Originally posted by kb056

3 million created quest, seems like alot, doesnt it?

Think Sony made a mistake here. If someone knows how long it takes to "create" a quest, I think they have given us enough info to peg the number for the maximum subscriber base currently ingame.

 

If every single person playing did nothing but created quests, depending on the time needed to create a quest, you can peg the max number of possible subs.

 

They say 1 person created 6k quests? 60 minsX24 hrsX30 days=43200 mins. 43200 mins/6000quests=7.2 mins.

This equates to a maximum of 200 quests per day per person with everyone playing 24 hrs a day for a month. 3M/200=15,000 players....

 

I.m betting SWG doesnt have more than a few thousand players still playing, sad.

Kinda drunk, atm, so please recheck my math...I may be wrong but not by much.

Your math doesn't make any sense at all, tbh.  I don't think it's even possible to derive anything from that info...

Originally posted by m240gulf

Originally posted by Hauken

If you look at Microsofts trackrecord regarding Vanguard they have a near perfect trackrecord. Heck MS pulled out of Vanguard long before Beta when they saw where that piece of shit project was heading. Management and cost controll where all but absent at Sigil. So the numbercrunshers at MS did what they had to do. Leave the sinking ship early and cut their losses.

 

 

Good point...

 

I will hold my opinions on if this is good or not until I learn a little bit more about how MS runs games.  I can't recall them creating (other then VG)  any MMOs so I can't really give a good opinion.  I do like some of their games, but in this case they aren't creating a game, rather just buying a game company.

 

Good find though, thanks Obraik.

Other then Vanguard, they've had at least two other attempts at MMO's, both of which they pulled the plug on before they were released.  Marvel Universe online (what would have been a competitor to DC Universe) and True Fantasy Live Online.
 

It is surprising that MS still hasn't made a serious push at the MMO market, even for the Xbox considering they like to keep close to Sony.  Sony now has three MMO's on the way for the PS3 (DCU, The Agency and FreeRealms) whereas the Xbox has nothing on the way.  If Microsoft were to get involved and take over EA, I wouldn't be overly surprised if they made a push for TOR to be playable on the Xbox as well.

Rumours have started that Microsoft is looking to aquire EA, http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/212227/rumor-microsoft-to-buy-ea/ , which would mean TOR would end up being published by Microsoft.  Microsoft is denying the rumours, http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE58N1EK20090924, but denied rumours sometimes end up becoming a reality (the existance of this forum is a good example...).  It's something to keep an eye on, though.

Whether this would be a good thing or not for TOR is debatable and will likely depend on your opinion of Microsoft but so far they don't have an overly good track record with MMO's - look what happened to Vanguard, for instance.  SOE had to step in and save the game from being scrapped before it even launched due to Microsoft ditching it.  Personally, I don't really blame MS for ditching Vanguard - based on the amount of work SOE had to do on the game to get it to a playable state it probably should have been left to die.

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

For the record, I don't like the Jedi profession (hence why I don't play it, nor did I persue it during the pre-nge days) and I despise the Spy profession (for the others who mentioned it).

As for the claim of TOR being Jedi centric, indeed, it is just my opinion.  My opinion that is based on the the previous two KOTOR games, the fancy game trailer that they did for TOR featuring a stack of Jedi and the majority of their screenshots and what not of the game as a whole featuring Jedi.  You're perfectly within your right to reject my opinion, just as I was yours ;)

 

So your opinion is based off of KoTOR, a Single Player RPG where you had no other option then to play Jedi . You also probably arn't thinking about the many charactes you encountered in KoTOR, which actually made the game far more enjoyable then playing a Jedi, Canderous Ordo being my favorite. Given the option, you don't believe players would have chose something other then Jedi, if it had a deep story behind it, like ToR will? And to add on top of that, most of the screen shots feature Jedi and Sith because it was the first classes to be known to ToR. After that it was Bounty Hunter which got a good amount of Screen Shots to follow it's announcment and the same for every class since then. The only reason you see more Light Sabers currently is because Sith Warrior was announced, and like I said before, screen shots follow the announcment. And just from glancing at the screen shots, most of them are scenery such as cities and creatures you encounter.

Then I look forward to being pleasently surprised when TOR launches.

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

 

Considering TOR is mostly going to be Jedi centered, I see little interest for me PvP'ing in it.

 

Hah, SWG is not jedi centric now, right? I actually resubbed about 3 months ago, I think I lasted about a week before I ran out of fun. It was really nothing more then Jedi and Spies. 

Anyways, I think you will be pretty wrong, I usually play mlee classes in MMOs, so far "all" the ranged classes shown in ToR seem more appealing then Jedi/Sith. There was actually a thread about a month back on the ToR forums, lots of people felt the same.

 

There's a "healthy" amount of Jedi, but there's a healthy amount of non-jedi.  I encounter more non-Jedi then I do Jedi...

 

The number of jedi running around during this timeline beyond Luke, Yoda, Vadar and the emperor is not healthy.  Also considering as the number of jedi increased in swg, the player population declined.  I must disagree with your definition of healthy.  Just as I disgree with your definition of successful.  

 

It is funny how you demand proof of even the most obvious situations in swg or soe, but you have little problem making unsubstantiated claims about bioware and their star wars mmo without missing a beat. 

People cannot say soe is on the decline, even when the company has closed more than half of their total game servers across their mmo division, but you can make claims about a game that has not been released yet and you have never played.

Very nice.

For the record, I don't like the Jedi profession (hence why I don't play it, nor did I persue it during the pre-nge days) and I despise the Spy profession (for the others who mentioned it).

As for the claim of TOR being Jedi centric, indeed, it is just my opinion.  My opinion that is based on the the previous two KOTOR games, the fancy game trailer that they did for TOR featuring a stack of Jedi and the majority of their screenshots and what not of the game as a whole featuring Jedi.  You're perfectly within your right to reject my opinion, just as I was yours ;)

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

 

Considering TOR is mostly going to be Jedi centered, I see little interest for me PvP'ing in it.

 

Hah, SWG is not jedi centric now, right? I actually resubbed about 3 months ago, I think I lasted about a week before I ran out of fun. It was really nothing more then Jedi and Spies. 

Anyways, I think you will be pretty wrong, I usually play mlee classes in MMOs, so far "all" the ranged classes shown in ToR seem more appealing then Jedi/Sith. There was actually a thread about a month back on the ToR forums, lots of people felt the same.

There's a "healthy" amount of Jedi, but there's a healthy amount of non-jedi.  I encounter more non-Jedi then I do Jedi...

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

 

Yes, one day in the future, the game will close.  Whether TOR has any effect on that depends on how well it succedes. 

 

As bad as SWG is, I don't think ToR has to be to sucessful to hurt SWG subs. I think most of the pvpers will quit and move to ToR, the people that prefer sandbox or complex crafting will stay. Just my opinion, could be wrong though.

 

Not enough info has been given on PvP for that to be considered a factor yet. 

I think as long as a Restuss-like sit and wait PvP zone is not mentioned, that's all you need to consider. SWG PvP is just bad.

Battlefields have gone a long way to removing the Restuss sit and wait.  You can now get yourself ready for PvP, put yourself in a queue and then go about playing the game while you wait for the other side.  During prime time, I usually only end up waiting in the Q for about 10 minutes before I'm being transported to the battle.  The upcoming GCW update should help with that too.

Considering TOR is mostly going to be Jedi centered, I see little interest for me PvP'ing in it.

Originally posted by greed0104

Originally posted by Obraik

 

Yes, one day in the future, the game will close.  Whether TOR has any effect on that depends on how well it succedes. 

 

As bad as SWG is, I don't think ToR has to be to sucessful to hurt SWG subs. I think most of the pvpers will quit and move to ToR, the people that prefer sandbox or complex crafting will stay. Just my opinion, could be wrong though.

Not enough info has been given on PvP for that to be considered a factor yet. 

Originally posted by Suvroc

Originally posted by Obraik

It doesn't take a clairvoyant to realise that they're going to shutdown those transfer from servers after they opened the stock gates and let everyone out for free.  No,SOE probably shouldn't have said they had "no plans" to shut them down but still, I do hope that the majority of people do have some self thought and could figure out for themselves that such an event is likely to happen sooner rather than later. 

For those that deliberately chose not to transfer because of community, I have to ask, what community?  There's very few left on those servers and while I can understand a small community can be more appealing to some, there are transfer-to servers that aren't exactly massive in populations (such as Gorath) that would likely give the same atmosphere.

I still don't have any sympathy.

 

So what you're saying is that regardless of what is being said officially at SoE the signs were clearly there and people should have seen this coming?

http://www.massively.com/2008/10/27/soe-responds-to-the-announcement-of-star-wars-the-old-republic/

John Smedley: "At some point we'll make a decision about when and if to sunset Galaxies, but as of right now we don't have any plans to do that."
 

You do understand that many people are telling others like yourself that this is coming as well and that you should see the signs too. Perhaps a little clairvoyance on your part may be equally beneficial.

Yes, one day in the future, the game will close.  Whether TOR has any effect on that depends on how well it succedes. 

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Obraik

 

They're not players, they're ex-players.  I call it "stupid tax" because they've had THREE opportunities to transfer off those servers for free now, without having to resub.  THREE chances to avoid having to pay $50 to move off.  Regardless of if the servers were closing down or not, there was a dead line set on that free transfer period and it was set to expire at the end of September (which was announce many months ago).  If people have chosen to ignore the THREE free opportunities to move off those servers then I think it's relatively safe to say they have little interest in returning to the game.

I'm sure if I worked for SOE this type of reply wouldn't be endorsed by them.  My patience for people willing to blame everyone but themselves has growen shorter over the last years (that's what getting into IT will do to you ;) )

You completely overlook the possibility that those "ex-players" may not have wanted to move.  They might have enjoyed subscribing to the game on the server they chose with the people they knew.  The free character transfer doesn't mean people were forced to move.  It doesn't mean people should have had clairvoyance enough to know soe would close the servers and then charge fees if they missed the last window.  You are using 20/20 hindsight to blame players for something they did not know and may not have even been something they were interested in.  

Not to mention soe said repeatedly during those free transfers, they had no plans to close servers. 

I don't blame anyone for staying that a) liked their community and b) believed soe had no plans to merge servers.  If players had any indication this was the route soe was planning then yes, it would be a "stupid tax", but that isn't how things happened.  Nice to see the SWG userbase blaming the players once again.

 

This is not how mergers were handled in any of their other games.  I have not logged onto one of my EQ accounts for years.  If I log on right now, I can play my character without paying a $50 fee even though my old server was closed down.  Why? because all the characters were moved when my old server was closed.  What justifies a $50 fee post mergers?  It isn't like everyone who has ever left knows about this.   

The FCTS was a terrible way to handle server megers, just like it was in warhammer.  Soe needed to take charge and merge servers just like they have in every other game instead of let players make paniced decisions that crowded everyone onto one server and effectively ruined the desired outcome of server mergers.  I find it laughable how soe stands proud and calls the fcts an overwhelming success.  I'm sure the players on Bria for example don't feel that way.

 

Not that much of this matters.  Former players are not coming back to this game anyhow.  Some people might subscribe to archive their memories on a new server, but thats about it.  Another vet trial would just result in people moving their characters to warehouse them on the new servers. 

It doesn't take a clairvoyant to realise that they're going to shutdown those transfer from servers after they opened the stock gates and let everyone out for free.  No,SOE probably shouldn't have said they had "no plans" to shut them down but still, I do hope that the majority of people do have some self thought and could figure out for themselves that such an event is likely to happen sooner rather than later. 

For those that deliberately chose not to transfer because of community, I have to ask, what community?  There's very few left on those servers and while I can understand a small community can be more appealing to some, there are transfer-to servers that aren't exactly massive in populations (such as Gorath) that would likely give the same atmosphere.

I still don't have any sympathy.

Originally posted by TUX426

Originally posted by Obraik

 Well, there you go.  The only inconveniance for not getting in before October 15 is a bit of "stupid tax" ;)

 

LOL, how you can argue this is beyond me. $50 for me to activate my toon PLUS $15 is GOING to cost them players. No way around it.

Why would you have the audacity to call the players "stupid"? How are they stupid? What did they do? Are you calling them "stupid" because they took a break or got bored of the current game? Maybe they were waiting for a coming Update? 

I have to assume you get "stuff" or favors from SoE, because there is no way in hell any rational person could justify the $50 fee to move a toon. If I go back, I don't have to pay the $50 to access my stuff...why should someone on a closed server??? It's a database...not like a Dev has to actually go in there and move my gear. I have several other accounts that were not active at all during the FCTS. Oct 16th, I can log in and play those toons for just $15...even though they have been inactive as long as anyone else's on a "dead" server. As one poster put it, the $50 is simply extortion.

That $50 fee just ensures none of the missing Vets from that server NEVER return. The only ones you can call "stupid" for the $50 is SoE...or maybe this is their plan.

 

They're not players, they're ex-players.  I call it "stupid tax" because they've had THREE opportunities to transfer off those servers for free now, without having to resub.  THREE chances to avoid having to pay $50 to move off.  Regardless of if the servers were closing down or not, there was a dead line set on that free transfer period and it was set to expire at the end of September (which was announce many months ago).  If people have chosen to ignore the THREE free opportunities to move off those servers then I think it's relatively safe to say they have little interest in returning to the game.

I'm sure if I worked for SOE this type of reply wouldn't be endorsed by them.  My patience for people willing to blame everyone but themselves has growen shorter over the last years (that's what getting into IT will do to you ;) )

Originally posted by Kazara

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by Varny

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by Varny

I think this is stupid because someone who hasn't played for years might want to come back and have to pay aload of money...... I can't believe some of the stupid decisions SOE are still making to alienate potential customers.

 

When you sign up for the game you agree to a policy that states SOE only guarantees to keep your character and items for up to 3 months after you leave the game.

 

People don't read them and then go "fair enough" and when they want to come back to the game think "oh well I had my chance I better start again" lol. No they go "I've lost my chars unless I pay $50... fuck this game" and they wont come back. This doesn't help the already small player base the game has and that will continue to decline as it ages. Specially when Swtor comes out the game will get no new players and then you've stopped all them people who quit years ago from ever coming back.

Stupid move by a stupid company.

 

I havn't played WoW for years but the new expansion makes me want to come back. What happens if they say "you have to pay us "50 to get your characters back" and I'd be like "screw this" and wouldn't come back to the game.

Any changes they'll make in the future that might appeal to people who quit wont ever come back now.

Is it $50 per character or per account?

 

So, they should keep those servers running for people that may (emphassis on the may) return to the game sometime and some point in the future?  Sorry, some potential gains just aren't worth it.  I would recommend not blindly clicking accept to agreements without first having a read through them - it's good to know where you stand ;)

It's $0 to move your character off those servers, assuming you have a sub.  Once October 15 comes along there's no paying $50 to get those characters back if you didn't transfer them - they're gone for good.
 

 

Maybe you should read the announcement and FAQ's on the O-board.  The characters are NOT gone for good.

"What happens if I am not able to transfer my characters from these servers before October 15th 2009, can I move my characters after October 15th 2009?

Beginning October 16th, 2009 at 12:01 AM PT you will be able to contact Customer Support and for the standard Character Transfer fee of $50.00 you will be able to schedule a transfer for your character, eligible structures and inventory.

Please be aware that the Character Transfer Service from closed servers does not guarantee that all inventory items will be transferred. Due to the unique nature of moving a character from a closed server, the Character Transfer Service may take additional time to process."

After Octiober 15th, a player will have to subscribe and pay the normal $50/toon to transfer.

 

 

Well, there you go.  The only inconveniance for not getting in before October 15 is a bit of "stupid tax" ;)

Originally posted by Varny

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by Varny

I think this is stupid because someone who hasn't played for years might want to come back and have to pay aload of money...... I can't believe some of the stupid decisions SOE are still making to alienate potential customers.

 

When you sign up for the game you agree to a policy that states SOE only guarantees to keep your character and items for up to 3 months after you leave the game.

 

People don't read them and then go "fair enough" and when they want to come back to the game think "oh well I had my chance I better start again" lol. No they go "I've lost my chars unless I pay $50... fuck this game" and they wont come back. This doesn't help the already small player base the game has and that will continue to decline as it ages. Specially when Swtor comes out the game will get no new players and then you've stopped all them people who quit years ago from ever coming back.

Stupid move by a stupid company.

 

I havn't played WoW for years but the new expansion makes me want to come back. What happens if they say "you have to pay us "50 to get your characters back" and I'd be like "screw this" and wouldn't come back to the game.

Any changes they'll make in the future that might appeal to people who quit wont ever come back now.

Is it $50 per character or per account?

 

So, they should keep those servers running for people that may (emphassis on the may) return to the game sometime and some point in the future?  Sorry, some potential gains just aren't worth it.  I would recommend not blindly clicking accept to agreements without first having a read through them - it's good to know where you stand ;)

It's $0 to move your character off those servers, assuming you have a sub.  Once October 15 comes along there's no paying $50 to get those characters back if you didn't transfer them - they're gone for good.
 

Originally posted by Varny

I think this is stupid because someone who hasn't played for years might want to come back and have to pay aload of money...... I can't believe some of the stupid decisions SOE are still making to alienate potential customers.

When you sign up for the game you agree to a policy that states SOE only guarantees to keep your character and items for up to 3 months after you leave the game.

As has been stated, it's free to transfer off the servers that are closing down.  Yes, if you don't have a current sub you'll need to pay $15 to activate your account so you can take advantage of that free transfer.  With two or three free vet trials already been active through they year and getting your character off a dying server was important to you, I have to question as to why you didn't take some initiative and take advatange of that free time to transfer then.  Going on about "SOE said they had no plans to shut the servers down" isn't really an excuse in my eyes but rather an easy way to blame someone else other then yourself.

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Obraik 

So now we're suddenly switching from talking about SOE as a whole to SWG?  As you should have read, my posts have been in relation to the argument that has meen mentioned in this thread that SOE is shrinking.  If you read through this thread, I haven't commented at all on SWG and whether it's shrinking or growing. 
 

 

I didn't realize WE were talking about SOE.  Saying WE in your statement really surprises me, because you have not really spent much time actually talking about the issue.  You have spent a great deal of time trying to turn this discussion into a debate over NCSoft.  How facts are actually opinions and nothing can be proven in this thread.  How soe releases games with to many servers. 

There are plenty of factual points brought up in this thread that do indeed show soe mmos are declining.  I would be more than happy to discuss any of the information that has been posted here if you would like.  Please go right ahead and pick some.  Explain why it is not a fact and instead an opinion.  At least try to address the points brought up instead of word smithing more derailment.

 

SWG is part of SOE and SWG is shrinking, just like all of their mmos.  We can talk about the company as a whole or each of their games individually if you like.  The results are going to be the same regardless, because their entire mmo base is shrinking.   SWG is just one example of the companies overall performace.  Showing that SWG is declining is also showing that SOE is declining.  Why nitpick one example that supports the topic?  

 

Let me know if you want to actually discuss the issues ok?  I would love to see the rationale you use to formulate your theories and think it would make great discussion if you ever chose to join in. 

 

 

 

 

 

Considering the words in the recent posts have been "SOE" and not "SWG", how could you not realise that the discussion has been about SOE as a whole?
 

I'd love to hear the "facts" that validate the majority of the claims here and I'd like to see your irrefutable evidence that shows how these facts are true.  Hint:  If I can argue a different point of view for the evidence you post then it's not irrefutable.

Lol, sometimes I think you must be a politician.  People have talked about SOE as a whole and SWG specifically at different times in the thread.
 

I've always been of a mind that you'll post in defense of SOE (or SWG) no matter what.  Any evidence that suggests real problems (with either) tends to be ignored.  People have talked about devs leaving, servers closing etc. in SWG, and all you have to say is that none of this matters because people don't have an exact subscription count.

Is an exact count the only available evidence of a reduced population?  Lol of course not.  Servers get shut down because they are under-populated.  It's that simple.  Did you miss the summit where Smed promised server merges because people were complaining about low populations on so many of them?

In case you've overlooked this for some reason, a low population is an undesirable situation for an MMO.  Tbh, I don't expect you to acknowledge any of this.  I simply don't think a simple recognition of such things is in your game plan.  What I'm really doing is calling you on your apparent denial.  You can do with that whatever you like.

Denial of what?  I haven't talked about SWG specifically in any of my posts in this thread, my discussion has been in response to those making claims about SOE and as such, my replies have been on that topic.  I haven't denied that this is proof that SWG's subscriptions have fallen over the years.  I welcome you to show me otherwise.

 

Lol I'll take obfuscation for 500 Alex.  Ahem, now that I've collected myself, you do realize that when you talk about the health of SOE games in general, this of course includes SWG?

You have talked about SOE games, including SWG, and said that without hard subscription figures people can't comment on the health of the games or the company.  That's pretty handy btw, since this one indicator isn't publicly available -_^.

I, and others of course, pointed out that hard numbers are not the only indicators of the relative success of a game or company.  Other indicators may include things like:

-server closures

-game closure

-layoffs

-lack of expansions

-reductions in staffing via transfers to other projects

-lead staff on new projects resigning to start their own work elsewhere

-new revenue models designed to charge extra for features that used to be part of the subscription.

Btw, some of these items refer to SOE as a whole, others refer specifically to SWG.  That should about cover everything ^_^.  Now, you can deny that these indicators exist if you like, or you can acknowledge them.  Probably the only thing on the line at this point though is your credibility.

You can't take the actions in one game and apply it to the company as a whole.  Based on your list, you're also looking a little too far into some things, or spinning them to your own purpose.

SWG might be lacking expansions but other SOE games have been recieving them.  SWG's TCG, whether you like it or not, is about to recieve its 4th expansion and appears to be doing well saleswise (whether you agree with those sales is not something I'm going to debate in this thread.  I've posted my view on this in other threads months ago).  FreeRealms appears to be going well for them based on all the success annoucements they keep releasing. 

Layoffs don't mean a whole lot in this time.  With the recession crap going on, it's rare to find a company that hasn't had to drop staff.

People have been shifted off other projects onto SWG, not just off it.  An EQ2 Dev was recently transferred to SWG to take over a role.  If you're saying staff transfers mean that a company is failing then I'd have to question your theory around this.  Companies transfer staff all the time, especially within bigger companies.  My company that I work for just transferred 3 staff members to different positions today, for instance and it's certainly not failing ;)  Lead staff moving onto their own position isn't exactly abnormal either - people do eventually outgrow their roles and have their own goals they'd like to fulfill that don't fit with the companies goals.

I'd love to see your explination on how new revenue models can be a bad thing.  I'm trying to see how keeping up with the market demand is considered bad.

I'm sure this will generate replys of "you're just saying that because you like SWG and you're an SOE nuthugger" but that's pretty much the point of what I've been saying in a number of posts in this thread.  All these things you're listing as indicators aren't hard evidence at all.  They're seen as bad indicators by you based on your opinion of what they mean - for instance I can only imagine you listed new revenue models since you don't like the new models they're using and prefer the traditional ways instead and because of this you see it as a bad indicator, ignoring the fact that there is indeed an entire market that much prefers the new way (I'm not one of them).  Maybe you listed staff transfers because you've never been part of a large company before.  My point is, as long as your "indicators" are based on your opinion, they never will be "indicators".

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

Welcome back Obraik. You've been a rare sight the last few months. Staying out of trouble?

These forums had become pretty boring over recent months and I didn't have enough free time to justify visiting them anymore.

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

Originally posted by Obraik

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Obraik 

So now we're suddenly switching from talking about SOE as a whole to SWG?  As you should have read, my posts have been in relation to the argument that has meen mentioned in this thread that SOE is shrinking.  If you read through this thread, I haven't commented at all on SWG and whether it's shrinking or growing. 
 

 

I didn't realize WE were talking about SOE.  Saying WE in your statement really surprises me, because you have not really spent much time actually talking about the issue.  You have spent a great deal of time trying to turn this discussion into a debate over NCSoft.  How facts are actually opinions and nothing can be proven in this thread.  How soe releases games with to many servers. 

There are plenty of factual points brought up in this thread that do indeed show soe mmos are declining.  I would be more than happy to discuss any of the information that has been posted here if you would like.  Please go right ahead and pick some.  Explain why it is not a fact and instead an opinion.  At least try to address the points brought up instead of word smithing more derailment.

 

SWG is part of SOE and SWG is shrinking, just like all of their mmos.  We can talk about the company as a whole or each of their games individually if you like.  The results are going to be the same regardless, because their entire mmo base is shrinking.   SWG is just one example of the companies overall performace.  Showing that SWG is declining is also showing that SOE is declining.  Why nitpick one example that supports the topic?  

 

Let me know if you want to actually discuss the issues ok?  I would love to see the rationale you use to formulate your theories and think it would make great discussion if you ever chose to join in. 

 

 

 

 

 

Considering the words in the recent posts have been "SOE" and not "SWG", how could you not realise that the discussion has been about SOE as a whole?
 

I'd love to hear the "facts" that validate the majority of the claims here and I'd like to see your irrefutable evidence that shows how these facts are true.  Hint:  If I can argue a different point of view for the evidence you post then it's not irrefutable.

Lol, sometimes I think you must be a politician.  People have talked about SOE as a whole and SWG specifically at different times in the thread.
 

I've always been of a mind that you'll post in defense of SOE (or SWG) no matter what.  Any evidence that suggests real problems (with either) tends to be ignored.  People have talked about devs leaving, servers closing etc. in SWG, and all you have to say is that none of this matters because people don't have an exact subscription count.

Is an exact count the only available evidence of a reduced population?  Lol of course not.  Servers get shut down because they are under-populated.  It's that simple.  Did you miss the summit where Smed promised server merges because people were complaining about low populations on so many of them?

In case you've overlooked this for some reason, a low population is an undesirable situation for an MMO.  Tbh, I don't expect you to acknowledge any of this.  I simply don't think a simple recognition of such things is in your game plan.  What I'm really doing is calling you on your apparent denial.  You can do with that whatever you like.

Denial of what?  I haven't talked about SWG specifically in any of my posts in this thread, my discussion has been in response to those making claims about SOE and as such, my replies have been on that topic.  I haven't denied that this is proof that SWG's subscriptions have fallen over the years.  I welcome you to show me otherwise.

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Obraik 

So now we're suddenly switching from talking about SOE as a whole to SWG?  As you should have read, my posts have been in relation to the argument that has meen mentioned in this thread that SOE is shrinking.  If you read through this thread, I haven't commented at all on SWG and whether it's shrinking or growing. 
 

 

I didn't realize WE were talking about SOE.  Saying WE in your statement really surprises me, because you have not really spent much time actually talking about the issue.  You have spent a great deal of time trying to turn this discussion into a debate over NCSoft.  How facts are actually opinions and nothing can be proven in this thread.  How soe releases games with to many servers. 

There are plenty of factual points brought up in this thread that do indeed show soe mmos are declining.  I would be more than happy to discuss any of the information that has been posted here if you would like.  Please go right ahead and pick some.  Explain why it is not a fact and instead an opinion.  At least try to address the points brought up instead of word smithing more derailment.

 

SWG is part of SOE and SWG is shrinking, just like all of their mmos.  We can talk about the company as a whole or each of their games individually if you like.  The results are going to be the same regardless, because their entire mmo base is shrinking.   SWG is just one example of the companies overall performace.  Showing that SWG is declining is also showing that SOE is declining.  Why nitpick one example that supports the topic?  

 

Let me know if you want to actually discuss the issues ok?  I would love to see the rationale you use to formulate your theories and think it would make great discussion if you ever chose to join in. 

 

 

 

 

 

Considering the words in the recent posts have been "SOE" and not "SWG", how could you not realise that the discussion has been about SOE as a whole?
 

I'd love to hear the "facts" that validate the majority of the claims here and I'd like to see your irrefutable evidence that shows how these facts are true.  Hint:  If I can argue a different point of view for the evidence you post then it's not irrefutable.

Smedley has confirmed they're woking on another kids MMO based on FreeRealm's:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6227728.html

No confirmation of the theme of the game.