In her final report coming out of the Indie MMOR Developers Conference, Laura Genender talks to Bruce Woodcock, better known as "Sir Bruce" of the interesting and sometimes controversial traffic-tracking site MMOGChart.com.

Last week at IMGDC I sat down with Bruce Woodcock, MMOG Analyst, and the man behind MMOGChart.com. For those of you who haven’t visited MMOGChart.com, Bruce’s idea and actions have become six years of tracking MMO populations.

It all started in 2002, when Bruce was browsing a forum and a random, interesting post caught his eye. An Ultima (or perhaps ex-Ultima) player posted a story about UO numbers declining based on Ultima press release numbers vs. EverQuest press release numbers.

Read the whole article here.

What a joke!

The industry DOES NOT take any notice of mmogchart.com and neither do most gamers.

Last year, we had Dana giving a half-arsed promotion of Bruces work of fiction - this year, Laura has a go. Pathetic.

As for all these unique visitors that are claimed, that's small change. A 'closed doors' website I host boasts far greater figures, and all you can see there is.......nothing.

I have only a very small amount of respect for mmorpg.com left (I used to rate it highest) and yet the 'alliance' between this website and Bruces bullshit astounds me.

I only come around here out of morbid curiosity nowadays, and the occasional informative post by someone not affiliated with mmorpg.com makes me smile, because that's where the REAL stories are.

Jon/Craig, this isn't aimed at you in any way (you're all this place has going for it nowadays) but please mmorpg.com, sort yourselves out.

70% of statistics are made up 94% of the time.

I think MMOGChart is a good tool to get information on a basic comparitive level. If it is true that Bruce does indeed recieve numbers and tips directly from game devs is a huge bonus to the credibility of the site.

I'm glad he keeps it updated and running, it's an interesting indicator of the health and prosperiety of a title.

In a world where most companies don't publically release their numbers, it's good to have something to fall back on for relatively accurate information.

Keep up the good work.

Do I believe it's 100% accurate? Of course not. Very few do and they shouldn't.

But, like I said, it's a good general indicator of information on a basic comparitive level.

Originally posted by darwa

What a joke!

The industry DOES NOT take any notice of mmogchart.com and neither do most gamers.

Last year, we had Dana giving a half-arsed promotion of Bruces work of fiction - this year, Laura has a go. Pathetic.

As for all these unique visitors that are claimed, that's small change. A 'closed doors' website I host boasts far greater figures, and all you can see there is.......nothing.

I have only a very small amount of respect for mmorpg.com left (I used to rate it highest) and yet the 'alliance' between this website and Bruces bullshit astounds me.

I only come around here out of morbid curiosity nowadays, and the occasional informative post by someone not affiliated with mmorpg.com makes me smile, because that's where the REAL stories are.

Jon/Craig, this isn't aimed at you in any way (you're all this place has going for it nowadays) but please mmorpg.com, sort yourselves out.

Whether you agree with him or you don't. Whether you figure his numbers are accurate or you don't, MMOGChart is a part of the industry. The article is meant to inform, and not to pass judgements one way or the other.

Honestly, I don't envy anyone trying to put those numbers together. For some companies, it's something that they want to get out. For other companies it's either something that they can't legally divulge or that they don't want to divulge.

As to whether the industry takes notice of it... I think that you might be surprised. I approved this article as a part of the coverage from the Indie MMO Conference for a reason. If an indie site is even trying to uncover the mysteries of subscriber numbers its worth at least talking about.

Originally posted by Stradden

 

Originally posted by darwa

What a joke!

The industry DOES NOT take any notice of mmogchart.com and neither do most gamers.

Last year, we had Dana giving a half-arsed promotion of Bruces work of fiction - this year, Laura has a go. Pathetic.

As for all these unique visitors that are claimed, that's small change. A 'closed doors' website I host boasts far greater figures, and all you can see there is.......nothing.

I have only a very small amount of respect for mmorpg.com left (I used to rate it highest) and yet the 'alliance' between this website and Bruces bullshit astounds me.

I only come around here out of morbid curiosity nowadays, and the occasional informative post by someone not affiliated with mmorpg.com makes me smile, because that's where the REAL stories are.

Jon/Craig, this isn't aimed at you in any way (you're all this place has going for it nowadays) but please mmorpg.com, sort yourselves out.

Wow... such hostility.

 

Whether you agree with him or you don't. Whether you figure his numbers are accurate or you don't, MMOGChart is a part of the industry. The article is meant to inform, and not to pass judgements one way or the other.

Honestly, I don't envy anyone trying to put those numbers together. For some companies, it's something that they want to get out. For other companies it's either something that they can't legally divulge or that they don't want to divulge.

As to whether the industry takes notice of it... I think that you might be surprised. I approved this article as a part of the coverage from the Indie MMO Conference for a reason. If an indie site is even trying to uncover the mysteries of subscriber numbers its worth at least talking about.

The fact that anytime we wish to be informed about actual numbers, companies will "hide" behind so much crap. Case in point...the idiotic and very stupid ..."4 Million characters created" debacle pushed out by Turbine...Then they state they are the 2nd largest MMO...which we saw over time keep getting * after * as they had to "define" that statement. I totally lost respect for that company, and according to Bruce's numbers, it also seems that they are NOT #2 anymore..(well, in a chart sense...Turbine as a game maker is #2 in a "different" way)

No, I am glad that someone is posting this info, and what is most important is if publications start using the data provided, then companies may think twice about "hiding" those numbers and be more open to provide real "facts" as they may look pretty bad on that chart compared to real world numbers...

Thanks Bruce!

Nice article and thanks for the insight and thank you Sir Bruce for providing the charts all these years!  Keep them coming!

Anyone who says a game has so many subscribers because a friend of a friend of a friends' gardner said so ( a.k.a. "inside sources which shall not be named" ) and thinks their data is worth more than the collective 0s' and 1s' used to type it out is fooling themselves, and wasting our time.

Originally posted by Stradden

 

Originally posted by darwa

What a joke!

Wow... such hostility.

 

Whether you agree with him or you don't. Whether you figure his numbers are accurate or you don't, MMOGChart is a part of the industry. The article is meant to inform, and not to pass judgements one way or the other.

As to whether the industry takes notice of it... I think that you might be surprised.

1 - Hostility brought on by the lack of impartiality MMORPG.com shows these days

2 - MMOGChart is NOT part of the industry - don't talk rubbish

3 - Actually Jon, I think YOU would be surprised. Not everyone that visits this website is 'only' a player.

Anyway, I've said my piece. See you same time next year.....

Originally posted by Stradden

 

 

The article is meant to inform, and not to pass judgements one way or the other.

Honestly I could care less about the numbers in games.  I have a hard time understanding so many peoples' obsession with them as well.  If I find a game enjoyable and fun to play, that's enough for me - I don't worry about whether someone else I've never met, know nothing about, and probably will never meet in my life, cares for the game. /shrug

Who really cares how many people are playing certain games? 

As long as there's enough people around to group with and converse with, does it really matter who's #1 or #300? Besides... most of the numbers are just estimates anyway.

While I certainly respect the work Mr. Woodcock puts into his site, I see no use for it other than for people to use for trolling... "My game is more popular than yours..."  "So and so company states they have this many subscribers, but the chart shows they are wrong.".. and so on.

Just my opinion, though. ;)

Originally posted by sartorius

 

Originally posted by Stradden

 

 

The article is meant to inform, and not to pass judgements one way or the other.

In this regard I would have to say the "article" failed then.  Not trying to ruffle feathers or anything, but this "article" is blatantly biased towards the website and it's author.  I even double checked the article's author's name after reading to make sure it wasn't written by the guy himself, or a relative.  It comes across as nothing more than a praising advertisement for a website whose "numbers" are questioned with every update by lots of people - of course there's nothing in this non-judgemental "article" about that.  Sorry, it is completely biased towards the author and the website.

 

Honestly I could care less about the numbers in games.  I have a hard time understanding so many peoples' obsession with them as well.  If I find a game enjoyable and fun to play, that's enough for me - I don't worry about whether someone else I've never met, know nothing about, and probably will never meet in my life, cares for the game. /shrug

 

Though I'm glad he does this and I'm sure there is a lot of work and even working and re-working the numbers, I take it for what it is. Some accurate and some not.

And no reason why an MMO site shouldn't include it as it has garnered a bit of attention over the years. However the article was clearly biased toward the site/info. Especially claiming that he provides the most accurate numbers, etc etc.

That may or may not be the case. I don't really know. And as showing that the Vanguard numbers were one of his mistakes, it then should have shown what his success are.

In any case, I'm glad he does it, I enjoy the chart and I take it for what it is, a guidline... some spot on some perhaps not so.

Some people seem to forget the main purpose of the chart is to see what works and what doesn't work.   Financially successful MMORPG's will be the models of future MMORPG's.  Bruce's chart shows what players like and what they really don't care for for the most part.   You may not care about Bruce's work, but I can tell you that the average "bean counter" does.

His work is "interesting".

The huge hatred he seems to get from a few minority groups among devs/players is also quite "interesting".

If someone destroy your scam, you would "attack" him.  I don't think Blizzard ever cares, neither in good, or in bad, about this Bruce guy.  Sony however...  *grin evilly*.

Originally posted by Teala

Some people seem to forget the main purpose of the chart is to see what works and what doesn't work.   Financially successful MMORPG's will be the models of future MMORPG's.  Bruce's chart shows what players like and what they really don't care for for the most part.   You may not care about Bruce's work, but I can tell you that the average "bean counter" does.

I like this.

However, I would insist more on the "what doesn't work" than on the what work.  If everything is flawed, you take the lesser evil.   WoW is that lesser evil.  WoW offer MORE freedom, more options, more ways of playing the game (PvP, Solo, Grouping, Tradeskills) than most MMOs.  It doesn't validate any of these gameplays, it does validate however that the player wants the REAL choice.

If anything, I think it underline critical flaws in many MMOs, especially those held by Sony.

I respect the work of Sir Bruce. It might not be 100% accurate all the time, but it is the most reliable source of informations about MMO numbers that i found so far. As a developer myself who have worked for company such as ubisoft and EA, to turn into an Indi developer 2 years ago, i must say i trust his sources both from a player and developer perspective. I could at least verify his numbers to compare them with our internal sources and if he was that close for ours, i can trust he is that close for the rest as well. (Back then, it was about the Sims online, and later on, Shadowbane)

Now if those who keep whining could bring something on the table instead of their mind numbing and useless complaints, i'm more then open to be re-directed toward a more accurate source. But good luck finding one. (Unless you actually work on the production team for X or Y company that produces MMO's.)

Nice interview; thanks Laura and Jon for the feature.

For those of you who think MMOGCHART.COM isn't taken seriously by the industry, here are some links:

http://www.ncsoft.net/global/board/downloadlist.aspx?BID=ir_pr

If you download the latest 2008 IR Report, you'll find NCSoft quoting my (older) numbers on page 16:

http://www.mmogchart.com/ncexample.JPG

You might also remember the presentation Vivendi gave to investors regarding World of Warcraft back in 2006:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1127055/000095012306007628/y22210exv99w1.htm

There you'll find a very suspicious looking graph on page 15:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1127055/000095012306007628/y22210y22210z0015.gif

Two of the sources for the numbers on that graph is Wikipedia and DFC Intelligence, who use my numbers frequently.  Another is NCSoft's own data, which I myself use for my charts.

I will also be giving a presentation at the www.iongameconference.com in May on my latest research.

Why are the numbers important?  Frankly, if you enjoy the game you're playing, then they aren't.  You shouldn't pay too much attention to them.  But if your MMOG starts "dying", you probably already know; the numbers simply provide a confirmation of this.  It also lets you know what other games are popular; they might be ones you want to try out.  But consumer concerns aside, we all have an interest in making sure the industry as a whole is doing well.  By aggregating data from multiple sources and reporting on trends in the industry, we gain insight into where we've been and where we may be going next.  And such data is particular useful to investors -- you know, those people who risk hundreds of millions of dollars in MMOG development every year so you can actually get to enjoy games like World of Warcraft, Tabula Rasa, Lord of the Rings Online, EverQuest II, EVE Online, and future games like Age of Conan, Stargate Worlds, and Warhammer Online.

Bruce

A number of figures he gives can be easily confirmed by official announcements, server data, company monthly reports etc. Others are estimates or come from unofficial sources - and the author doesn't hide it.
There are some companies that do not make their subscription numbers a secret. There's also a number of companies that do, mostly because their games fail, and it's them / their fanboys that attack Bruce for his job.

---

Originally posted by darwa
2 - MMOGChart is NOT part of the industry - don't talk rubbish
3 - Actually Jon, I think YOU would be surprised. Not everyone that visits this website is 'only' a player.

---

  The haters on this thread make me sick.  Neither the author of the article or Bruce tell any of us a lie what-so-whoever.  He is very upfront about every last element on his site, and is completely open to changing his charts at any point that a company wishes to offer the information for him to do so.  He doesn't actively blast games just because he can.

  He provides a free service to the industry, and frankly...since this industry is full of nothing but CONSTANT lies from these suits with attitude problems I'm glad he does.  I've no doubt his sources are reliable enough to warrant using their numbers as a guide if not a solid fact...especially since he apparently gets contracted from time to time in this field for his work.  Using blatant lies would compromise his job and his acceptance in the field...neither of which are things I'm sure he is trying to do here.

  Truth be told, if you think his numbers are bunk then its not him you have to blame....the guys running the game in question are perfectly able to correct him and he has shown in the past to USE that information over his sources when its presented.  If your beloved games' leaders don't want to step up to the plate with that info, then why in gods name should we just assume HE is lying instead?  It would seem to me that the person wanting to say the least probably has the most to hide.

  I salute his efforts, and hope that the industry takes MORE note of it and actually starts thinking more about what they are doing when they invest in this business.  Blizzard didn't reach the top by sitting on their butts assuming that their ideal was all that they would need.  They did a lot of research.

Originally posted by Teala

Some people seem to forget the main purpose of the chart is to see what works and what doesn't work.   Financially successful MMORPG's will be the models of future MMORPG's.  Bruce's chart shows what players like and what they really don't care for for the most part.   You may not care about Bruce's work, but I can tell you that the average "bean counter" does.

After all, when a company sees one or two games that are clearly superior to the others in subscriptions, they ARE likely to copy that games model/design/systems, so that they can generate similar numbers (and profit). That means a lot less innovation, and more cookie-cutter copies of the game most folks are already playing....something mmo fans are getting more and more wary of as the months (years) pass by.  It happened with all the other PC genres, and it happened with console games.  If everyone copies the best seller, eventually, the results are just weak and degraded clones.

Overall, I do agree that it is important to share subscription numbers with your paying customers (not doing so is too open to abuse/fraud IMO).  But, "the industry" using those numbers as a tool to influence there design is a bad omen, also imo, and could contribute to the downfall of the genre.

Originally posted by Bountytaker

 

Originally posted by Teala

Some people seem to forget the main purpose of the chart is to see what works and what doesn't work.   Financially successful MMORPG's will be the models of future MMORPG's.  Bruce's chart shows what players like and what they really don't care for for the most part.   You may not care about Bruce's work, but I can tell you that the average "bean counter" does.

Unfortunately, that same statement could be used to argue AGAINST the use of the chart.

 

After all, when a company sees one or two games that are clearly superior to the others in subscriptions, they ARE likely to copy that games model/design/systems, so that they can generate similar numbers (and profit). That means a lot less innovation, and more cookie-cutter copies of the game most folks are already playing....something mmo fans are getting more and more wary of as the months (years) pass by.  It happened with all the other PC genres, and it happened with console games.  If everyone copies the best seller, eventually, the results are just weak and degraded clones.

 

Overall, I do agree that it is important to share subscription numbers with your paying customers (not doing so is too open to abuse/fraud IMO).  But, "the industry" using those numbers as a tool to influence there design is a bad omen, also imo, and could contribute to the downfall of the genre.

Actually I wish the industry publishers of these games would be upfront with the players and provide Sir Bruce with more accurate info.  Why?  So future games are better.   WoW set a standard that has yet to be equaled.  Is it perfect...no...but the game itself is very fun to play and is a polished product...moreso then any other MMORPG on the market (although I think CoH and GW could make an arguement on that) because Blizzard paid attention to even little details like your character leaving footprints(just like GW's) when they walk...and the finished look and feel of the game over all.   If Sigil had paid as much attention to the same kind of details and if Sony would stop re-writing Vanguard and work of polishing the game as a whole...like adding underwater environments and such Vanguard would be the best game on the market - period.   Sony could take a lesson from Blizzard in this regard and stop trying to maketheir games into WoW, but to follow Blizzards example and make a polished game rather then a half-arsed game.

That is why Bruces chart is important.   Do you think more people play WoW because it is a bug filled, un-polished game or more people play GW because it is still be re-written to play like WoW...no it is because the publishers of these two games put out quaility products and it shows that in Bruces chart.

Originally posted by JonMichael

Who really cares how many people are playing certain games? 

As long as there's enough people around to group with and converse with, does it really matter who's #1 or #300? Besides... most of the numbers are just estimates anyway.

While I certainly respect the work Mr. Woodcock puts into his site, I see no use for it other than for people to use for trolling... "My game is more popular than yours..."  "So and so company states they have this many subscribers, but the chart shows they are wrong.".. and so on.

Just my opinion, though. ;)

 

Yes it does. If a game has too few subscriptions, it is likely that it will close its doors. Building up a MMORPG char is a major endeavor and I don't want to waste time on a game that is likely to die in another 6 months.

So while it does not matter to me whether WOW has 10 or 12M players (since it is so successful that it is almost certain that it won't die for  few years), it DOES matter to me how many subscriptions for games like Tabula Rasa has before I would consider playing seriously.

Originally posted by SirBruce

Nice interview; thanks Laura and Jon for the feature.

For those of you who think MMOGCHART.COM isn't taken seriously by the industry, here are some links:

http://www.ncsoft.net/global/board/downloadlist.aspx?BID=ir_pr

If you download the latest 2008 IR Report, you'll find NCSoft quoting my (older) numbers on page 16:

http://www.mmogchart.com/ncexample.JPG

You might also remember the presentation Vivendi gave to investors regarding World of Warcraft back in 2006:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1127055/000095012306007628/y22210exv99w1.htm

There you'll find a very suspicious looking graph on page 15:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1127055/000095012306007628/y22210y22210z0015.gif

Two of the sources for the numbers on that graph is Wikipedia and DFC Intelligence, who use my numbers frequently.  Another is NCSoft's own data, which I myself use for my charts.

I will also be giving a presentation at the www.iongameconference.com in May on my latest research.

Why are the numbers important?  Frankly, if you enjoy the game you're playing, then they aren't.  You shouldn't pay too much attention to them.  But if your MMOG starts "dying", you probably already know; the numbers simply provide a confirmation of this.  It also lets you know what other games are popular; they might be ones you want to try out.  But consumer concerns aside, we all have an interest in making sure the industry as a whole is doing well.  By aggregating data from multiple sources and reporting on trends in the industry, we gain insight into where we've been and where we may be going next.  And such data is particular useful to investors -- you know, those people who risk hundreds of millions of dollars in MMOG development every year so you can actually get to enjoy games like World of Warcraft, Tabula Rasa, Lord of the Rings Online, EverQuest II, EVE Online, and future games like Age of Conan, Stargate Worlds, and Warhammer Online.

Bruce

 

    Not sure if you remember me from Grimwell but I posted there regularly. Hope you are doing well and all the old gang and frequent posters there are well also.

    Thanks for the update of the charts and all the work that you do. I tend to look at your research and numbers frequently and I also know that you do the best with that you are given. Like others have said, I, for one, wouldn't want to be the one that undertakes this and kudos to you for doing so.

     I look forward to your updated data and numbers when the big games of 2008 launch. Keep up the good work!

Thanks Templarga, of couse Grimwell is a big man at SOE now and badmouthing my numbers. :(  But hey, it's his job.

Bruce

.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

 

Originally posted by JonMichael

Who really cares how many people are playing certain games? 

As long as there's enough people around to group with and converse with, does it really matter who's #1 or #300? Besides... most of the numbers are just estimates anyway.

While I certainly respect the work Mr. Woodcock puts into his site, I see no use for it other than for people to use for trolling... "My game is more popular than yours..."  "So and so company states they have this many subscribers, but the chart shows they are wrong.".. and so on.

Just my opinion, though. ;)

 

Yes it does. If a game has too few subscriptions, it is likely that it will close its doors. Building up a MMORPG char is a major endeavor and I don't want to waste time on a game that is likely to die in another 6 months.

So while it does not matter to me whether WOW has 10 or 12M players (since it is so successful that it is almost certain that it won't die for  few years), it DOES matter to me how many subscriptions for games like Tabula Rasa has before I would consider playing seriously.

First and foremost a game has to hold my interest  like classic EQ did, and I would consider playing a low population MMOG if I ever find another one of the same quality that is designed to be challenging unlike all the new simple craptastic games being released today. I liked Ryzom and played it for a while but the low population was a definite turn off and kept me from committing to it seriously.