61 replies to this topic

[Kyrie]

Hey all,

I thought I would start a somewhat tongue-in-cheek discussion on one of the implications that joining Steam will have for PGI:

Steamchart user count tracking

For the longest time PGI has hidden the user-count from the public as part of its company secrets. By joining Steam, the user-count of Steam players playing MWO will always be visible in real-time, as well as with statistics on changes over time (weekly, monthly, etc).

So, PGI, are you guys really ready to bite the bullet on showing the numbers finally once again? :-)

[Theodore42]

They haven't really been spending money on advertising for new players and Steam would also buff their numbers in a BIG way. If they get solid MM and CW together for a Steam release and advertise for it in a big way, their numbers will go through the roof.

If they had jumped on Steam and done a huge advertising campaign in 2013, their player count would have gone up insanely, then crashed insanely, and this game would probably already be dead, even before clan mechs dropped.

Timing is everything

[Pjwned]

Depending on how Steam integration is handled, players could still be in the game without using the Steam client if they so chose.

That is an interesting point though.

[Kyrie]

Well, I for one have always objected to the removal of the user-count. I suspect that indirectly, the decision to make the user-count a company secret is one of the reasons we never had a chat system -- a chat system would let us see numbers.

I think that if MWO is going on Steam, they should simply let the numbers be public, and give us a chat system.

[orcrist86]

The real implication is VoIP and the possibility of new matchmaking methods.

[Kyrie]

orcrist86, on 11 January 2015 - 12:17 PM, said:

The real implication is VoIP and the possibility of new matchmaking methods.

VoIP has actually nothing to do with Steam. A lot of F2P games refuse to integrate VoIP on Steam. ;-)

[Sarlic]

Isnt it only for Steam users? Not affecting current players?

[Kyrie]

Sarlic, on 11 January 2015 - 12:34 PM, said:

Isnt it only for Steam users? Not affecting current players?

PGI will be forced to reveal the players playing MWO using the Steam app, since the steam app that runs in the background will track the game you are playing when started with Steam.

However, because PGI will be forced to reveal at least that much, why not just show the whole numbers as most games do?

[Screech]

Honestly I don't think they will mind that much, they seem pretty comfortable in their skin these days. I question what exactly people think they will do with this information? Once they have it what will be accomplished?

Edited by Screech, 11 January 2015 - 12:37 PM.

[Kyrie]

Screech, on 11 January 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

Honestly I don't think they will mind that much, they seem pretty comfortable in their skin these days. I question what exactly people think they will do with this information? Once they have it what will be accomplished?

The concern from PGI has been that if users perceive the game population to be shrinking, it contributes to the likelihood of others who were marginally invested in the game to quit as well. In a sense it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- a game that has momentum in population tends to keep it, while those that are losing numbers have a much harder time recovering.

A botched Steam launch is the final death-knell for any game. Because Steam users can track the population count, they know whether it is worth even trying the F2P title to begin with.

PGI's main problem with Steam is going to be the 30% they are going to take right off the top of gross revenues; their second issue is going to be adjusting to the fact that Steam insists on user-count tracking. If PGI is serious about going on Steam, they should begin, IMHO, by abandoning their "company secrets" stance on user-counts as a general principle.

[Robin Wolf]

Oh well, I'm not gonna quit because others do. As long as there are enough people around and I enjoy the game, I'm gonna stay here. Hopefully, there are likeminded people sharing my view, here

Also, I believe the more transparency, the more confidence people will put on PGI.

[Brody319]

Free advertising Is the big thing I think. WoT has a lot of TV advertisement that I think greatly increases their player base while MWO is kinda restricted to the word of mouth.

[Shatterpoint]

The player count isn't due to lack of advertising it's due to the game and the community.

Look at the new player advice, it's all crap based from fan boys. Go on there and tell people how screwed they'll be at the start and watch the white knights show up telling people how they'll roll everyone in their shiny new recruit bonus mech...10 matches later that potential new guy is either a firm clan member or playing something else.

The game has massive issues, lying to new people just shoots MWO in the foot..tell people it's hard and they're screwed from the start so you get the right people into the game who in turn recruit similar like minded people. The eve online mindset..you're ****** mate, it's up to your neck when you start but you can dig your way out be someone worth a damn.

Edited by Shatterpoint, 11 January 2015 - 01:23 PM.

[Screech]

Kyrie, on 11 January 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

The concern from PGI has been that if users perceive the game population to be shrinking, it contributes to the likelihood of others who were marginally invested in the game to quit as well. In a sense it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- a game that has momentum in population tends to keep it, while those that are losing numbers have a much harder time recovering.

Was that PGI's concern or IGP's regarding the numbers? PGI seemed to have no issue with putting out numbers in the CW. I think the concerns from 2012 are not the same as the concerns in 2015. But I suppose people need their windmills to do battle with to stay happy.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Reviews, a game I have been watching came out of "early access" (open beta), and a single user made it their sole purpose to tank the game with grass roots campaign to down-vote the game. I suspect MWO will suffer the same fate with the amount of anonymous players with an axe to grind.

[Coolant]

As long as my friends and I always get a match, and PGI is making enough money to continue development, number of players is a luxury I can do without. Would I like to know? Sure, but not necessary.

[LameoveR]

So, when it's goin' to come on steam?

[Kyrie]

Coolant, on 11 January 2015 - 02:18 PM, said:

As long as my friends and I always get a match, and PGI is making enough money to continue development, number of players is a luxury I can do without. Would I like to know? Sure, but not necessary.

The issue of the numbers is related to the issue of the chat system, or lack thereof. I am approaching it somewhat backhandedly, but the gist of the problem goes like this:

1) CW needs communication and coordination
2) CW implies a need for communication specifically within CW but also within the game itself in general (f. ex, attracting units to your faction needs ways to communicate with them in a general game chat).

We have never had a game chat in MWO, and its well past time it got a comprehensive system of communication precisely because CW makes it necessary.

The main reason, I am conjecturing, that PGI has never implemented a game chat functionality is that it would invariably reveal user counts. That and the fact that there was little true *need* to coordinate between players until now.

A public game chat would serve many useful non-CW functions:

1) Recruitment into Units
2) Advice/Help from Veteran Players
3) Grouping for the Group queue, planning specific battles
4) Coordinating non-standard matches using the premium-time special matches feature
5) Many others.

So lets get those chat systems rolling PGI, and put in the numbers without fear. ;-)

[TotalCookie]

Kyrie, on 11 January 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

The concern from PGI has been that if users perceive the game population to be shrinking, it contributes to the likelihood of others who were marginally invested in the game to quit as well. In a sense it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- a game that has momentum in population tends to keep it, while those that are losing numbers have a much harder time recovering.

A botched Steam launch is the final death-knell for any game. Because Steam users can track the population count, they know whether it is worth even trying the F2P title to begin with.

PGI's main problem with Steam is going to be the 30% they are going to take right off the top of gross revenues; their second issue is going to be adjusting to the fact that Steam insists on user-count tracking. If PGI is serious about going on Steam, they should begin, IMHO, by abandoning their "company secrets" stance on user-counts as a general principle.

Look at some other F2P games on Steam who got there one or two years ago. Less than half of their players use Steam. It isn't a good player counter if players are not forced to play through it. Also, the aforementioned F2P games have been doing quite good since they were published on Steam. I don't think it's "the final death-kneel".

[Kyrie]

TotalCookie, on 11 January 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

Look at some other F2P games on Steam who got there one or two years ago. Less than half of their players use Steam. It isn't a good player counter if players are not forced to play through it. Also, the aforementioned F2P games have been doing quite good since they were published on Steam. I don't think it's "the final death-kneel".

When you go on Steam, the Steam community judges you by the Steam counter, and the Steam Store page and Steam Community page, in that order.

Game developers choose to go on Steam and face the 30% haircut based on the massive advantage that Steam offers as a marketing platform. The numbers on that marketing platform do matter. ;-)