These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Im done and thanks for all the fish

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
#21 - 2012-10-01 14:10:04 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Perramas wrote:


We were not talking subs, we were talking number of people online at the same time. That peaked in January of 2011, you can tell this if you know how to read a chart. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Notice for the last year the average number of people has been lower than the peak back in January of 2011.


Subs are the more important number. Even so, the average server population is just as healthy now as then.


What good are subs...if they dont log in.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2012-10-01 14:12:18 UTC
Xanadu Farsight wrote:
Bottom line is, im done
Unlikely. Seeing as how the rest of your post was just a bunch of made-up nonsense, there's no real reason to believe this either.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2012-10-01 14:19:03 UTC
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Perramas wrote:


We were not talking subs, we were talking number of people online at the same time. That peaked in January of 2011, you can tell this if you know how to read a chart. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Notice for the last year the average number of people has been lower than the peak back in January of 2011.


Subs are the more important number. Even so, the average server population is just as healthy now as then.


What good are subs...if they dont log in.


The money to pay for devs?
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-10-01 14:30:59 UTC
Man the violins men! We are under attack by a sad individual!
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#25 - 2012-10-01 14:39:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Perramas wrote:


We were not talking subs, we were talking number of people online at the same time. That peaked in January of 2011, you can tell this if you know how to read a chart. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Notice for the last year the average number of people has been lower than the peak back in January of 2011.


Subs are the more important number. Even so, the average server population is just as healthy now as then.


What good are subs...if they dont log in.


The money to pay for devs?

I'm pretty sure we usually see eye-to-eye on things, but I have to disagree with you on this one. While subs are good as a metric for current-time financial stability, they have little bearing on the health of the game itself. The player count is a much more favorable metric here, since it shows player interest in the game. An increase in subs without a proportional increase in player count can mean one of two things: either people are simply getting more alts without growing the game's population (stagnation), or the game's population is growing but the players exhibit a decrease in enthusiasm and simply play less hours per day. The latter is particularly dangerous because it means people aren't all that excited about the game's features or direction, and therefore aren't likely to continue their subscriptions in the long term.

Do the devs have more money if only the subscription count grows? Sure, but it's also evident that that money isn't going toward the development and marketing of the product that makes that money. A drive to increase subs above all else is a short-term profit hedge. I won't speculate as to CCP's intentions here. As far as I know, they might be very apprehensive about the situation. But I know for a fact that a declining player count is bad, and that's exactly what we have here. We barely break 40,000 on weekdays now, and there's no way we can't attribute this to CCP's fight against bots (lol).

With each passing day, I meet less and less new people, and have to memorize more and more names of alts that my friends keep getting.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#26 - 2012-10-01 14:44:58 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

I'm pretty sure we usually see eye-to-eye on things, but I have to disagree with you on this one. While subs are good as a metric for current-time financial stability, they have little bearing on the health of the game itself. The player count is a much more favorable metric here, since it shows player interest in the game. An increase in subs without a proportional increase in player count can mean one of two things: either people are simply getting more alts without growing the game's population (stagnation), or the game's population is growing but the players exhibit a decrease in enthusiasm and simply play less hours per day. The latter is particularly dangerous because it means people aren't all that excited about the game's features or direction, and therefore aren't likely to continue their subscriptions in the long term.

Do the devs have more money if only the subscription count grows? Sure, but it's also evident that that money isn't going toward the development and marketing of the product that makes that money. A drive to increase subs above all else is a short-term profit hedge. I won't speculate as to CCP's intentions here. As far as I know, they might be very apprehensive about the situation. But I know for a fact that a declining player count is bad, and that's exactly what we have here. We barely break 40,000 on weekdays now, and there's no way we can't attribute this to CCP's fight against bots (lol).

With each passing day, I meet less and less new people, and have to memorize more and more names of alts that my friends keep getting.


Given the changes coming this winter and dust intergration and future plans I'd say CCP are doing a fine job of putting that money to good use.

Population wise EVE is just as healthy as in 2011. Average population is around 40- 45k on a night which is a good recovery pace. We also have an aging population. Most the people in my corp a few years ago were either unemployed or still in education, now we have jobs so less time to play. (yay for economic recovery)
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#27 - 2012-10-01 14:49:51 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

I'm pretty sure we usually see eye-to-eye on things, but I have to disagree with you on this one. While subs are good as a metric for current-time financial stability, they have little bearing on the health of the game itself. The player count is a much more favorable metric here, since it shows player interest in the game. An increase in subs without a proportional increase in player count can mean one of two things: either people are simply getting more alts without growing the game's population (stagnation), or the game's population is growing but the players exhibit a decrease in enthusiasm and simply play less hours per day. The latter is particularly dangerous because it means people aren't all that excited about the game's features or direction, and therefore aren't likely to continue their subscriptions in the long term.

Do the devs have more money if only the subscription count grows? Sure, but it's also evident that that money isn't going toward the development and marketing of the product that makes that money. A drive to increase subs above all else is a short-term profit hedge. I won't speculate as to CCP's intentions here. As far as I know, they might be very apprehensive about the situation. But I know for a fact that a declining player count is bad, and that's exactly what we have here. We barely break 40,000 on weekdays now, and there's no way we can't attribute this to CCP's fight against bots (lol).

With each passing day, I meet less and less new people, and have to memorize more and more names of alts that my friends keep getting.


Given the changes coming this winter and dust intergration and future plans I'd say CCP are doing a fine job of putting that money to good use.

Population wise EVE is just as healthy as in 2011. Average population is around 40- 45k on a night which is a good recovery pace. We also have an aging population. Most the people in my corp a few years ago were either unemployed or still in education, now we have jobs so less time to play. (yay for economic recovery)


Please provide a link showing the increase in subs in the past 12 months.
Perramas
DreddNaut
#28 - 2012-10-01 14:53:03 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Xanadu Farsight wrote:
Bottom line is, im done
Unlikely. Seeing as how the rest of your post was just a bunch of made-up nonsense, there's no real reason to believe this either.


Agreed, Doomheim or it didnt happen!

Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people- Eleanor Roosevelt

highonpop
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2012-10-01 14:53:49 UTC
Sweet another I QUIT thread from some insignificant person

BAI o/ GEWD LUCK o/

FC, what do?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#30 - 2012-10-01 15:00:57 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Please provide a link showing the increase in subs in the past 12 months.


Wiki EVE Online wrote:
In March 2012, Eve Online reached over 400,000 subscribers. Monthly cost of subscription varies by plan and country ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Online


Perramas
DreddNaut
#31 - 2012-10-01 15:01:05 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Perramas wrote:


We were not talking subs, we were talking number of people online at the same time. That peaked in January of 2011, you can tell this if you know how to read a chart. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Notice for the last year the average number of people has been lower than the peak back in January of 2011.


Subs are the more important number. Even so, the average server population is just as healthy now as then.


What good are subs...if they dont log in.


The money to pay for devs?



We all know there are a large number of EVE players who have an active subscription who do not play as opposed to those who do actively play. Those players next step is to cancel and walk away after they get tired of only logging in to change skills to train.

Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people- Eleanor Roosevelt

Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
The Invited
#32 - 2012-10-01 15:08:51 UTC
If you would rather play GW 2, then you deserve each other. We will see if that game keeps your interest for 9 years -.-

Watch me live for all your Empyrean news and analysis!

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#33 - 2012-10-01 15:09:48 UTC
Perramas wrote:



We all know there are a large number of EVE players who have an active subscription who do not play as opposed to those who do actively play. Those players next step is to cancel and walk away after they get tired of only logging in to change skills to train.


You will be in for a long wait for them to cancel, this has been the norm for 9 years.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#34 - 2012-10-01 15:11:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
baltec1 wrote:
[quote=Destiny Corrupted]Population wise EVE is just as healthy as in 2011. Average population is around 40- 45k on a night which is a good recovery pace. We also have an aging population. Most the people in my corp a few years ago were either unemployed or still in education, now we have jobs so less time to play. (yay for economic recovery)

Negative.

When I emulate the PCU graph and integrate the average, it's actually in the upper 23,000s. The peak is certainly above 40,000, but that's the peak, which happens at 18:00 EVE (14:00 EST). When I take the "all time" data and shove a trendline between mid-2009 and now, the player count remains static. If I do it from the beginning of 2010 and now, it's negative. You don't even need to do math to see the proof; just eyeball it on Chribba's site.

The point is, EVE had really stable growth until right after Apocrypha, when it flattened out. Now, if I remember correctly, CCP made an "announcement" right around that time. Also, for three years since, we had back-to-back pvp nerfs and money grind buffs. Of course people will get more accounts to grind wormholes/incursions/FW plexes. That doesn't mean that the game became healthier.

I don't think the aging population argument works here either, because the average age has remained constant, if not decreased, despite the game's age. Check this out.

"What are the user demographics like? Based on what I see in the chat channels, my impression is that the users are a bit older than in your normal fantasy MMORPG?

Magnús: That’s probably right, the average age is about 27 years old. 95% of the users are male and 5% women. Most of them have an education and some kind of a degree. Their average EVE playtime per week is 17 hours."

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
#35 - 2012-10-01 15:18:33 UTC
Perramas wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dragon Outlaw wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Perramas wrote:


We were not talking subs, we were talking number of people online at the same time. That peaked in January of 2011, you can tell this if you know how to read a chart. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Notice for the last year the average number of people has been lower than the peak back in January of 2011.


Subs are the more important number. Even so, the average server population is just as healthy now as then.


What good are subs...if they dont log in.


The money to pay for devs?



We all know there are a large number of EVE players who have an active subscription who do not play as opposed to those who do actively play. Those players next step is to cancel and walk away after they get tired of only logging in to change skills to train.


I tend to agree with you on that. When a significant number of your customers pay for your product and end up barely using it, something is wrong. Anyone with a minimum of knowledge in marketing would understand this.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#36 - 2012-10-01 15:21:14 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Please provide a link showing the increase in subs in the past 12 months.


Wiki EVE Online wrote:
In March 2012, Eve Online reached over 400,000 subscribers. Monthly cost of subscription varies by plan and country ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Online




Wikipedia...a source of solid information....LOL.

Did you hear the one about the goons who managed to game Wiikipedia into imbedding in Mike Trout's entry an nickname that a single Something Awful user decided it should be, and then the whole forum got in on the action, creating bogus web sites referencing the same nick name, and Wikipedia editors bought it?

When I heard that, I realized that the null sec zealots will game anything to meet their agenda, which is to wipe out high sec, which in turn means a lower sub base. So sorry, I don't believe what I read from Wikipedia.

And CCP is usually not forthcoming with current sub rates.
If they had the guts to post monthly sub rates, that would be a very useful tool for the forum warriors, and would eliminate a ton of false information, on both sides of the argument.
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-10-01 15:22:37 UTC
wow u mad. Should have found a half decent corp as I garuntee if you werent trying to "solo pvp" you'd actually be having fun.. This game isnt meant to be played alone. But have fun with WoW Pandas, im sure we will see you again.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#38 - 2012-10-01 15:28:22 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Wikipedia...a source of solid information....LOL.

Did you hear the one about the goons who managed to game Wiikipedia into imbedding in Mike Trout's entry an nickname that a single Something Awful user decided it should be, and then the whole forum got in on the action, creating bogus web sites referencing the same nick name, and Wikipedia editors bought it?

When I heard that, I realized that the null sec zealots will game anything to meet their agenda, which is to wipe out high sec, which in turn means a lower sub base. So sorry, I don't believe what I read from Wikipedia.

And CCP is usually not forthcoming with current sub rates.
If they had the guts to post monthly sub rates, that would be a very useful tool for the forum warriors, and would eliminate a ton of false information, on both sides of the argument.


So use one of the other dosen results from a google search if you feel wiki is not for you. Or look through CCPs twitter feed, where they go on about all sorts of numbers.

Also lol at 0.0 want to kill high sec.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#39 - 2012-10-01 15:29:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Wikipedia...a source of solid information....LOL.
No. PCWorld, quoting official CCP statements.
Lern2Source.

Destiny Corrupted wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Population wise EVE is just as healthy as in 2011. Average population is around 40- 45k on a night which is a good recovery pace.
Negative.

When I emulate the PCU graph and integrate the average, it's actually in the upper 23,000s. The peak is certainly above 40,000, but that's the peak, which happens at 18:00 EVE (14:00 EST). When I take the "all time" data and shove a trendline between mid-2009 and now, the player count remains static.
…and you're also answering a completely different question that doesn't in any way negate what baltec said.

Population-wise, EVE is just as healthy as in 2011, and right now we're seeing a consistent 1,500 higher PCUs than the same day last year which is a good recovery on top of the recovery the game saw last year as Crucible information started to leak out.
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-10-01 15:44:30 UTC
Tippia wrote:
No. PCWorld, quoting official CCP statements.
Lern2Source.


Since you're being petty about citations, I'll just note that the article quotes no official statement on this issue.

Back2School.