pretty big variety, including dailies from previous expansions which people still do because they provide special mounts/tabards/pets you can't get elsewhere)

Run old raids for transmogrification gear

Run old dungeons & raids for achievements and mount drops

Fly around doing archaeology for fun while waiting for a Raid/Dungon/Pvp queue to pop...oh and after the instance/battleground is over you're deposited right back where you were

Fishing or hunting for useful stat boosting consumables

 

WoW because of it's sandboxy nature provides plenty for it's players to do at max level, and it's frequently arranged in such a way to be convenient to the player. Bioware's missed on a lot of little things like this and it all eventually added up and drove people away:

 

-no moddable UI and click casting making healers jobs take twice the button pushes than games with clickcasting

-no dual spec making GF have a critical shortage of heals and tanks

-running back to where you were before after a HM/Op

 

and one of the biggest peeves of many:

 

-In WoW you are actively encouraged to use the transmogrification system. The cost of transmogging items is cheap, you just have to have the proper armor piece farmed from the desired tier of content. This encourages players to play MORE by running old raids for drops they want so they can have a customized armor look they desire. And since it works like a "paint it on" feature you never have to sacrifice a set bonus or stats on whatever armor you're using.

 

-in TOR you're almost discouraged from using different looking armors. Set bonuses don't carry over from the opening tiers of gear which are the most common and probably 95%+ players don't bother to raid HM EC where the armor bonuses do transfer. Moreover the cost of extracting the mods is obscene, running days worth of credits from dailies just to change your appearance once when a BW rep stated how poor the typical TOR player is. It makes no sense.

 

In WoW when a character reaches max level I always am able to find stuff to do on them, and don't feel pressed to get on my alt. On TOR there's been so little to do at max level I've almost leveled as many characters in 8 months than I did in WoW in 8 years. That's kind of absurd.

 

And in MOP there will be even more to do....a lot more. 3 new raids, 9 heroic 5 mans and challenge modes , farming profession...the list goes on and on....

[CharleyDanger]

I know that The Bastion has seen no real drop off since Tuesday (At least two instances on the fleet most times of the day) With the GW2 launch I think that is amazing. The game may not have a million subs anymore, but it looks like there are a lot of people that truly love the game. I think this game has a great core, and if Bioware can crank out some quality content every month or so, I think the game has a bright future.

[LordArtemis]

At every stage of the losses this game has suffered, an excuse emerged that game fans rallied around. At this point it seems the common excuse seems to be that "all games have suffered this kind of attrition 9 months after release".

 

So in effect it is being said that all games (except WoW) have lost over 50 percent of their launch sub base within 9 months. Well, lets investigate that, shall we?

 

Aion - Launched with around 200 to 500k in subs, 9 months later had 4 million players.

Lineage - Launched with around 100k in players in 1998, 9 months later had 500k in players.

 

Everquest - Less than 50k at launch, around 175k at the 9 month mark.

 

FFXI, LotRO, Rift, Second Life, Eve Online, DAoC, CoH/V, SWG, etc.

 

The list goes on and on. All you have to do is look up the ACTUAL information. In truth, there appears to be only three games...just three comparable games....AAA MMOs that launched and 9 months later had lost 50 percent or more of it's playerbase...

 

Warhammer Online, AoC and....SWToR.

 

It seems the common accepted flaw between all three games? The games launched incomplete.

 

All three games had serious content holes and flaws, bugs and gameplay issues. All three had strong voices before launch warning about the flaws and pointing out the game was not ready, all three launched and had catastrophic losses.

 

(One could point out Tabula Rasa, Vangaurd, PotBS, PotC, Sims online and STO, but should those games even be compared to this game? If I add STO to the list it ends up falling into the same problem category...incomplete, warnings, losses.)

 

So no...not ALL games have suffered this "attrition" in this time frame. Three comparable AAA MMOs have. And all three had reasons to lose such an alarming amount of players in such a short time.

 

They ignored their players, either by choice or necessity, and suffered the consequences as a result.

Edited August 30, 2012 by LordArtemis

[NinjaApacHe]

Last night 3 istances of Imperial Fleet on ToFN, and all planets with plenty of players. So it's happening what predicted: people are coming back from holidays and deluded by GW2.