The sky isn't falling. A numbers based view.

[Tim-ONeil]

No new data equals same as old data.

 

Very scientific......

 

I'll just make up my own numbers then. As long as they are extremely low you'd be satisfied right?

 

There's no point in hiding your personal bias anymore. Everyone has an agenda, I started the thread to see how things actually were from a realistic point of view using data available and it's turned into an I think we have 200k players thread at the end by people that want that to be the case.

 

No new data is just that. If you choose to read anything more into it then it's completely 100% your opinion at that point and because of that there's nothing left to discuss here.

[Andryah]

If there are 500k to a million subs then where are the players? Anytime I log on I see 100-200 on fleet and a spattering where ever I go. I am not necessarily saying these numbers are wrong but they just don't seem to gel with what I see in game.

 

Did you check to see if there were multiple Fleet instances? I was on Harbinger last night and there were three active on the Imperial side, and any planet I visited was buzzing with multiple instances as well.

 

The current set of servers appear to be pretty stable now days in terms of populations. Well, except for general chat.....that was a complete melt down yesterday with all the Disney this and Disney that rochambeauing going on everywhere I traveled. But that's intra-server social instability, no actual population instability.

Edited October 31, 2012 by Andryah

[Urael]

Did you check to see if there were multiple Fleet instances? I was on Harbinger last night and there were three active on the Imperial side, and any planet I visited was buzzing with multiple instances as well.

 

The current set of servers appear to be pretty stable now days in terms of populations. Well, except for general chat.....that was a complete melt down yesterday with all the Disney this and Disney that rochambeauing going on everywhere I traveled. But that's intra-server social instability, no actual population instability.

 

+10 for working that word into a post.

[Mindphaze]

I think you need to add Turbine's Asheron's Call to that list. It came out in late November 1999, and to this day it is still PAY TO PLAY and in 2012 still has players paying for subs. An accurate sub number would be nice to see. Edited October 31, 2012 by Mindphaze

[Andryah]

+10 for working that word into a post.

 

Hehe... yeah.. well I was having actual South Park flashbacks watching general chat channels last night.

[chuixupu]

Harbinger is definitely one of the biggest ones at the moment. I have actually seen up to 6 instances of the fleet at times. Jedi Covenent isn't quite as big but there's always at least 2 fleet instances.

[Andryah]

I think you need to add Turbine's Asheron's Call to that list. It came out in late November 1999, and to this day it is still PAY TO PLAY and in 2012 still has players paying for subs. An accurate sub number would be nice to see.

 

Well, this entire thread was more based on the modern era (as in the last 3-4 years) for MMOs.

 

MMOdata quit tracking Asherons Call in 2007. At that time.. it had between 10-15K total. I'm sure it's probably around the same level today... because of the nostalgics in the MMO community. It never had more then ~100K subs, even at it's early peak in 2001-2002.

[Surakis]

If there are 500k to a million subs then where are the players? Anytime I log on I see 100-200 on fleet and a spattering where ever I go. I am not necessarily saying these numbers are wrong but they just don't seem to gel with what I see in game.

 

That's like saying Sandy isn't really going on because when I go outside it's clear and pleasant weather.

[Aragorrius]

Awesome to see some rational thinking and numbers to back up feelings...

 

Too often this fan base just acts like an angry mob following the witch that cry's wolf burning the innocents at the stake...

[LordArtemis]

The only metric that can be used to estimate current subs is by looking at the loss rate over time. It is the only information available.

 

Though I still feel VERY strongly that sub levels at this point no longer matter with the new business model, if one projects the relatively steady loss of subs since launch, and one assumes that loss rate continues (which is certainly arguable) that would place the subs somewhere north of 300k to 800k subs at this point. A wide range, certainly, but the only range that can be guessed at based on actual released information.

 

Even if subs are on the low end of that range, it is very likely, IMO, that the F2P launch will reverse that trend.

[simplius]

Awesome to see some rational thinking and numbers to back up feelings...

 

Too often this fan base just acts like an angry mob following the witch that cry's wolf burning the innocents at the stake...

 

thats the downside of big IPs,,they have strong emotions attached to them

 

just like "real" love, strong feeling can blow things out of proportions

 

i still cant sleep , because of all the news we had today,,hopefully this is a turning point

 

MICKEY MOUSE for WORLD PRESIDENT:cool:

[JarekCyphus]

The only thing I'll point out is that the GW2 having more revenue is a flawed statement. They might have sold more boxes but SWTOR sold Digital Deluxe and Collectors editions are premium price points to generate enough from initial box sales to make back their investment in the game.

 

Add to this 10 months of collecting subscription fees and it's no contest really.

 

You're not accounting for the micro-transaction sales that have occurred in GW2 since its launch. Lack of a subscription fee and no obligations to other subscriptions makes paying a little extra (especially for flavor items and a recent, highly successful Halloween event) a lot more appealing than if you were to pay a subscription fee AND have that carrot dangling in front of your face. Okay, so maybe SWTOR's 10 months of subscription revenue from 500k (roughly) subs may give it an edge on GW2, but it pales in comparison to the success GW2 has already known in its first two months of release. Good publicity versus SWTOR's bad publicity.

 

Going F2P by the game's 1 year anniversary is a good move, whether people will agree with it or not. If they take cues from ArenaNet and make the perks from continuing subs appealing to the longterm player, then there may yet be a recovery in sight for this game. If SWTOR's trend continues, however, then it won't be long before GW2 surpasses SWTOR completely. If you deny that, then you're simply deluding yourself with the blind hope that "your" game will succeed. Many of us have already been down that road with SWG.

[Comstrike]

You take MMOdata as gospel. Fine. So be it, I'll take that at face value. But I can't rate their stats, or the hard and fast conclusions coming out of it, as more than speculation. Although yours and a few others at least makes an honest effort of it.

 

There are no airtight figures out there. Likely we never will have any.

[LegendaryBlade]

SWTOR is considered a failure largely due to it's huge investment cost. None of the other games you listed invested the same amount of money in to the game as SWTOR did and, worse yet, many of them were still considered failure. STO, which according to your own information only have 5% less retention, is often considered a failure at launch. Even most players (and myself) will tell you it didn't get good until a year after launch.

 

Not to mention a lot of people are expecting another huge drop once the year-long subs that aren't renewing drop. I don't know if anybody remembers the drop after two months from people not renewing.

[ivanhedgehog]

Somewhere I read that SWTOR would need to keep over 500k subs for over 1 year to break even; anything over that is a win for them. Just a few more months to go... With the rate of updates right now I think they will break even, especially with the Cartel Market coming to the game. It's amazing how much money people are willing to spend on a f2p game... lol

 

The problems this weekend after the release of f2p havent help a bit. Rolling back servers and telling people that lost cartel coins to suck it up is not an option. aside from the legalities in some states, this will drive out subscribers and that wont help a bit. They need to step up and actually fix something for once.

[DarthCrisious]

Damn no posts on here for about a month! All I can say is the game is well done, has a good story and I will continue to support it via my monthly subscription and buying the expansions, whether or not I'm actually playing.

[nartiuslightlord]

never seen this one or did I? Edited December 20, 2012 by nartiuslightlord

[Tamanous]

NOOOOO but SWG was the greatest game evar!!! TOR needs to be turned into SWG2 NAO!!!!

 

/sarcasm off

 

The SWG 30k sub at cancel is total players. The last weeks of the game had only 6k-9k peak time players logged in ... and yet, like you joked, you see everyone talking about the game as if it were the greatest mmo ever made.

 

Other than it's sandbox features the game was quite terrible. If you wanted to play Barbie it was great and even I like those elements but the RPG world, game and physics were quite terrible and largely based upon the engine itself.

 

I just think Bioware needs to take a hard look at this game and put serious effort into quality of life features that keep players away. The core game has some very fun elements to it and is an alternative themepark play style that will appeal to many players.

Edited December 20, 2012 by Tamanous

[Grammarye]

You're not accounting for the micro-transaction sales that have occurred in GW2 since its launch. Lack of a subscription fee and no obligations to other subscriptions makes paying a little extra (especially for flavor items and a recent, highly successful Halloween event) a lot more appealing than if you were to pay a subscription fee AND have that carrot dangling in front of your face. Okay, so maybe SWTOR's 10 months of subscription revenue from 500k (roughly) subs may give it an edge on GW2, but it pales in comparison to the success GW2 has already known in its first two months of release. Good publicity versus SWTOR's bad publicity.

 

Going F2P by the game's 1 year anniversary is a good move, whether people will agree with it or not. If they take cues from ArenaNet and make the perks from continuing subs appealing to the longterm player, then there may yet be a recovery in sight for this game. If SWTOR's trend continues, however, then it won't be long before GW2 surpasses SWTOR completely. If you deny that, then you're simply deluding yourself with the blind hope that "your" game will succeed. Many of us have already been down that road with SWG.

It's almost impossible to track this precisely because neither TOR nor GW2 release figures on their Cartel Coin/Gem sales, nor would they have any interest in doing so.

 

Considering that GW2 (unlike GW1) has a lot more discontent visible over the way the cash shop is being ... encouraged... I'd say it's not quite so clear cut as your somewhat biased post suggests. I speak as an avid player of both games, so it's hardly a case of 'my game'.

[Kalfear]

Quote: Originally Posted by Tim-ONeil

SWG had under 30k players before the sunsetting announcement.

NOOOOO but SWG was the greatest game evar!!! TOR needs to be turned into SWG2 NAO!!!!

 

/sarcasm off

 

LOL, congrats, you found the one usefull line in that OPs post (I stopped reading when he said the truth in the numbers but didnt use the real number and instead created straw man arguements comparing to other games. More fanboi spin)

 

And love the sarcasm

 

As for thread, truth is in the number

 

2.1 million subs at launch

under 400k subs now (as per EA statement)

any other numbers are completely meaningless and nothing but spin

 

Personally I could care less how TOR ranks to WOW.

WOW was a terrible game with amazing marketing

TOR is a moderate game with terrible marketing

 

Im waiting on next shareholder meeting for new numbers

Should be a interesting read

Sadly we already know EA counts f2p accounts as subscriptions so hopefully the investors demand more transparency.

I know Id love to know what the real sub numbers are.

 

And in the end, None of that matters to me and my playing TOR

Ill leave when Im done or when all my friends leave or when it becomes P2W.

 

But then again im not a employee of EA, hired to spin and promote TOR on the forums (as others are rumored to be). I have no agenda beyond common interest and curiosity.

[LtBombshell]

It pains me to see people saying this game is dead, but whether it is or not, I find it irrelevant. I personally love this game and will continue to play it for a long time.

[Rafaman]

It pains me to see people saying this game is dead, but whether it is or not, I find it irrelevant. I personally love this game and will continue to play it for a long time.

 

Indeed. It is a matter of perspective. Mine is simply that I'm having fun and will continue to have fun for many months if not years. I've already pre purchased Makeb.

[tzagheru]

It pains me to see people saying this game is dead, but whether it is or not, I find it irrelevant. I personally love this game and will continue to play it for a long time.

 

It also saddens me to see ppl with such low gaming standards, regarding endgame pve and pvp.

But as you say its irrelevant, somebody's trash is someone else's treasure.

[DarkkChaos]

It is quite clear this game, since launching the F2P model, has starting making a comeback.

 

Pre-F2P, you would barely see 2 instances of fleets...and even now, after F2P has been in effect for a going on 2 months, peak hours are seeing 4 instances!

 

Whatever was happening to this game BEFORE, sure isn't happening now. Everyday, I see returning players posting in general chat, I see people deciding to sub...instead of staying F2P.

 

The best decision this game has made since it launched....was going F2P. This game is FAR from dieing..and anyone that played it BEFORE F2P, can see that.

 

The whole "this game is going down" gang....are just doing what internet trolls do, spewing uneducated mumbo-jumbo......as has happened since the dawn of the internet......and as will continue as long as we have an internet.

Edited December 21, 2012 by DarkkChaos

[LordArtemis]

Well, frankly, the sky fell. The numbers prove it without even a shred of doubt. The subs nosedived, period. The reasons are debatable, but the fact it happened is now beyond argument.

 

However, that nosedive seems to have stopped, and perhaps populations are now stable...even on the rise.

 

So, in short, it's time to stop with the spin about sub losses. It happened. It's also a bit silly to try and contend that subs are still nosediving, as that seems to not be the case based on in game attendance, pretty obvious.

 

Enough with the back and forth guys if either group wants to be taken seriously. You do not need vindication Tortanic group, the game did in fact bomb pretty spectacularly. Again, the reasons are speculative, but it did in fact lose over 80 percent of it's original subs in under a year.

 

Nor do you need to defend the game or sub numbers Torleaders, you are defending a game that does not get the credit it deserves, there is no doubt of that, the game is not the craptastic fubarfest that some would like others to believe. What the game does well it does the best in the industry IMO, arguable of course.

 

Both groups are hereby recognized.

 

Now, can we get back to giving the game vital critical feedback so it can continue to evolve and improve instead of this testosterone contest we seem to be engaging in?

Edited December 21, 2012 by LordArtemis