115 replies to this topic

[Thorn Hallis]

Sifright, on 20 December 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

but yea the real proof is that when I play 8man games it can take upto 6-7 attempts to get a game.

If the player numbers were healthy that wouldn't be happening given how the match making system at the moment is any eight vs any eight which should be instant matches.

Thats a proof that the "competitive gameplay" isn't as competitive as it should be...or some self proclaimed "competive teams" found themselfes not so competitive at all after some losing rounds...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Sifright, on 20 December 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

but yea the real proof is that when I play 8man games it can take upto 6-7 attempts to get a game.

If the player numbers were healthy that wouldn't be happening given how the match making system at the moment is any eight vs any eight which should be instant matches.

thought this was the fault of ECM and noone wanting to 8 man

Gallowglas, on 20 December 2012 - 02:02 PM, said:

For rational people, perhaps. However, every single forum troll uses their anecdotal evidence that because there are 100 fewer people on one night versus another that it means the game is dying. It happens all the time in WoW. The moment any sort of numbers are reported, idiots come out of the woodwork to prophesize doom. Heck, people were doing it almost immediately after they showed up in MWO. I'm sure some would legitimately use it for simple matchmaking informational purposes, but my guess is that a whole lot would just use it for the purposes I describe.

happens in EVE too which is funny when they have more accounts now than they ever did before

http://www.forbes.co...e-sets-records/

but that doesnt make them RIGHT

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 December 2012 - 02:04 PM.

[Major Cockburn]

IronEagle, on 20 December 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

In closed beta we had a counter that displayed the number of players online.
It usually was from 1000 up to 4000 players ready to rumble.

It would be nice to see what effect the introduction of new items or game mechanics
on the playerbase has.

Thank you in advance

they wont PGI doesn't want to be embarrassed by publishing the small user base #s

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Thorn Hallis, on 20 December 2012 - 02:03 PM, said:

Thats a proof that the "competitive gameplay" isn't as competitive as it should be...or some self proclaimed "competive teams" found themselfes not so competitive at all after some losing rounds...

eh? who?

[Gallowglas]

Some of the responses in this thread do nothing but reinforce my point. Just sayin'

[Quinton]

sigh, i've said it before, but it needs to be said again.

remember, when considering any change to something that will affect a large (more than 10) number of people:

PEOPLE ARE STUPID

and much like cattle in the respect that it only takes 1 person screaming doom! to set the whole damn herd off and cause a stampede.
Anyone who's watched stock markets can attest to this, one ***** sells his stock and suddenly every other ***** in the market is throwing it all away on the assumption the world is ending.

[Sifright]

i'll just sit here being

because 8man gaming ends up being against the same two teams every time. Until both teams stop playing after they get stomped repeatedly.

[Sifright]

Rationality > all.

I mean when I played eve online a lot, I really abused that simple statement.

Would a rational person believe some one is going to sell a +3 9million ISK implant for a mere 2.5 million?

You would be surprised at the number of people who snapped them up for 250 million back in the day when I played.

Or the number of people who thought I ****** up a contract in the escrow which meant they ended up giving me a navy Raven for standard one with them giving 900 million on top?

Yea....

Most people are idiots to be honest, I ended up leaving eve online because I felt my self being pushed towards acting that way in real life towards people who were shall we say more than slightly dim....

tl;dr

People are dumb regardless of what the facts are might as well have the real figures out there.

[Gallowglas]

Buddahcjcc, on 20 December 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

"better to be thought a failure than to post the numbers and prove them right" is the logic gallowglas?

I suppose. I just think it's more that the negative impact of showing those numbers, whatever they might be at any point in time, far, far outweighs any potential (and likely marginal) benefit to anyone here.

[Anastasius]

Sifright, on 20 December 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Stupid pic

That is because most people want easy wins and stat padding. Real competitors are few and far between.

[Bryan Ekman]

Moogles, on 20 December 2012 - 01:20 PM, said:

They won't bring it back because the numbers are lower than they were in closed beta; which is quite frankly embarrassing. Their excuse was that the tiny counter took up too much bandwidth or something.

Misinformation is dangerous. Do you have a source for your comments? I can most definitely refute it had anything to do with bandwidth...

We removed the online counter for the same reason we don't release exact registration numbers, it's viewed as a business metric for now.

I know it's lame, but it's a double edge sword. Releasing the information is generally viewed one of two ways, positive or negative. Chances are we (PGI/IGP) view the numbers differently than you (players), because we understand better where the numbers should be, and why they are what they are. We can look at other indicators, like matches played, unique logins, MC sales, etc etc, and see positive trends where others would assume negative trends.

A good example is there was a massive spike of online players when we went OB followed by a quick drop and return to normal levels. We see this all the time when content is released. The trend however, is still one of steady average growth.

Looks something like this:



For those curious we had a record day on December 18th and continue to build week-over-week.

[Sifright]

Anastasius, on 20 December 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

That is because most people want easy wins and stat padding. Real competitors are few and far between.

my opponents in 8 mens are the easy mode.

if I want a hard game I go solo pug and charge the enemy team like a bawse.

1 VS 8 and smashing the enemy team to pieces is how I get my clanner role play in.

[Comguard]

There was a thread were we monitored the new user accounts (you can see the numbers at the bottom of the main forum page).

You can read it here (the thread was eventually closed):

http://mwomercs.com/...h/page__st__160

Edited by Comguard, 20 December 2012 - 02:29 PM.

[Sifright]

Bryan Ekman, on 20 December 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

Misinformation is dangerous. Do you have a source for your comments? I can most definitely refute it had anything to do with bandwidth...

We removed the online counter for the same reason we don't release exact registration numbers, it's viewed as a business metric for now.

I know it's lame, but it's a double edge sword. Releasing the information is generally viewed one of two ways, positive or negative. Chances are we (PGI/IGP) view the numbers differently than you (players), because we understand better where the numbers should be, and why they are what they are. We can look at other indicators, like matches played, unique logins, MC sales, etc etc, and see positive trends where others would assume negative trends.

A good example is there was a massive spike of online players when we went OB followed by a quick drop and return to normal levels. We see this all the time when content is released. The trend however, is still one of steady average growth.

Looks something like this:



For those curious we had a record day on December 18th and continue to build week-over-week.

I wish I could believe this, my experience *admittedly anecdotal* is that I end up playing against the same few people constantly.

It could be a function of low player base in my peak gaming hours but even so :\

[Major Cockburn]

that's also assuming they aren't padding the numbers

[Anastasius]

Accually there are only 27 people playing MWO the rest are bots.

[Major Cockburn]

Anastasius, on 20 December 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

Accually there are only 27 people playing MWO the rest are bots.

explains why most of em play so poorly.

[Broceratops]

i see a lot of non founder tag people now. more than before. this is just the feeling i have in my head of course, but i think population is on the upswing.

that doesn't mean they're making any money, but I'm not fearing that they'll go THQ on us in the next half year

[Comguard]

Total Members today:
415,888

Total Members 26 November, the day the thread was closed:
406,201

Around 400 new users per day.

[Bryan Ekman]

M A L I C E, on 20 December 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

Are those literal numbers on the Y axis there Bryan? Kidding, I'm certain that's meant to represent thousands.

lol

I just put number into excel that made a saw tooth graph.