These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Did Tranquility lost 50,000 subscribers since Incarna?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#1 - 2013-02-09 11:55:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Some number crunching from EVE Offline and EVE total subscribers...

Date: Dec. 27 2012

Tranquility weekly average PCU = 33,786 (75,22%)
Serenity weekly average PCU= 12,126 (24,77%)
Total weekly average PCU (2 servers)= 44,912

For a estimated subscription count of 450,000 subscribers:

TQ: 75,22% = 338,490
SR: 24,77% = 111,465

So....

EVE total subscribers = 450,000 (as advertised)
Serenity subscribers= circa 100,000 (EVE Offline estimation)
Tranquility subscribers= circa 350,000 (EVE Offline estimation)

I think that 350k vs 100k is a generous estimate as Serenity's PCU has being going down all the way along January whereas TQ is marginally increasing.

So, the question is: did Tranquility lost 50k subscribers since pre-Incarna and the 400k number? Back then, Serenity was not being accounted as a part of total subsciption (and anyway SR was offline for a good part of 2012) so apparently either CCP forgot to tell us they hit 500,000 subscriptors thanks to Serenity, or they forgot to tell us that 100,000 subcribers from Serenity mean that Tranquility has taken a serious blow and lost 12.5% of its subscribers since Incarna.

That hasn't translated direcly into PCU as many players are returning to EVE thx to successful iterations, so there are less subscribers who actually play more and that's good as long as it lasts. But then, with overall subscriptions going down and only returning players saving the day, maybe CCP should consider whatever happened to natural growth and all those lovely new subscribers.

(Might be noted that EVE is not suffering from the economic climate because it is clearly anti-cyclical, as the less job you have, the best you can pay your subscription through PLEXes... at least while you can afford the internet bills! Lol)

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Sarmatiko
#2 - 2013-02-09 12:06:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarmatiko
At last! Thread about CCP lies with serious statistical analytics, not based on subjective estimations and false assumptions!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2013-02-09 12:07:13 UTC
Turns out, bear content does not attract as many people as pvp content.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#4 - 2013-02-09 12:12:08 UTC
They have been cracking down a bit on bots(or so they say) which maybe the reason for the reduced numbers. However with how much they are pushing Power of 2 and Sidekick it wouldn't surprise me if they have taken a hit on numbers.

CCP is going down a dangerous path of relaying too much on multi-accounts.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Merouk Baas
#5 - 2013-02-09 12:12:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Merouk Baas
Dunno, I use eve-offline, and by those charts they lost quite a few after Incarna but it's bouncing right back up now. We're likely to surpass the sub and concurrent logon numbers shortly.

Dust seems to be getting some interest from console players. Don't know if the numbers will hold after release, or what kind of profit they can extract out of them via microtransactions, but it's more important to them than EVE at this point. I'm actually pleased that they're still posting dev blogs and doing patches and expansions, and not ignoring us completely.
RAP ACTION HERO
#6 - 2013-02-09 12:12:37 UTC
my special snowflake post needed to be copied and pasted into a new thread.

vitoc erryday
Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#7 - 2013-02-09 12:15:06 UTC
How would the war on bots skew the figures?
Whitehound
#8 - 2013-02-09 12:17:43 UTC
Yes.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Ai Shun
#9 - 2013-02-09 12:32:46 UTC
And next we'll see a thread about how EVE is dying. Oh wait. There's already been a few. Must be time for the one where WiS and dress up dollies will save EVE because so many Turkish men will suddenly flock to the game?
Josef Djugashvilis
#10 - 2013-02-09 12:48:25 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
And next we'll see a thread about how EVE is dying. Oh wait. There's already been a few. Must be time for the one where WiS and dress up dollies will save EVE because so many Turkish men will suddenly flock to the game?


Turkish men - WiS - dollies...

Sorry, but you have completely lost me at this point...what is the connection?

This is not a signature.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#11 - 2013-02-09 13:01:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
Dollies... the next "must have" for all the cool kids... or is that "Dollies with Monocles"... Shocked

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#12 - 2013-02-09 13:09:57 UTC
Kinis Deren wrote:
How would the war on bots skew the figures?


Deleted accounts are not really subscribed accounts now are they? It's not a far stretch to think that most botters also had more than one account.
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#13 - 2013-02-09 13:21:57 UTC
CPU load can also be effected by changes in the game's code structure. Better code upgrades = less CPU use per person.

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Corey Fumimasa
CFM Salvage
#14 - 2013-02-09 13:34:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Corey Fumimasa
Ai Shun Eve is going to die if we don't all accept the FACT that people want easy and not hard. Eve must be made easy in order to survive!!! Its only a matter of time before all of our ISK and assets go poof when the servers go down. I wonder if CCP could arrange an item and currency swap with a game like Salem? Then we can at least keep some of our wealth. Eve is Dying! Eve is Dying...

Oh, wait. This thread is just about some data, kind of looking at it and talking about Eve? But, I thought we were all going to run around and scream like preteens with their hair on fire? And jump to conclusions and shout accusations and otherwise behave as though there is something to be afraid of and scared about!

I guess you can relax a bit Ai, I sort of jumped the gun, I'm terribly sorry about that. No one said anything about the imminent closing of doors at CCP and the destruction of the servers.
Corey Fumimasa
CFM Salvage
#15 - 2013-02-09 13:49:26 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Turns out, bear content does not attract as many people as pvp content.


Whats "bear" content?
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2013-02-09 13:50:45 UTC
Look at it this way, if the stakeholders are not bailing out a window with everything they can get including the toliets, EVE is doing well.
Now if the stake holders feel making a lighter softer highsec is what is needed CCP must comply.(The downside of going public is you have to actually make money for stockholders)
So if you want more pvp, I would suggest finding a way to incentivize people to do so on your own.
How, is up to you, but going off the lolztastic tears in the venture threads, getting more into lowsec is apparently not the solution.
(Also for those guys http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/456/963/56b.jpg)
Josef Djugashvilis
#17 - 2013-02-09 13:55:37 UTC
Corey Fumimasa wrote:
Ai Shun Eve is going to die if we don't all accept the FACT that people want easy and not hard. Eve must be made easy in order to survive!!! Its only a matter of time before all of our ISK and assets go poof when the servers go down. I wonder if CCP could arrange an item and currency swap with a game like Salem? Then we can at least keep some of our wealth. Eve is Dying! Eve is Dying...

Oh, wait. This thread is just about some data, kind of looking at it and talking about Eve? But, I thought we were all going to run around and scream like preteens with their hair on fire? And jump to conclusions and shout accusations and otherwise behave as though there is something to be afraid of and scared about!

I guess you can relax a bit Ai, I sort of jumped the gun, I'm terribly sorry about that. No one said anything about the imminent closing of doors at CCP and the destruction of the servers.


I have to confess that if my hair was on fire, I would run around and scream and it is that long since I was a teen-ager that I can hardly remember it.

This is not a signature.
Corey Fumimasa
CFM Salvage
#18 - 2013-02-09 13:56:17 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Look at it this way, if the stakeholders are not bailing out a window with everything they can get including the toliets, EVE is doing well.
Now if the stake holders feel making a lighter softer highsec is what is needed CCP must comply.(The downside of going public is you have to actually make money for stockholders)
So if you want more pvp, I would suggest finding a way to incentivize people to do so on your own.
How, is up to you, but going off the lolztastic tears in the venture threads, getting more into lowsec is apparently not the solution.
(Also for those guys http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/456/963/56b.jpg)


I though CCP was private:

About CCP
CCP Games is a privately held company that specializes in the creation, development, and distribution of Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOGs). Founded in 1997, CCP is recognized internationally as a pioneer in the single-server persistent universe concept of the MMOG genre. CCP Games is headquartered in Reykjavik, Iceland with an office in Shanghai, China. For more information, visit www.ccpgames.com.

This is all I found on the website.
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#19 - 2013-02-09 13:56:18 UTC
Corey Fumimasa wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Turns out, bear content does not attract as many people as pvp content.


Whats "bear" content?

Happens when you put beer in a sodastream.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#20 - 2013-02-09 14:01:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Pahrdi
Corey Fumimasa wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Turns out, bear content does not attract as many people as pvp content.


Whats "bear" content?

You'd say "easy" to that. I cannot speak for others. But if EVE goes the down the "easy" or "bear" path, CCP will lose my subscriptions.

Blizzard has lost mine for good because of this.

Edit:

The deciding point for me when subbing was the "htfu" way of EVE. I always missed the Diablo 2 HC way of doing things in WoW. Not loosing your character was really weird when I started playing WoW. With EVE I got at least some of that back.

Remove standings and insurance.
123Next pageLast page