IMGDC 2008 - A Chat About MMOGChart
In her final report coming out of the Indie MMO 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.
While Bruce knew very little about Excel, this thread inspired him to take these findings – and similar findings – to the visual realm. He gathered together numbers from press releases of more MMOs, and made the first MMOG Chart. He found the results interesting – though his chart ugly – he decided to post them on a website to share with fellow gamers. And then he was done, his project complete –
Or so he thought!
At the 2003 Game Developers Conference, Bruce found that his little MMOG Chart idea had made quite a large splash. He had gamers and developers alike asking him for another chart and who was he to deny them? Since then, MMOGChart.com has provided the most up to date, accurate information on MMOG populations.
The project evolved over time, with sources widening from press releases to inside sources and tips from developers. I asked Bruce where he got his numbers from, and oddly enough, most of them come from secondary sources like interviews, press releases, and financial releases. Some companies – Bruce used NCSoft as an example – release quarterly reports including subscription numbers. Others, such as CCP, Lindon Labs, and more send him numbers directly.
A number of his sources even came from under the table, so to speak. People who shouldn’t release the information, or PR “off the record” reports help fill in the chart when companies are “officially” close-lipped.
Sometimes, the press releases are more cryptic, but Bruce decodes them all the same - let’s say a LOTRO press release claims to have the 2nd largest subscription count of all US developed MMOGs; Bruce knows, then, to put them just below WoW and just above the next highest (when he guesses, he guesses conservatively).
With so many diverse sources, and many that would have a vested interest in fudging the numbers, I asked Bruce if he had ever caught a company adding some subscriptions on to the real total. According to Bruce, he’s only found one source so far that gave him the wrong information and it was removed immediately.
To help users gauge the believability of these numbers, Bruce gives every entry an “accuracy rating”.
Wondering what it takes to get on the MMOG list? For now, Bruce is only covering subscription based MMOGs as free or micropayment games will always have a different definition of “total subscribers.” For games like Second Life, where users can play for free or pay, Bruce only counts the paying subscriptions.
Even just covering these Pay to Play games, Bruce has a full plate of hard work with gathering and confirming information. Is it hard to keep up? Oh yeah, but Bruce finds that going to conferences and tradeshows helps him maintain and create relationships with developers to get numbers.
Bruce also uses his MMOG knowledge as a consultant for investors and developers. MMOGChart and private research helps to educate investors about the industry and the probability of success of a product. Bruce often does projections of likely subscriber numbers for games in the making, based on genre, IP, what percent of its target market it is likely to bring in, how alpha/beta testing was received, etc. These projections are, of course, based on the assumption that the game PROVIDES what it is promising. One example of projection-gone-wrong would be Vanguard, which Bruce projected at 240-320k users in the first year. This may have well been true if Vanguard had released with its full feature set!
Through doing these projections, Bruce has noticed a pattern in a game’s lifecycle. Most retail games follow the same pattern: they have a rapid rise for the first 1-2 years, level out for 2-4 years, then begin to decline. If the game has a poor launch (but a lot of hype), this “cycle” is often compressed into a single year or two. Some games are different, especially those that are digitally distributed such as EVE – these games seem to have a slow growth over time. Does that make digital distribution healthier for the long-term MMO? Too soon to know!
One of Bruce’s future predictions is that World of Warcraft will hit 12 million subscribers in the next two years – let’s see if it comes true!
MMOGChart has become a regular stop for MMO users and developers the world over. Averaging 1000 unique visitors on your average day and around on million hits when a new charts goes up, the site is running strong and filling a much needed niche. Check out the newest charts – uploaded just yesterday – 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.
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.
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.....
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
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. ;)
I would have to agree.
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*.
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.
Here is a prime example. Dear darwa. The fact the company you work for doesn't regard MMOGChart as part of the industry, doesn't mean other companies don't. I assure you, 'some' do. If you feel your subscription numbers are misrepresented, there's a very easy way to fix it : publish your reports, and I mean real reports, not "4 millions characters created". I know it won't happen though - because it usually means confirming that the game barely pays for itself, or at least, is not nearly as successful as the PR department is trying to make it look.
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.
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.
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.
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
.
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.
SOE cancel button doesn't work properly. They prolly count peoples they wrongly charged and who want a refund. I hold them a grudge and I am far from done with my vindicative comments.
If anything, you should include a "cancel but denied" grey area for SOE.
EQ was a casual game in 1999, compared to other available MMOs (FFA UO, RvR DAoC, Pyramidal system in AC...). No matter what SOE says. There is room for hardcore games and system, but never at the expanse of your casuals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn8u-JuDiFw
Keep up the good work!
Got me what all the fuss is about, as I see it, Bruces numbers have been pretty dam accurate for years now as most on his list I have played and would easly concure the numbers just by my experiance alone as a player. Those here I believe that bash the numbers are those that have some ties to MMO's that are not fairing so well.
Your only saving grace is to make an MMO people want, if you don't have the means or resources to do so, do what most people do. Find another line of work, don't bash Bruce's numbers because they put your MMO in a bad light. It is YOU that made your peice of dung, now you have to live with it.
As to the Sony guys, here is a good peice of advice and you have heard it plenty, "don't fix what is not broken" and finally, your spy game has real good possibilities, I know many interested to see what becomes of it, don't screw that one up and you might just have a huge hit on your hands!
salu!
X
I love looking at those charts every few months. It makes me feel better about all the trash talking I did when LoTRO fanboys made a big fuss when turbine lied about having 9million characters active. The moderate fanboys said it was more like 600,000. They were both way off haha. I got to endgame before I realized that game imploded because the devs sought to please moderate and not hardcore gamers. Too late to go back and fix that mistake haha.
(<Mod edit>)
If it's really a useful industry tool and companies really look to its stats to judge how well they stand against their competition then great. In that case, the opinion of anyone here makes no difference either way. They either find it useful or they don't.
For myself, I couldn't care less how popular a game is. That WoW has 9 million or whatever players when I played it made no difference to me... I found the game didn't keep my interest and I left. That FFXI has 500-600k players when I played it makes no difference to me. I don't care how many LoTRO has... I play the game because I enjoy it. Not so I can point to a chart and say "uh huh... .ya see that? My MMO can beat up your MMO!"
My point? Some people in these forums put *wayyyy* too much emphasis and concern into those numbers as a way to prove either they're playing the "best" game, or that someone else isn't. Why do you need to justify what you choose to entertain yourself? Is the need to be validated that great for some people? Are they that insecure?
Of course, many times it's merely a convenient "prop" to bolster whatever point-of-view they're trying to force down others' throats. Thus, when the numbers support their argument "they're accurate", when they don't, "they're way off" or "obviously fabricated".
One of the people I parenthetically mentioned above has demonstrated that behavior numerous times in the past. He'll hastily post links to any stats he can find to "prove" a game isn't doing that great. Yet, just as hastily dismiss any that show otherwise. It's so blatantly duplicitous, I can't believe they expect no one to see right through it.
The only meaning I take from any population numbers is this: Is the game doing well enough for the developer to continue supporting and expanding it. If 200k players is a large enough population to do so, then that's awesome. 199k other players and myself will continue to have a fun way to spend our time.
But anyway... If nothing else, the article sure got a rise out of people here.
First of all, id like to say that I appreciate your efforts and your commitment to your work. However, as many users pointed out (some in a very rude way), your data mixes valid and invalid information. If you want your work to be taken seriously, you should not mix facts with guessing, however intelligent that guessing might be. Rating sources for reliability is good, but not enough. If you mix real data (financial reports, official company statements, employee interviews) with guessing (anonymous tips, unconfirmed/unclear company statements, etc), then people will assume that all your data is just a guess.
One way to avoid it is separate charts with confirmed and unconfirmed data. This way, when people compare various subs, they know that that data is solid or not. Once again, thnx for the effort.
I'll accept the accuracy of SirBruce over any random rabid poster from this site. Ballpark figures are good enough for me, accuracy to a Tee is only important to accountants. I like the chart because it shows me which companies are on the up and up when they talk about their own business versus those who lie out their asses, like Turbine and SOE. Both have a history not only about misleading subscription numbers, but also in shady and unprofessional practices against their customers, mistreatment of customers on bulletin boards and so forth. All of these are reasons why I won't play their games, they just don't deserve my money. I also factor in their style of development and typical end product, which I have never like from both of those companies either.
During my design meetings Ive often pulled out your charts to help look at different mmorpgs and their relative popularity. Personally I've also used them to try to find trends of things that led to what. How much of an effect bad lauches had for example. I think what Bruce has done is a great help to the industry and should only improve over the years.
Do you really think he does that? That doesn't seem like him at all. He's usually the nice guy. In fact, I thought he used to stick up for you (not in a pervy way) now and then, back in the olden days. I still peek at his blog now and then, and I don't remember him dissing you anywhere, though I'm sure I've not read everything there.
Yeah, I was disappointed too:
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?&topic_id=414100
Mind you, I know a lot of PR folks and they are frequently called upon to cast doubt on mmogchart as part of their job, and I am perfectly understanding of that; they aren't perfect after all. But in this case Grimwell went way too far in pretty much disparaging the whole site based on the supposed fact that some of the SOE numbers are more than 10% off, which isn't surprising since many are over a year old. But instead of simply saying in a nice way that the numbers aren't exact, he attacked the whole of the data, which honestly really hurt my feelings as in the past Craig and I had always gotten along.
Bruce
Bruce,
Ihave a question reguarding a statement you made on the EQ2 site you linked. You stated:
"If he is questioning the accuracy of some of the more recent numbers for games like SWG and EQII, that's understandable, but in many case those numbers are for periods a year or more ago; they were accurate *then*, but are probably no longer correct for *today*, which again is not surprising and certainly not contrary to what I claim. "
Yet on your site you state for SWG in particular:
"As of October 2007, sources indicate the game has approximately 100,000 subscribers, but I believe the number could be much lower. http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/"
If you comment on the EQ2 site that your numbers are from a year or more ago, how can you state on your page that as of Oct '07 sources indicated a number for SWG and you have that number on your chart?
Essentially, are the numbers you show, for SWG in particular, a year or more old as you stated on the EQ2 site, or are they current as of Oct '07?
I think you misunderstood their question. What JonMichael's asking is "If the game is popular enough to have enough players to interact with - does it matter how it ranks?"
I think you interpreted it as him asking if it matters how many players it has.
Of course it matters whether they have enough players to sustain the game or not. Players are a MMO's life-blood and they need enough subs to pay the bills, at the least. But as far as how it ranks? I don't think that's nearly so important - unless one cares that much about how popular their chosen game is, or needs to feel they're part of some "in-crowd". Personally, I couldn't care less. I play because I enjoy it - not because others do.
Sorry Bruce, one more question:
On your site you state:
C – This indicates that most or all of the data points provided are merely industry “best guesses” or are otherwise questionable. Usually, I will not chart MMOGs that rate C or lower. Their numbers should be taken with a large grain of salt.
DAOC, SWG, PotC, V:SOH and TR are all rated as a C, yet you have consistently charted their course. If the numbers for these game should be taken with a "large grain of salt" and normally you would not chart rate C or lower, why chart them? Are the ratings for the games in need of an update or are games in which "best guesses" going to be charted from now on?
I do have a question about the LOTRO numbers. It was stated that LOTRO sold over 350K copies by Augustish of 2007 in NA alone. Yet the subscribers you list are at 150K? That wouldn't be too bad out of 350K total copies sold. But what about the copies sold in EU, Russia, China, and Korea?
So you are telling me that out of all of those markets the total subscriber base is 150K? Sorry but I don't believe that.
Perhaps I could have written that more clearly. I was speaking in general that many SOE games have old numbers; the SWG number is as of October 2007 but sometimes numbers reported can lag behind the actual numbers.
Bruce
Because they are important games which I do have some data for; I just don't know how reliable it is. DAoC was an A until a few years ago when Mythic stopped revealing numbers; ditto SWG. TR will be upgraded to an A probably next month once we have official numbers from NCSoft. So, these aren't "best guesses" but they are "questionable".
Bruce
I haven't seen any source that LOTRO has sold over 350K copies by August 2007 so you'll have to provide a source on that to enlighten me.
Beyond that, all I can say is a lot of people buy boxes who don't wind up subscribing.
Bruce
Thanks for the replies Bruce I appreciate it. Another question if I may in reguards to SOE numbers...the Station Pass. You are quoted on your site as saying that Station Passes are currently at around 50k folks.
- Are the number shown for each game within the Station Pass including that 50k or are they completely seperate numbers?
- If they are included does each game get the standard 50k included (50k for SWG, 50k for EQ2, etc) or is that number split among each game, and if so, how?
God I hope I worded that right.
I can't remember the other link I saw but this shows that Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter's information about sales. He states that Midway sold around 350K copies in Q2 of 2007(not sure on Midway's quarters but quarter 2 at my work ends in April, that is Military Quarters though since our fiscal calendar runs from october to october, but even if it is calendar year that would mean 350K sold in NA by June 2007). Which would not include any of the sales by codemasters, or the new sales in Korea, China, or Russia. Since this was only talking about Midway's sales.
(And while this source is still more of a guess, no offense but he comes from a more reliable source then you do Bruce. Since he works as an analyst for a Major investment company.)
The 50K (or whatever it is now) isn't included in each game. Only those station pass subscribers who actually activated an account for the game in question are (ideally) counted for that game. So if you sign up a station pass but only play EQII and SWG, you won't be counted for PlametSide. However, if you played SWG on your station pass like 2 years ago, but now only play EQII, you're still going to be counted as a SWG subscriber. At least until they delete the SWG registration, if they ever do.
Bruce
So, yeah, that's just a guess from June 2007. Want to know the actual number? 172K
http://au.gamespot.com/news/6176030.html
So this just shows you that analysts for major investment companies are far more wild guessers than I am. The guy's estimate was off by over half. Half! If they had sold 350K by August they would have shown up higher on NPD's sales charts during July and August. So perhaps they've sold 350K units by now. As for overseas sales, I'm not aware of any data but they don't seem particularly large as of yet.
Bruce
Granted a few of the numbers are right on, but those are from Corporate press reports. A company can't lie on numbers here or they will get in trouble for filing false reports. But saying that there is a reason Bruce took a good year off from updating his numbers. He was caught putting up false numbers for the likes of AC2 and Horizons. He just has to becareful when he gets numbers from insiders working for the companies.
Yes I do look at Bruces numbers but I take them with a grain of salt, knowing majority of games he is taking wild guesses at or getting from insiders for the company that is trying to keep their lively hood going. I would like to see Bruce put * on the excel sheet where he is guessing or getting numbers from insiders, that way at least he is letting us know those numbers could be wrong in a big way. It would add to his crediblity at least. Crediblity that was hurt back in the AC2 HZ days.
Er, no, I took a year off because:
1. Getting new numbers is hard work and I don't get paid for it, so I can only update the website when I have time and money to spare.
2. To update the website further required an overhaul to WordPress which was doublt time-consuming. So even though I had new numbers I couldn't report them.
3. For about six months I had a consulting contract that took up all my time.
4. Afterwards I was pretty much burnt out on MMOs and had a lot of personal projects and family stuff to attend to so I was working on that.
I don't know of any credibility hit during the AC2/HZ days; my numbers on those games are still the most accurate data out there for them.
Bruce
I guess my biggest issue is how can you honestly compare game populations when you do not account for markets out of the NA market for the smaller games but then compare them to World of Warcrafts 10+ Million number. Why not compare the 200Kish subscriber games to World of Warcrafts 2 million NA number to make it a more fair comparison?
Also how come you do not include the extremely large asian games that have a higher population then World of Warcraft does? There are numerous Asian Games with millions of subscribers. I can't remember them (as I don't really like the game style there) but I have seen claims of 80+ million subscriber games.
Then you must have forgot about all the days on VN boards where you were getting hit hard on numbers that were not anywhere near what you would post. As for being the most accurate for a long time you were and still are the only person putting up numbers like this. Granted there is http://mmogdata.voig.com/ but no one really puts much into his numbers and the side joke was it was you who did that site. But that has been confirmed it wasn't you. I just don't see the problem Bruce with putting an * next to the name for example LOTRO on the excel sheet saying this is not from corporate records. Because you refuse to do this little thing hurts you and makes a lot of us wonder why you refuse to do it.
The numbers I provide for LotRO are worldwide. Again, the 200K for August 2007 is based on Turbine's own statement which indicated they are at or over 200K subscribers. Even allowing for generous box sales in Europe at that time, we know they weren't more than 300K subscribers then. But my estimates always err on the conservative side. I don't know LotRO's box sales since then these things generally decline over time, so I don't expect LotRO is selling 50K boxes a month anymore.
The Asian games you speak of are nearly all free-to-play, microtransaction-based; they aren't subscription based games. The claims you see are often bad reporting of the total number of registered players who have ever played the game, not a current monthly active account or anything like that. Free-to-Play games are a growing part of the MMOG market and do deserve to be tracked according to their own metrics, but you can't fairly mix them in with subscription-based MMOGs.
Bruce
He don't and shouldn't put up numbers from Asian games because of the whole inet cafe thing. Can you really put up numbers from a cafe that buys the subs and then wants to add the number of people accessing their computers. It just isn't the same as indivitual accounts.
Oh, I didn't forget about them; I just don't consider them that important. The vast majority of the industry cares little for what some frustrated ex-Horizons player said on a Vault mesage board. Again, the numbers were, in fact, in agreement with what I posted; it's only some players who didn't want to believe them.
I assure you I did not do the mmogdata site and have no connection with it other than the fact that they used a lot of my data. I've spoke with Phil 'Vortal' White and we could not come to an arrangement on working together so I wish him luck; I can't vouch for his sources or methods.
You're the first time I've ever seen someone request a * for such a thing on the Excel sheet, so it's not acurate to say I've refused to do it in the past. In any case, this is, I believe, sufficiently covered in the reliability ratings in the Analysis section of the report and if anyone wants to question the source for a specific data point, all they have to do is ask. So there's no secret that some data points aren't from corporate records.
Bruce
I requested it a few times Bruce on VN boards but you always go to the Analysis section comment. Why not put an * next to the game then people will know to access that part of it and it would save you so much time explaining why you put this or that number up for this or that game. Dude it would help you not hurt you in the long run. But because you keep refusing to do it I guess I will just let it go.
Internet game room players who accessed the game in the last 30 days are included (at least for Blizzard and NCSoft's games).
Bruce
Most people don't read the Aanlysis section as it is, let alone the FAQ. A little asterisk isn't going to change anything.
Bruce
Ok then I guess I was wrong. Anyway Bruce keep up the good work even if I always give you a hard time on it. You know there are always people like me on the other side of the debate. By the way D0Zer says hi.
So you are basing all of your guestimation on very shoddy work. You honestly shouldn't list any MMO population that doesn't have strong backing data. I am sorry but "inside source" is not a strong data source.
Again, the vast majority of the data is NOT guesswork. The LotRO data IS, and is appropriately graded as such. Yes, I picked 200K because I always err conservatively; that's not a matter of innacurracy but simply a choice of methodology. No, it can't mean there were 10 million, because we know the box sales were not 10 million. In fact, we know the box sales were somewhere between 172K and, let's be generous and say 350K. And no one gets 100% conversion. So 200K - 300K subscribers is a reliable estimate, and that's what's actually cited in the Analysis section, and 200K is what's charted because of the aforementioned methodology. So your continued complaints are pointless because all of this is already discussed and included in my report.
I agree that some insides sources are not strong; that's why some games get rated B or C instead of A.
Bruce
I don't see how you can honestly come to a current (as of December 2007) subscriber number of 150K worldwide.
While I don't have a specific number for you, my sources indicate that the Codemasters sales at that time were not significant.
As for the 150K number since, that's from an unconfirmed source, so it could be wrong as well. Hence LotRO's rating. Hpefully Turbine can clear this up by providing some more precise data in the future.
Bruce
Silly, you're getting so much space even here to show off your "unconfirmed data".
Bruce. Just let it go. Some people will always argue semantics and stupid stuff like accuracy even after you clearly state that some of your work is based on "estimates" because the publishers do not like to give out the info. I like the work you do and I appreciate the amount of effort you put into doing your charts and graphs as do many others. Forget the naysayers and just move on.
Bruce, thanks for your work!.
--Tei.
Good job on the charts Bruce.
..Some people don't seem to know this isn't your job.
For instance he makes a guess on how many more copies of LOTRO above the 172K were sold, he then guesses how many people still subscribe. Heck I would be happy if he listed the 172K as the subscriber number. At least that has some basis in reality. But using sales numbers from 3 months out of the about 12 months the game has existed and from only 1 publisher out of the 5 publishers who sell the game is just not good reporting. If a newspaper published information with that type of poor research and not clearly marked as "guesses" on the main charts, they would get sued.
As someone suggested earlier he should list separate charts. One for confirmed data and one for "guesswork" data.
No, they wouldn't, and once again you misstake the facts because of some personal stake you have in your preciousssss LOTRO. The 200K number isn't a guess; it's a minimum based on Turbine saying they're at least as large as the reported data for the 2nd largest MMO in NA at that time, which is 200K. It has absolutely *nothing* to do with adding a guess to 172K. 172K was from 2 months previous, and simply serves as a sanity check to tell us that, yes Virginia, they've at least sold that many copies. Subsequent sales numbers again tell us NOTHING other than the fact there's an upper limit to the number of subscribers during that time, which was probably no more than 300K in August. It good be God-knows-what now, but that's irrelevant; those sales are not the basis for subsequent data points.
And I can also assure you that those sales in those "4 other publishers" you're touting aren't that high, or else you can bet Turbine would be crowing about how they've passsed 500K subscribers, 1 million subscribers, etc. They haven't, and they aren't going to, because the game, as great as it is, ain't never gonna get there. Unless a bunch of people in China suddenly decide to start playing it.
Bruce
Preciousss? Huh? Falling to personal attacks? I don't even play LOTRO as a full time MMO. I played for a few months and then quit for awhile and played again for a month. (Not lifetime subscription either) I have as much personal stake in just about any MMO. Since I have played about 30+ of them. AC1, DAoC, WoW are the big three I have played and the only ones I have played full-time.
Umm... seriously you need to let that 172k number go. I can't believe anyone who wants to be taken seriously actually uses that still, even worse to point to it as a "fact" for basing sub. numbers on. For more info. on how GameSpot arrived at that number and the debate behind it on this very board... visit this very long thread. (Be warned though... it's very long... and the good stuff isn't until over half-way through).
www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/142530/page/1
Here's some more links to do some research with (hmm... who is supposed to be the "expert" on this stuff)?
www.midway.com/rxpage/mpr_12064.html
http://www.midway.com/assets/press/documents/MWY_Q2_2007.pdf
(Notice anything missing in those two links above? Hmm... no mention of that magical 172k number? So where do you suppose Gamespot come up with that number? Oh yeah... they pulled it out of their...) Really, if using Gamespot's 172k number is "solid evidence" ...I'm even less sure of the other numbers from the site.
Doing some cursory investigation I think it will shed some light on just how much guessing is done in the sub. numbers for MMO games. Oh and for the record... I don't put much stock in NPD's numbers either. (NA numbers only, large retailers not counted, no direct download numbers, etc. It's all a very interesting business approach). But, then that's an entirely different thread.
Last point. Your quote below:
"or else you can bet Turbine would be crowing about how they've passsed 500K subscribers, 1 million subscribers, etc. They haven't, and they aren't going to, because the game, as great as it is, ain't never gonna get there."
Whoops... there goes that objectivity claim. So much for being an unbiased observer merely putting up the numbers. Seems like somebody touched a nerve with you there. If you want to be taken seriously you might want to avoid such obvious biased remarks in the future.
(Oh and by the way. As to the Codemasters not having nearly the numbers that Midway did... heh, they have half of the servers. A couple of them named as the most crowded on the official boards... might want to rethink that statement too. )
1. I have no need to let the 172K number "go" as it provides no basis for my research other than to confirm that they sold at least 172K copies by June 2007. Since I'm already believing they sold at least 200K copies by August 2007, the 172K number is largely irrelevant.
2. I have no desire to read a long MMORPG thread on the subject. As to the Midway documents, I have already reviewed those, as well as several other private documents not in general circulation.
3. Again, the 172K number is not the basis for my numbers, so if you do not consider it "solid evidence" then it should provide no bearing on your evaluation of my research. I only brought it up to refute another poster's posting of another analysts's " guess" as to the box sales.
4. I've done far more than a cursory investigation of this mater, so I think I'm at least as well informed if not moreso than you on the subject. As to NPD's numbers, you do not seem to know that large retailers are now in fact counted (they resolved their problem with Wal-Mart), so while deficiencies still remain, their numbers remain more accurate than before. But NA box sales do little more to help provide a ballpark uuper bound when sales via other channels are minimal, and again provide no basis for my reporting.
5. The fact I've rendered a forecast on LotRO's future growth in no way damages my objectivity in reporting the numbers. I am called upon as an anayst to report what the numbers show and what I think that means. If the numbers turn out differently from my predictions, the numbers are what matter, not my predictions. I've been wrong before, so if anything that enhances, not detracts from, my credibility and objectivity.
6. No need to rethink the statement re: Midway vs. Codemasters, as the number or crowdedness of servers is orthogonal to number of subscribers.
Bruce
I enjoy the site however Im old and those graphs are hard to follow. Many of the symbols and colors look nearly identical to others on the same graph. Would it be possible to single out individual games or make a way to zoom in so we can view easier ?
One comment on the numbers...
Star Wars Galaxies - you have them listed as 100k I believe. I recently went back and played the game for 2 months. There is noooooooo way that game has more than 40k players. There are like 26 servers, 20 of which are completely dead. Maybe 3 that are okay and 3 that are somewhat active (but compared to other MMO's still very dead).
Using the principle that on a weekend one might expect to see 10% to 15% of the entire game's accounts playing, I made an estimate on the 3 busiest servers (last month). Doing every search method available, I ran across on average 200 different names per server. Now of course half of those could be someone logging into an alt but im being conservative and counting them all that I found. Thats 600 total names for 3 servers. The 3 medium servers, lets say theyre half as busy so 300 total...or 900 total for the top 6 servers.
Lets say the remaining 20 servers have 100 names per (thats being generous) or a total of 2000 names, add in the top 6 and we get 2900 total names (again being generous). Using the above principle (based on Eve and SOE statements) we can assume almost 3k is 10% of the total player base.
Therefore Star Wars Galaxies has roughly 30k subcribers. Course mine is only an estimate as well but from what I saw more accurate than your number for the game.
I read somewhere that anytime a station pass member creates a SWG account, they are forever counted as a SWG subscriber regardless if they ever go back and play the game again. If true, Im thinking this is where the numbers might be skewed a bit (course that all depends on where your info comes from)
Im sure you have received critical comments previously about SWG. You see many of us have a vested interest in seeing SWG failure. And a healthy subscriber base says it was okay for SOE to violate the cardinal rule of MMO's...never change the core mechanics of the game. They broke the trust that exists when a player pays a monthly fee to someone who is supposed to use that money to fix bugs and add content.
Its in the best interest that everyone see SWG totally fail for the good of the industry. Otherwise why ever bother investing time and money into an avatar when it can be tossed aside ?
Hey I'm young and the graphs are too small for me too. :) If you have Microsoft Excel, the best thing to do is download the Excel file from the Downloads section and look at the charts up close yourself. I'm looking at better graphical solutions but to be honest the current Excel export method is extremely convenient.
As far as SWG goes, yes the number could be smaller, but you're right about station accounts. Basically your station account is a subscription to ALL of those MMOs. Now, if you don't actually ever register for one, you won't be counter, but if you played SWG 2 years ago on your station account and now no longer do, there's really no way not to count you as a subscriber since you ARE still paying for a SWG subscription that you aren't using. So yes, that does skew the numbers a bit on the low end. But I think for most people it matters little if SWG is 50K or 100K; what's important is that it's not 200K and it's not 10K. And it's still useful for ferreting out trends; whether or not a game is growing or shrinking, and how quickly.
As for the rule of thumb regarding concurrent users to subscribers, while 10% used to be a standard metric, in my research I've found it can really vary a lot from game to game; some may be as low as 5% and others as high as 25%. I've also seen that it tends to get distorted for older games and games at the low end; basically there seems to be some percentage of people who will simply keep subscribing to a game long after they stop playing. Remember too that concurrencies are a leading indicator; people stop playing, and only months later do they usually unsubscribe. People who bought a yearly subscription may still get counted.
Bruce
If you people are so fricken insistent that his numbers aren't even accurate for ballpark figures, then why don't you get off your lazy asses and do your own research and publish your "accurate" numbers. Otherwise, just shut up, you're not debunking anything nor are you being constructive. Obviously there are more people that respect these numbers than don't. That alone is good enough to use the graphs as a general tool for evaluating MMO's for whatever reason. If companies want to use that data, that is their business, not yours. You people think you're so smart, but these companies make money off you anyway. Even SWG is still making money after all the uproar you people made. Makes you wonder how much of a real impact you whining bulletin board lurkers really have on the industry.
My point and I have stated it numerous times is that his research has holes and shoddy disclaimers showing those holes. His charts are reposted numerous times without his game grades attached and so give the illusion that those are hard numbers. (which I am not blaming you for Bruce. But it would be more responsible to have the information shown on the charts, so they can't be used to convey something they don't mean)
So once again I am not putting down what Bruce does with his off time. Nor am I putting down the value of the work (since a lot of publishers do not release hard data). What I am putting down is the fact that he doesn't make it apparent enough what is hard data. Such as EvE's subs, WoW's Subs, NCSoft's subs, etc compared to what is not hard data. Such as SOE, Turbine, EA Mythic, etc.
Anything that isn't either a press release, financial report, or an "on the record" company representative statement should be listed on a separate chart and annotated as such.
I don't understand what the problem with that is? It shouldn't be all that difficult to transfer the data that is hard fact from the estimated data. And it would go a long way to increasing credibility of the information and also the validity of the charts.
See using two charts to show the information with titles showing which is which would be more helpful to the community then lumping all of them together.
Unless of course there is a reason that they need to be lumped together on a single chart. I can't see why that would be though if the information is for informative purposes only.
But once again I am sorry if people take offense, but I just believe that if you are going to do something, it should be done 110% the right way.
And remember... Bruce is the one that brought this to us here for open discussion through the interview. If you don't like the discussion... well, don't read it.
I'm still not getting why is this charlatan getting so much space here. He's got a big adv on the main site. Is a guessing competition or using UNCONFIRMED DATA good enough? Don't you wanna pay him a TV adv?
I agree with Cabe2323... This would all be moot if the hard data was listed separate from the just guesses data. It's pretty easy to see which MMOs have reliable data and which ones don't when you download the spreadsheet. Problem is that the vast majority of people don't take the time to download the spreadsheet and look at the numbers. Then when you try and tell people that very fact... they say you're lying.
Whatever... if people want to believe something just because it's got a web site and a graph... good grief... we're in bigger trouble than I thought.
well, if you believe that 46% of all statistics are totally meaningless then this site shows the general trends of subscriptions in games, and not hard data. Nobody's every going to release hard data anyway because they are all scared of what it could do to their credibility. Weird, I reckon.
I'm interested to see that he's now listing the trands of concurrent online users. The data's too vague to mean anything, but certainly something you could throw under the nose of a marketing manager, investor or hosting provider (e.g. someone so far removed from the real world it's a surprise the even exist) in order to dupe them into giving you more money, better equipment, etc.
I like the site. I don't use it as a reference, more as a feeling.
Discussion? You guys aren't discussing a damn thing. All you do is attack the validity of his data and give absolutely no proof. Where are your hard numbers that prove his are completely and utterly wrong? You guys aren't being in the least bit constructive and you complain of personal attacks and yet the very language you use in your posts does the exact same thing, puking hypocrites. Here, I'll even reflect your own idiocy back at ya, if you don't like the topic of discussion then don't participate in this thread. Yes, this is a public forum, but there is still a code of conduct, he hasn't done a damn thing to earn the vitriol you guys keep spewing at him in every post. You don't believe the numbers, fine, then move along instead of badgering the guy with statements that literally and figuratively call his work bullshit.
As to the "complain of personal attacks"... and where was it that I did that again? And then the "very language you use in your posts"... excuse me? Show me where I posted a single personal attack.
Really I do think you're a bit too emotionally attached to this. You might want to take a step away from the keyboard for awhile if something this insignificant gets you so worked up.
Doh, please I beg you, if you ever gonna post something in the future, read the whole thread first. It was Bruce (not the one from Canada) but the Bruce, the Great Conjurer who said that some of the data are UNCONFIRMED.
I too would like to see some sort of notation/separation between what is solid, public and actual numbers, and guesswork and info from insiders (which are about as reliable as NDA breakers for betas... doesn't matter if their info is right, they're still doing something they shouldn't).
Personally I don't use this site because there's no way to really tell between what's real and guess. While some might argue that it's a good "guide," it's not if half the stuff is just guess work. How useful are these numbers if you have to take all of them with a huge helping of salt? Not much.
Heh. Yeah, I noticed the facade of objectivity slip a bit there, too. Quite unbecoming of someone who wants to be taken seriously as an impartial collector and reporter of stats.
Bruce, you're sounding more like your typical mmorpg.com LoTRO hater in that post than someone trying to defend objective research.
"And I can also assure you that those sales in those "4 other publishers" you're touting aren't that high, or else you can bet Turbine would be crowing about how they've passsed 500K subscribers, 1 million subscribers, etc. They haven't, and they aren't going to, because the game, as great as it is, ain't never gonna get there. Unless a bunch of people in China suddenly decide to start playing it."
You don't know any of that. Not a word of it. Unless you'd like to reveal your source? Seriously... If I didn't know better, I'd have figured that was posted by any of the usual suspects right on the LoTRO forums.
And, before you try to dismiss me as "another LoTRO fanboi defending my "precioussss"... if you read my post history, numbers and ranking means squat to me. As long as there's enough subs to keep the game active and growing - which there most certainly is for LoTRO - life is good. I do, however, pay attention when there's an apparent motive behind one's actions or comments and they seem disingenuous. And you, in that post, certainly displayed something to be suspicious of.
Looks like it just took someone to rub you the wrong way for it to come out.
First off I haven't made a personal attack, while both you and Bruce have. Secondly I could care less about the numbers themselves. They are pointless. The point is the validity of the research method. I am sorry if my schooling causes me to have an issue with questionable methodology.
As I and numerous other have stated this could easily be resolved by listing the data seperately. That isn't a big deal. Just one chart annotated as "Hard" confirmed data and one chart annotated as "Educated Guess" unconfirmed data.
How is that not constructive? I am stating my opinion on how the data could be better presented in a manner that would help the users of the information more. It would better portray which companies are open with their information and as that is important to a lot of people it would mean more then just a number. People that do not like the practice of not releasing subscription numbers could then avoid all of the companies on the uncomfirmed chart.
You just can't compare data when it is gathered in such varying manners. It really calls into question the validity of the data itself.
You call that "rendering a forecast"?
If you say so.
Looks to me like you slipped, and are now trying to spin it into "credibility".
Careful, Dragonace... No telling what he might do if you really anger him. He's liable to get really mean and call you a fanboi.
Of course.. I don't know that for certain... I'm just rendering a forecast... a "best guess" if you will.
Just FYI Bruce was a big supporter of LOTRO before it came out of beta. He was talking the game up way before it went retail. Wish I would have keep thoe posts just for the laughs.
But saying that LOTRO isn't a bad game it just will never be that great of a game.
1. No, you're missing the point. Whether or not the numbers are made up are irrelevant to what's on my charts; someone else brought the issue up here.
2. So far, all the links you've provided I've read, so I doubt that thread provides anything new I haven't read before. Perhaps you should actually read what's on my site sometime; maybe you'd learn something.
3. No, the point is YOU think the number is bogus, but that's your not very well supported opinion. You basically say, "Well, I can't find another source for it, so they must have made it up." And you've found nothing to contradict it. So yeah, I'll take their number over an "analyst guess". But since neither has any bearing on my numbers or my methods re: LotRO's numbers, then this whole issue is irrelevant.
4. Direct downloads are quite "minimal" when a particular game doesn't have them or has them only in a limited fashion. While digital distribution has come a long way in modern times thanks to the likes of Steam and X-Box Live, and I think we've finally turned a corner there, for a retail-launched MMOG retail still rules the roost. So NPD not counting digital downloads for LotRO is pretty much a non-issue right now.
5. No so; for example I've "doom and gloomed" WoW's growth in the future, so it has nothing to do with whether or not the company provides data. And I'm not particularly negative on LotRO; it's been such a great success that Jeffrey Steefel got rated highly on my list of the Top 20 Most Influential People in MMOs in 2007. I just said it ain't getting 500K subs unless it takes off in China; I'm sure Turbine would be happy to have a 400K sub MMO for the first time.
6. Again, more irrelevancies. The state of the servers now has no bearing on a sub number from August 2007. And Codemasters could have sold a million boxes today and it still has no bearing on the numbers I've reported.
Bruce
You should read the Analysis and Conclusions sections; this will tell you MMOG by MMOG what's firm, what's less firm, and what's believable but questionable.
Bruce
1. Yes, *I* am the one not being taken seriously. Do you even hear yourself?
2. And no, I wouldn't like to reveal my source; their identity is protected under California law.
3. I've read a coule of threads on the LotRO forums, but I'm not a regular reader so I don't really know what you're talking about.
4. Yes, you've uncovered my secret motive to destroy Turbine by reporting that their latest MMOG is the most successful of their four released MMOGs yet. Brilliant!
Bruce
I was an even bigger supporter of DDO and AC2; imagine how embarassing that was. :P
That's what makes the current assertions even more laughable. I've probably spent more time in Turbine's MMOs AC1, AC2, and DDO than all other MMOs combined, except maybe for Ultima Online. I'm on good terms with many of Turbine's former employees. I'm more of a fan of Turbine (pun!) than anything else.
Bruce
Sir Bruce's data is a "fun" read, and may be used to denote trends, but his chart is much like religion........unverifiable, with unrevealed sources it is easy to set oneself up as the expert (see the pope), and in the end because only one "speaker" tells the masses what is and what is not, it becomes a cult in its own right.
tl; dr
Bruce
I check out MMOGChart every now and then. Why? Because there is nothing else like it on the web.
All the people saying they should start their own websites and post their own numbers should do exactly that instead of complaining. Give another perspective if you disagree with the site so much. And get ready to spend years doing it and becoming known as MMOGChart has.
Any sensible person knows that broad ranges are all we can expect when most of the industry guards their sub numbers. I haven't found anything on MMOGChart that flies in the face of reality in general terms. Now I don't expect anyone to be able to say whether a game has exactly 150k or whether it has 300k unless they steal that info from companies.
Until some of these whiners start collecting data themselves, MMOGChart is the only resource out there.
Now if you want to mock something, how about those predications? Vanguard? It will be interesting to see how accurate the 12 million WoW subscribers one turns out.
Praise Jesus!......Hallelujah!!!.......I have seen the light.............now as we all wait for the smoke stack.............................
This is a good point, I have found NOTHING else on the web that does the same thing. You can beat it all you want but so long as it is the only one, I will watch it, and it will exist and be used.
I've always found that looking at server lists and population status (low/medium/high) is a good way to tell how well something is doing.
Granted, you need a general understandin of what "HIGH/FULL" means, but it does help.
I'll judge the a-hole critics here as people who just want to prove someone wrong, and can't let it go. Much like Darwa's initial post: He rates MMORPG so low but still comes by here to make a post.
Some like to drink the kool-aid... others like to have a bit more to go on than a vision from the "UNCONFIRMED SOURCES".
Here's the link for the data below: www.mmogchart.com/analysis-and-conclusions/
A – This indicates that the vast majority of the data points shown come from either official announcements by the companies involved or reliable inside sources. The numbers can be considered reliable, although a few of the data points may be incorrect.
B – This indicates that while some of the data points shown may be official, a substantial number come from press articles, unproven inside sources, or other indirect means. The numbers may not be exact for the MMOG in question, but are certainly in the ballpark.
C – This indicates that most or all of the data points provided are merely industry “best guesses” or are otherwise questionable. Usually, I will not chart MMOGs that rate C or lower. Their numbers should be taken with a large grain of salt.
45 MMOs that a letter grade is given for.
5 = C - 11% of the letter graded MMOs
(Seems like a high percentage give the statement of "Usually I will not chart" statement)
19 = B - 42% of the total letter graded MMOs
2 = less than 1 year old data
9 = 1year+ old data
2 = 2 year+ old data
3 = 3 year+ old data
2 = Games that have shut down.
1 = Games no longer tracked.
Hmm... only 2 games with data less than a year old. Even one of those two is for a game with only 1,000 users. So let's see 2 out of 19 is about 11% of the data is less than a year old.
21 = A - 47% of the total letter graded MMOs
11 = less than 1 year old data
4 = 2 year+ old data
1 = 3 year+ old data
3 = Games that have shut down
2 = Games that are no longer tracked
Definitely the best chance of accurate data in this grouping. I'm a bit surprised to find "A" rated data that is 2 and shockingly even 3 years old though! Might want to consider downgrading them to at least a B by now.
So, of the 40 games in the A and B rated categories... 13 have data that is less than 1 year old or about 33%.
Well, the letter grade is only on the data reported. So yes, in some cases, I have great certainty what the subscriber numbers were for a MMOG 3 years ago, but I can't tell you what it is today. This isn't a problem generally but it can distort current market share data by a small amount. With WoW and NCSoft's games dominating most everything else, though, we're really only talking about a few tenths of a percent.
Also, a lot of those games you mention that haven't been updated in a while are closed or are no-longer subscription based so are now 0 (Earth & Beyond, MCO, The Sims Online, ShadowBane, etc.)
Bruce
Newsflash to you : All companies put their own spin on things to make the marketing sound better. At least Turbine wasn't LYING when they said they had 4 million characters made in their Middle Earth.
Blizzard's "10 million" stickers on their boxes aren't exactly the truth. There is NOT 10 million SUBSCRIBED WoW players. 6 Million of the 10 do NOT PAY MONTHLY FEES. Only 4.5 million pay subscription fees for WoW and that's in North America and Europe.
And Bruce's chart should show that. If the chart was meant to be truly accurate for a "Subscriber MMO" chart.
I think his estimate though is accurate that WoW will hit 12 million. What the heck- Blizzard will ship the next expansion for free to the Asian Internet cafes again ...like they did with Burning Crusade. Only the US and Europe have to PAY for the Game boxes and PAY the monthly game fees.
And the " your preciousss LOTRO" comment by Sir Bruce was very unprofessional and rude.
The Internet cafe players in China are still paying to play the game. Only those active in the last 30 days are counted, so I have no problem with equating them with monthly subscribers. True, they don't have to buy the game box, but otherwise it's no different from someone who plays WoW or EQ with a game time card.
Bruce
Wow! And this generation is supposed to bring about social change based on logic that is setting a precedent over previous generations.
You people do realize that if the data is faltered and can NOT be correlated by providing evidence of how the data was arrived at, it is inconclusive at best and false data at worse? If pharmaceutical companies approached research like this I sure wouldn't even want to take over the counter medicine.
For the sake of argument, I would like to ask Sir Bruce what level of education he has concerning business, statistics, and methods of research? This is not an attack, it is merely a question because honestly I do not know. But I think it is important in order to be taken legitimately as an analyst you at least have some background in data gathering, statistical modeling, and business research. This is one of those times education is important.
EDIT: NM I found your WiKi entry and while you have a degree, which is good, I see that you are NOT trained in statistics, business analysis, business research, or any other business for that matter. Physics, computer science, and philosophy (btw I am impressed), are not business or statistical methods concerning business, although you should be aware of scientific methods of study based on your physics trainings. And based on that you should be aware of why there are criticisms with your analysis of anonymous data sources and the lack of verifiable date. Just because you say it is does not mean the rest of the educated community will accept that it is.
I just find it funny that people say we are picking on him. If you can't stand the heat... stay out of the kitchen comes to mind. The only personal attacks seem to be coming from Bruce and his followers for another thing. Heh... not that we're really dealing with facts though... so no biggie.
Damn, I got quoted.
So here is the problem with your response. You are assuming that the viewer has to care about the accuracy of his data and graphs. Scratch that, I care, but my accuracy requirements are much different than yours it sounds like.
It is accurate enough for my needs (Which, to be honest, are not many). It succeeds.
As far as I am concerned it doesn't directly lie outright, but many of the posts mock it and bash the author, who put together a pretty good site in my opinion. In his spare time nonetheless. Come on, the whole site has "reader beware" or "my opinion" all over it.
But, what were you pointing out in quoting my post? I'm presuming:
"You can beat it all you want but so long as it is the only one, I will watch it, and it will exist and be used."
But can't quite be certain since you basically used my response as fodder for a snide remark. I find that petty and unhelpful. Regardless, I can see a point where I should have stated "It will be watched" rather than "I will watch it."
"Our species eat the wounded ones" So go ahead and chew on that bone I gave you.
"You people do realize that if the data is faltered and can NOT be correlated by providing evidence of how the data was arrived at, it is inconclusive at best and false data at worse?"
If this was the case, i'm fairly certain multiple MMO companies would have contact Sir Bruce to either pull the site down, correct it, or they would have released statements of their own to combat such dangerous info. Particularly from the press, hits, or even this topic. From what it sounds like, many companies are actually trying to promote his efforts. Perhaps they feel he is inflating things to their benefit. But in the end it is reader beware, this is the internet.
Your post (particularly at "Wow! And this generation") suggests you are older than me or possibly my superior, but you do not demonstrate it this time. Particularly with your jab at me.
Either his data sources, or his lack of a resume (since you asked for his credentials) doesn't fit your standards. Problem is, i'm fairly certain this is one of those times where it is your problem, not his.
No, I don't have a degree in such things, nor is one required in order to do industry analysis and reporting. Bill Gates didn't have a degree in engineering or business, either.
Bruce
Thanks for clarifying Bruce. And yes... there are quite a few that did quite well without a degree. Who knows... perhaps our criticisms will inspire you to greatness as well.
From this site: www.forbes.com/2003/07/28/cx_dd_0728mondaymatch.html
Richest self-made Americans
without a college degree:
William H. Gates III
Harvard University, dropout
Net worth: $43 billion
Source: Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people )
Paul Allen
Washington State University, dropout
Net worth: $21 billion
Source: Microsoft; Charter Communications (nasdaq: CHTR - news - people )
Larry Ellison
University of Illinois, dropout
Net worth: $15.2 billion
Oracle (nasdaq: ORCL - news - people )
Michael Dell
University of Texas Austin, dropout
Net worth: $11.2 billion
Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people )
No, but to sound like an old folk, you should know better. You do have a degree, and you should know that if you are going to use unsubstantiated data, unverifiable data, and "unrevealed" sources your methods will be questioned by those that know better.
I start to question your need to hide your sources, and I wonder if it is all about the following rather than the data. While a degree may NOT be REQUIRED, a degree does validate the person doing the analysis.
But really I don't know why I am here, because secretly I hope Turbine's LoTRO numbers stay low but profitable. I mean your biased statements alone make me glad you are busy in other places. Because this is the best MMO community I have found in the 7+ MMO's I have played. I do not want the fad crowd to find the game and screw it up for a rather pleasant community. So for me it is self serving for you to use biased and unsubstantiated numbers in this case.
Thanks!!
Long post to defend unverified data. So the ends justify the means? Be very careful, that kind of logic supports genocide, racism, and a whole bunch of other negative behavior traits.
F.Y.I. You might want to update your page located at: www.mmogchart.com/2008/02/11/npd-to-start-tracking-mmog-subscriptions/
Here is the quote: "they don’t include sales from major retailers like Wal-Mart" Heh... seems like I got chastised for saying the exact same thing not too long ago.
See... look how much good we're going for you. Helping you fix out-dated data and inconsistencies. Sometimes it's good to have some healthy criticisms from time to time instead of just blind followers.
Yes- the Asian people pay....drum roll please....4 pennies to log into WoW at the Internet Cafe's!
Sorry- I don't equate 4 cents to a game subscription.
Nice try, but you should read down to the comments section. That's how I knew it was no longer true.
Bruce
Er, sorry, it's a lot more than 4 cents:
Bruce
Point being Bruce, it is A LOT less than people pay in US and Europe for Wow, different way they subscribe and play over there, you can hardly equate any equality between Asian and US/Europe numbers, they are a completely different animal. Hence once you combine them you hold yourself up to justified criticism.
Your SWG numbers are way too high, I still log into that game ocassionally with station pass and the vast majority of servers are ghost towns. I am sure you are being fed bad numbers on purpose for this game. This game is a real sore spot with Smedley and I would not put it past him surreptitiously having his people pump up the numbers.
I still find it amazing that more people stlll play outdated EQ rather than EQ2.
For those disputing your numbers, I don't know any place else that has better ones.
I am thankful for the opportunity to see Sir Bruce interact on these boards.
It brings light to the opinions, values, and some of the bias he has towards specific games. My only hope is the industry sees topics like this so they know how he is "applying" his super secret, optimized, decoder ring applied data.
???
That link I posted is from YOUR web site.
This quote:
"they don’t include sales from major retailers like Wal-Mart"
is from YOUR web site.
What part of that is not true?
Here is the entire piece:
The NPD Group has announced today that they’re going to start selling quarterly reports tracking “market size and title shares for paid online subscriptions to video games and MMO/PC games, gaming Web sites, and video game console services.”
Well it’s about time. NPD is currently the industry go-to source for monthly retail sales figures, but they are notorious for also under-reporting said numbers; they don’t include sales from major retailers like Wal-Mart, nor do they track digital downloads. It’ll be interesting to see how their MMOG numbers compare with mine (or if they’ll just copy my numbers for their own report).
From this link: www.mmogchart.com/2008/02/11/npd-to-start-tracking-mmog-subscriptions/
Wouldn't it make sense to edit that bit about Wal-Mart if you now think it's not true? Especially since you are telling other people it's not true. Someone reading your site would clearly have the wrong information... correct?
See... that's another part that makes the site a lot less believable. Even when you admit there is mis-information on the site... it doesn't get changed. Don't you think thats a problem with credibility?
Heh.. oh well. It's your site, do what you want. Just thought you'd appreciate someone trying to point out an error that even you, yourself admit is an error... for some reason you just choose not to fix it.
Heh.... I'm hoping you got... "express prior consent" from Vivendi before posting that up... otherwise the mods should take it down, as it's illegal. Wouldn't want you getting in trouble.
Bruce,
It costs $1.86 to play WoW for 33 hours in China. But, they can choose to walk into those Internet cafes and pay for one hour at a time by paying 5 cents per hour.
5 cents an hour is not "paying a lot more than 4 cents an hour" as you said Bruce. Anyone with 5 cents in their pocket can play WoW once a month in China and be counted as a paying subscriber.
What I'd really like to know is- is WoW the only game installed in the Cafe's computers- other than the numerous F2P and P2P Asian games? Are there other NA games even available on those Cafe's computers? And if a person in China pays a nickel for an hour- can they play any game that is installed on those Cafe's PC's?
Was EQ, UO, FF, GW or Lineage ever launched in Asia and put on those Internet Cafe computers?
Will AoC and War launch in Asia when they launch in NA?
With that said... we can take a look at the partner whereby WoW is provided to China's Cafe computers... The9 . From their website here:
www.corp.the9.com/
We can see that they do indeed have licenses for other MMOs... :
MU
World of Warcraft
Soul of The Ultimate Nation
Joyful Journey West
Granado Espada
Guild Wars
Hellgate: London
Ragnarok Online 2
Emil Chronicle Online
Huxley
FIFA Online
Audition 2
Field of Honor
Audition
In addition, The9 is also developing two proprietary MMORPG games, Fantastic Melody Online
and Warriors of Fate Online
.
It would make sense that at least some of the above titles are also available on those same computers. There would be next to zero chance that a MMO NOT in that list above would be installed though. That's my take on it anyway.
The part I wrote, which the nice man from NPD corrected me on in the COMMENTS section, which is why I pointed you to that. Yes, I was wrong, but I learned and corrected my false belief several weeks before your post, which is why I was able to correct you when you made the same mistake.
Bruce
It's not a private document; it's a public document from their website that they are required to release per SEC rules. The disclaimer is just standard boilerplate you slap on everything; it doesn't always apply. :)
Bruce
You have to pay $3.72 for account activation, and you can't buy just an hour; you have to buy at least 33.33 hours. That's closer to 6 pennis an hour than it is to 4. You also did not say they paid 4 pennies an hour; you said:
"Yes- the Asian people pay....drum roll please....4 pennies to log into WoW at the Internet Cafe's!"
Which is false... they pay several dollars in order to log into WoW. Would you say US folks pay 2 pennies to log into WoW? Because that's what a 30 day sub works out to on an hourly basis. But perhaps you feel that's unrealistic; you can't play 24 hours a day. Well, even if you play 8 hours a day, that's 6 pennies an hour. If you're an average player who plays 20 hours a week, that's still less than 20 cents an hour.
I guess you're under the impression the China player can simply pay for one hour. That's wrong, and no more true than the idea that someone who buys a WoW game card in the US can only pay for one hour.
To get your game on those computers, companies in North America and Europe generally have to make arrangements with third party operators, who in turn "sell" the game to the cafes. In Blizzard's case, they work with The9 in China. Other games have tried to launch into China and other Asian territories with varying degrees of success, but for the most part WoW is the only wetern MMOG that has done well (Ultima Online has seen good success in Japan).
Bruce
Yes... I realize you were corrected in your COMMENTS section. However... you still have your original INCORRECT statement on the main article of that page... the part that 99% of everyone who visits that page will ONLY read.
Doesn't that seem a bit odd to you? To expect your visitors to read the COMMENTS section to find out the CORRECT information? I guess if it were me... I'd want it to be obvious to my visitors what was correct and incorrect information. Perhaps you have a different standard for presenting information to your visitors though?
However, that "standard boilerplate" is there to provide protection for them for exactly what you've done. It would be fine to link to their site pointing to that document... as I did with Midway's documents.
However, to copy it and then re-distribute it as you did... not cool.
Yes, I expect readers who read an post to read the comments as well for any updates or clarifications. No, some people won't, but I can't help that. I have a hard enough time just getting people to read my FAQ.
Bruce
In this case, there's no way to directly link to a particular page in the PDF document.
But it's entirely cool to copy it and re-distribute it. The documents in question are effectively public domain, and in any case the "fair use" exception applies. I could have simply pointed you to the SEC site, but under new regulations the SEC allows companies to now offer such documents on their own sites rather than on EDGAR.
Seriously, you've gotten worked up over nothing. :)
Bruce
Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted. Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix.
When I look at these charts I'm sure to include a grain of salt about the size of Russia.
No offense, but "For entertainment purposes only." should be put on each Excel graph.
I'm sure you put a lot of work into them, but that doesn't magically make them accurate or valid.
No, I don't see it.
Bruce
Even when you admit there is INCORRECT information... and yet you refuse to fix it. Hmm... yeah, I think that says a lot.
Oh jeez, he doesn't see the need to correct it.
Gah, I'm almost certain this needs to be closed.
It's CORRECTED in the comments section for all to see.
Sheesh.
Bruce
LOL!
So in other words... you could post whatever you feel like in your main articles (or graphs) as long as you've got some obscure disclaimer hidden away in some way shape or form on your site? Afterall, it's the readers job to read ALL the information provided?
Heh... yeah, I think that says everything anyone needs to know on the subject.
Makes me wonder how many times data points on the graph have been questioned by legitimate sources but you just point them towards the letter grade section to justify their INCORRECTNESS.
Yeah, this has been a very informative post indeed.
And why not correct it? That's the really weird part of it. It's like 5 words. Doesn't even have to change the article at all... just delete the part that is wrong now. Would take about 5 seconds.
Doesn't it seem odd to willingly keep INCORRECT information on your site?
But, apparently that's not much of a concern. Heh, silly me.
4 Million Characters
Please note the data listed as
"for the Hottest MMO of the Year"
"Since its launch in April, LOTRO has quickly become the second largest MMORPG with an estimated 4 million characters calling Middle-earth their home. The game continues to grow with two massive updates that have increased the world by over 20%:"
But...this is in comparison to who? And why is this not corrected?
Oh wait...later in the post...just near the bottom...
"Comparison data includes subscription-based MMORPG titles developed in North America based on reported data."
So, it is fixed later on, but not IN the actual article...
Just a few words to add on...so why not fix it to read
The second largest MMO based on comparison data including titles developed in North America.
Guess a lot of people do the same thing...how odd...
Later
Unfortunately I'm not having forum discussion with the person(s) responsible for the data from that website... as this thread topic is about MMOGChart.com (notice the Title of the thread). You are free to create a topic about how it seems to be a wide-spread problem though.
However, since you brought it up... do you think it's right? To purposefully leave INCORRECT information on a website that is for the purpose of gathering information? Especially since it would take all of 5 seconds to change it?
I think we can see that most of the arguments in this thread regarding the MMOGChart website all deal with one specific game...
LOTRO...
Some minor comments have been made on SOE games, but overall, it all still boils down to LOTRO's numbers. And guess what, it would not be such an issue if they had not used such a quote as noted above.
And to be honest, a site like Bruce's would also not exist if the companies were forthright with their numbers. As someone stated earlier, who cares if the game is #1 or #100 (or whatever)...well, a lot of people do. Why would anyone want to go to a dying game?
So many differing viewpoints are stated on the population. The players (and fans) say there are a ton of people, but then other people say there is not. So, why is there such a varying degree of population statistics? The fans and players believe the non-players are liars, and the non-players call the "fans" liars.
So, really...someone MUST care to be so fervent in defending Bruce, yet someone MUST care to also argue it. So, back to the poster who said" Who cares how many people..."...well, they must care or they would not say anything....Same as the poster who says some words are incorrect...if the numbers don't matter...why argue?..and for someone who does not play, and argues...they care about those numbers, as they want to know if that game is healthy.
So, really this whole thread is pointless...as Bruce has some data, and some people believe it, and some do not...it really means nothing, as both sides are either right or they are wrong..and until Turbine, SOE or anyone who "Does not share their numbers..."...shares...then all we have is the speculation and data of Bruce. And until Turbine or SOE (who by the way already has called the MMOG numbers false by a large margin) say otherwise, the data is as close as we can get...
So, maybe the "fans" can give more hard cold facts, instead of arguing in this thread...but, until then, LOTRO has 150k subs...
Thanks and good luck Bruce!
Heh... you still didn't answer the question openedge.
Do you think it's o.k. for a site to WILLINGLY leave INCORRECT information on their site? Especially when it is a site that deals with providing players with the most accurate information possible. Seems like a pretty straight-forward question. It just seems really odd to me.
You might want to re-read the thread though... as there are quite a few comments on more than just LoTRo's numbers.
You are correct though in that I have no idea on LoTRo's .... or any games REAL numbers. You might want to check out Bruce's site again though before you use those numbers.
www.mmogchart.com/2008/04/08/version-23.0-available/
Direct quote from the above link:
"SirBruce (blog author) says:
Added on April 14th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Dirk, there’s been some discussion of this over om the MMORPG forums, and while I stand by the 200K-300K estimate earlier, the more recent 150K number may be mistaken on the part of the source. However, there’s little I can do at this point until I get another source inside Turbine or until Turbine provides some official data."
I do find it interesting that he hedges with the 300k number in that comment (which we now know is the most important area to check out). However, if you look at any of the charts or download the spreadsheets... the highest number he uses is 200k. So which number are we to believe? The 200k (the last "accurate" number); the 150k (the last given number on the graph); or the 300k (the number given in the comments... which from prior statements is where the CORRECT information is given)?
So, each site has corrected their data in various ways.
As to the 200-300k submitted scrips, as Bruce stated "he has received source information that contradicts his findings, and as such is willing to rely on the internal source moreso than his data" In so many words he is willing to throw out his information if more of the information leans toword a different number. He is willing to correct his numbers, unlike a certain company (Turbine was willing to let the 800k scrips foobar from the Boston Globe run it's course...with no fix, just like Bruces 150k with no fix)
Again, all we have is this data, and until I hear otherwise, this seems to be the most reliable
Later.
But the incorrect data is still there. Why not just remove it... that's the point.
And remember this thread is about MMOGChart.com try to stay on topic. Other web sites and how they operate don't really come into the discourse as we both already agree that it's not o.k. ... and since this topic is about MMOGchart.com and why Bruce decides to leave INCORRECT information on the site.
Why expect people to try and dig for the correct information further down, when it could just be taken care of by removing a few words?
Kinda silly of you to say another site is wrong... yet defend Bruce for doing the same thing.
Edit: Forgot to add... the quote you gave of Bruce is older than the comments section I quoted. So, since we are going on precedence here... doesn't only his most recent COMMENT count?
I hate to get drawn into this AGAIN, since I've corrected several falsehoods by a particular poster here several times to the point where I just stopped because he simply kept repeating the same lie. But lest anyone be confused about the 200K-300K remark, which again I've already addressed here, but this is already discussed underh LotRO in the Analysis and Conclusions section and whenever I have a range of possible values I usually pick the most conservative. If Turbine thinks 200K (or 150K) unfairly represents their game, they are free to correct that number.
Bruce
Again, information is far and between, and so much information has been "misinformation" So, as long as their is only this source, it looks to be the best source, until further data is released by the companies in question. You wish to argue this further...please go ahead...but, I see no further need at this point...
As Bruce stated, all the company has to do is correct that info. SOE has made a statement to the contrary on Bruces data...now all we need is Turbine or NCSoft or any other company to do the same. NCsoft corroborates Bruces data though...so, now all we need is an official from Turbine..I wonder if Bruce is close or way off...guess we believe it until otherwise stated...
Cheers!
So, then it's o.k. for Bruce to do shoddy journalism... as long as other sites do it too? That seems like good logic... I guess. Why not just do the right thing and fix the INCORRECT information... then we could point to Bruce's site as an example of how it should be done?
But, I'm glad to see that you put Bruce's site in the same category as that other site you linked.
Even you yourself admit you have INCORRECT information on your site... yet you don't remove it. Or do you now claim differently? Or, perhaps you've fixed it?
No, I don't have a degree in such things, nor is one required in order to do industry analysis and reporting. Bill Gates didn't have a degree in engineering or business, either.
Hmm... someone has decided to create an "alt" account... now the question is who? And for what purpose?
Heh... whoever it is could have at least attributed that quote above to it's proper author:
Back a page or two on this very thread you'll find the quote above.
Very odd indeed.... we'll have to keep an eye on this poster and see what becomes of them.
Edit: Looks like this user was created by the same person:
Both asdfghjklSS and qwertyuiopss were created on the same day. I'd say the chances of two different people creating accounts on the same day with names like that are highly unlikely. This second user qwertyuiopss ... also did the same thing in copying another persons thread and posting it as their own...
nice article on the modern day fortune tellers, no more no less.
think a SERIOUS aspect of reality is missing there...
These numbers of mmo PC gamers are just a TINY fraction of total gamers and PC gamers are similarly a small part of the world gamer population (PC and console.)
Mr. Bruce used to table the relative populations of PC vs console and MMO vs the rest of the gaming genre... and PC mmo gamers were less than 5% of that world gamer population!
Granted the site is named MMORPGCHART but to not show how the MMO #s fit into the big picture, world internet gaming, is short-sighted at best. When one sees console software selling 50 and 100x what pc does, and the nich MMO PC market is pitiful compared to populations playing other genre (ie. sports, fps, ect) and even platforms (Wii, DS, handheld, ect) well, the total numbers help bring it to perspective.