Even still, that number would in no manner reflect any scientific method to getting a correct number and would be 100% guess.
Yeah I've said that a few times in this thread.
Doesn't make the claim that 6 million boxes have been sold and 5.8 million people are unable to play any LESS ridiculous.
I merely seek to use BETTER logic and BETTER math, of course even close to accurate as no one but SE knows, to BETTER explain what they are doing and what is MORE likely CLOSER to the truth.
I figured that'd be obvious to anyone reading... especially 'cause I've said it a few times.
1) Where the hell are you getting 6 million boxes
2) I think you are massively confused as to what we're saying
YOU are saying:
460k/3.2m = 190k/X where X is the suggested number of FF copies sold and you are therefore saying X = 1.32 million boxes
MORS is saying:
400k/1m = 190k/X where now X = 475k boxes
So Mors is saying that using your comparison, but instead comparing a similar point in time that FF has sold 1/3rd as many boxes as you suggest. Hence why in his first post on this thread he said 475k not 6 million.
Doesn't make the claim that 6 million boxes have been sold and 5.8 million people are unable to play any LESS ridiculous.
I merely seek to use BETTER logic and BETTER math, of course even close to accurate as no one but SE knows, to BETTER explain what they are doing and what is MORE likely CLOSER to the truth.
I figured that'd be obvious to anyone reading... especially 'cause I've said it a few times.
1) Where the hell are you getting 6 million boxes
2) I think you are massively confused as to what we're saying
YOU are saying:
460k/3.2m = 190k/X where X is the suggested number of FF copies sold and you are therefore saying X = 1.32 million boxes
MORS is saying:
400k/1m = 190k/X where now X = 475k boxes
So Mors is saying that using your comparison, but instead comparing a similar point in time that FF has sold 1/3rd as many boxes as you suggest. Hence why in his first post on this thread he said 475k not 6 million.
To quote MORS-
"Assuming we accept these numbers, that means that out of 6 million sales, less than 200k people can play at any given time. 5.8 million people are locked out of the game? And this is minor?
Well, I haven't seen an official number saying 6 million(even though that is the number I keep seeing bandied about on the official forums) so let us go with the more modest number of 1 million(The number of sign-ups they had for beta 4?)
Out of 1 million sales only 200k can play at any given time, which means 4/5 people are locked out... And given that people leave their characters logged in indefinitely so as not to lose their spot, it means 4/5 people are locked out essentially permanently."
And BTW only 475K copies sold for FFXIV is a ridiculously low estimate.
And I introduced the idea that 100% of the people who buy a game are not trying to play it at the same time. I, for example, am not trying to play FFXIV right now.
So how many people, what % of total users ARE trying to play at any given time?
Look, we don't know the sales figures when the peak concurrency happened. We also have no objective way to back into that number. Using peak concurrency vs. a known sales figure (total) AFTER the concurrency makes sense. Most products follow some sort of bell curve in selling. No trend is sustained and all non-commodity products eventually get replaced or forgotten.
Assuming there isn't a substantial lag between game purchase and period of play (why would there be one?), then it's fair to assume that the peak concurrency happened near the peak of sales velocity. I see no reason why the average player would suddenly play GW2 for a less amount of time regardless of time of purchase. Thus, since that concurrency number never increased it's fair to say that the rate at which people left game was faster than the rate of sales. Therefore, the bell curve had to be on the downward slope.
The reason why that's important is because it incorporates relatively less error into Spock's number. Yes, he will be underestimating because the denominator is too high. We all know that, he even acknowledges that.
However, when you *know* the source of error and you use a logical framework you can apply the answer in useful way. We know that it's unlikely less than Spock's number and probably more.
The chance that Spock is as far off as your numbers suggest is simply unrealistic.
While fun, the whole conversation is largely irrelevant. We know SE is increasing data center capacity within a week. Either it fixes the problem, or it doesn't.
Look, we don't know the sales figures when the peak concurrency happened. We also have no objective way to back into that number. Using peak concurrency vs. a known sales figure (total) AFTER the concurrency makes sense. Most products follow some sort of bell curve in selling. No trend is sustained and all non-commodity products eventually get replaced or forgotten.
Assuming there isn't a substantial lag between game purchase and period of play (why would there be one?), then it's fair to assume that the peak concurrency happened near the peak of sales velocity. I see no reason why the average player would suddenly play GW2 for a less amount of time regardless of time of purchase. Thus, since that concurrency number never increased it's fair to say that the rate at which people left game was faster than the rate of sales. Therefore, the bell curve had to be on the downward slope.
The reason why that's important is because it incorporates relatively less error into Spock's number. Yes, he will be underestimating because the denominator is too high. We all know that, he even acknowledges that.
However, when you *know* the source of error and you use a logical framework you can apply the answer in useful way. We know that it's unlikely less than Spock's number and probably more.
The chance that Spock is as far off as your numbers suggest is simply unrealistic.
While fun, the whole conversation is largely irrelevant. We know SE is increasing data center capacity within a week. Either it fixes the problem, or it doesn't.
Thank you.
Real question is "how many players are trying to play at any given time, on average."
I postulate around 13% - on average, and my "math" works out 3 times so far - even if the numbers and curves are quite skewed - it makes sense.
"Assuming we accept these numbers, that means that out of 6 million sales, less than 200k people can play at any given time. 5.8 million people are locked out of the game? And this is minor?
Well, I haven't seen an official number saying 6 million(even though that is the number I keep seeing bandied about on the official forums) so let us go with the more modest number of 1 million(The number of sign-ups they had for beta 4?)
Out of 1 million sales only 200k can play at any given time, which means 4/5 people are locked out... And given that people leave their characters logged in indefinitely so as not to lose their spot, it means 4/5 people are locked out essentially permanently."
And BTW only 475K copies sold for FFXIV is a ridiculously low estimate.
And I introduced the idea that 100% of the people who buy a game are not trying to play it at the same time. I, for example, am not trying to play FFXIV right now.
So how many people, what % of total users ARE trying to play at any given time?
Snarl, that is from another post I did which then cause badspock to post this.
First off, 6 million is the number that the white knights(among others) keep quoting on the official servers. The forums were down when I posted, so I could not provide a reference.
Secondly, I agree 475k copies is a low estimate, which is why in my other post I suggested 1 million, which is the number of B4 sign-ups. I think 1 million is a reasonable number(which is why I suggested it) and that means that you are comparing the same(or similar) numbers of active accounts/subscribers from GW2 head start to the FFXIV early access.
Thirdly, everything I posted in this thread was purely about your math. Not trying to push anything from my other thread. I have no problem looking at other theories or mental excercises... But the logic and math you are using here (isolated and independent from any other thread) are wrong.
I won't speculate on total sales, but I too don't see a strong enough correlation between the data sets to make a positive assertion. Although it is a fun thread to read and argue over and napkin math and pseudo-logic is fun. It's a lot more fun than most of the "because I said so" threads.
Agreed... if it wasn't fun I wouldn't engage in it. ;p
I think a realistic number is more around 200k people. Mind you that the PS3 people are tossed into the mix, though they have a much smaller population than PC gamers (I assume)
Also we have to count the JP population as well.
Either way its all guesswork, no matter how much you try to break it down. We don't know for sure, and will never know, unless they release their numbers publicly...which they wont do unless the game gets incredibly massive (think 50-100 servers), which I doubt will happen.
Either way, judging from my server which I never have an issue logging on to (which is on the no character create list of servers) the game is unbelievably packed, everywhere there are tons of people. I expect all the other servers are the same way, and perhaps a bit more on some of those servers that people cant even log on to ever.
This certainly isn't a game that seems to be struggling to get people to play. It does look good from a numbers standpoint, their only mistake was with EA and their choice to launch with so few servers. Other than that it does look like this games going to do pretty damn well. Unless of course endgame is atrocious and people leave in hordes...it seems unlikely to be the case. This game knows exactly what it is doing and who its appealing to, and doesn't seem to fall into the lame "lets try to make every type of gamer happy" which leads to everyone getting disappointed.
Also im a big believer that raw numbers is arbitrary and not really a good way to determine a games worth or success. If a game with a small budget can have one server with more than enough players on it to cover all aspects of gameplay...then to me that game is a success.
I never understood why some people are so concerned with numbers beyond their own server. Its not like it matters after your server is filled and lively...who cares if there is 5 more packed severs or 500.
And because this game is well made, knows its audience, and has the FF IP behind it...I really think this game is going to do just fine. Also im fairly sure the SE guy Yoshi or whatever has stated before that the game will go f2p over his dead body (or something along that line) so im feeling good about sticking with it.
Thirdly, everything I posted in this thread was purely about your math. Not trying to push anything from my other thread. I have no problem looking at other theories or mental excercises... But the logic and math you are using here (isolated and independent from any other thread) are wrong.
What % of concurrent vs total players would you, on average, say a MMO would get - especially during a early access / launch period?
Given that %, and that we know FFXIV:ARR peaked at 180K concurrent, how many total players would you say FFXIV has?
If you postulate 1 million players, 180K is 18% - which again is not far off at all from my estimate of around 13% based on the numbers from EvE Online (readily available stats) and GW2 recently released figures. (Even with EvE on average around 8% we still have a range of 8-18% no where near the 40+% you mentioned earlier)
Then, given the number of servers, we've calculated 3800 players per server.
An increase from 180K to 200K concurrent players - would allow for an additional 200 players per server.
Some JP have no queue or 1017, some NA/EU are probably closer to double that waiting/unable to play.
Still only talking a % or less than 1% unable to play at any given time.
So again, we're talking about the same thing.
An increase of that size would hopefully be enough to end 1017 and server queuing - barring any further substantial growth.
So thank you for agreeing with me, you could have just made this a lot easier instead of arguing so much for no reason.
Either way its all guesswork, no matter how much you try to break it down. We don't know for sure, and will never know, unless they release their numbers publicly...which they wont do unless the game gets incredibly massive (think 50-100 servers), which I doubt will happen.
They already have 50 servers... 25 JP and 25 NA/EU
Apparently the logic capacity of badspock and Alamareth is not enough to understand Mors' point.
Oh....the humanity.......
Mors' point was that I'm wrong, and I never contended that I wasn't, just that I am far less wrong and my numbers make/made a lot more sense.
I'm not the one trying to prove the statistical relevance and accuracy of my made up numbers, just that my made up numbers fit the model and fit what we have seen, the numbers we do know, and fit nicely into the observable patterns.
I truly don't understand how this is hard for people to comprehend.
Apparently the logic capacity of badspock and Alamareth is not enough to understand Mors' point.
Oh....the humanity.......
Mors' point was that I'm wrong, and I never contended that I wasn't, just that I am far less wrong and my numbers make/made a lot more sense.
I'm not the one trying to prove the statistical relevance and accuracy of my made up numbers, just that my made up numbers fit the model and fit what we have seen, the numbers we do know, and fit nicely into the observable patterns.
I truly don't understand how this is hard for people to comprehend.
Because it is not your numbers that are the problem, it is your model... If your model is broken your source numbers may be right, but your resultant numbers cannot be less than wrong.
Apparently the logic capacity of badspock and Alamareth is not enough to understand Mors' point.
Oh....the humanity.......
Mors' point was that I'm wrong, and I never contended that I wasn't, just that I am far less wrong and my numbers make/made a lot more sense.
I'm not the one trying to prove the statistical relevance and accuracy of my made up numbers, just that my made up numbers fit the model and fit what we have seen, the numbers we do know, and fit nicely into the observable patterns.
I truly don't understand how this is hard for people to comprehend.
Because it is not your numbers that are the problem, it is your model... If your model is broken your source numbers may be right, but your resultant numbers cannot be less than wrong.
Says the guy using fan boys from the official forums to start a conversation about sales.
As for SnarkRitter - I'm not even going to engage that.
Because it is not your numbers that are the problem, it is your model... If your model is broken your source numbers may be right, but your resultant numbers cannot be less than wrong.
Says the guy using fan boys from the official forums to start a conversation about sales.
As for SnarkRitter - I'm not even going to engage that.
I'm solving for X. That's it. Nothing complex about the model.
Some of the numbers may be assumptions, but logical assumptions at least.
When you don't have real numbers, logical assumptions are as good as it gets.
Certainly when compared to illogical assumptions (like desperately high or low sales figures).
We have a situation. We have a couple of numbers. The rest is guesswork.
My guesswork has a higher probability of being closer to an accurate guess.
You do notice I say "guesswork," "higher probability," and "guess" and that last sentence right?
When you look at the quote "conclusions" I have come up with - they seem they could be probable.
Period. End of story.
1.4 ish million is a good guess.
13% or so concurrent population is a good guess.
That being said, the rest works - if you agree the above is a fair guess.
I hope they get all the support they deserve. I hope they sold 1 million box sales and thats what i call a HUGE succes. They now have to smooth out the problems, work on a new patch and focus on PVP !!! Knowing Noaki yoshida he might surpise all pvpr's as this man was a legend in DaoC and rated #1.
Very happy with the game and already knew in beta they hit gold status with a little old grumpy bitter vet mmo player like me
I would say, just on the Data front: Given GW2 has been out for a year - it's had more time to accrue box sales, while it's peak concurrent is from over a year as well.
Peak Concurrent could have happened on Day 1, when the game had only sold 1M copies, for all we know. That would lead the ratio of concurrent players to box sales a bit on the low side, and thus lead to a lower than actual percentage of the FFXIV player base locked out on 1017/queue than what is probably reality.
So while it's better than a blind hunch, and you recognize the assumptions your making introduce flaws into the data, I think it skews a bit toward putting S/E in a better light than what the actual case may be. But I think your as close as anyone will be able to get without actual numbers from S/E.
Still, very interesting case you make - and I think you are a lot closer than S/E probably figured anyone would be able to get.
I would say, just on the Data front: Given GW2 has been out for a year - it's had more time to accrue box sales, while it's peak concurrent is from over a year as well.
Peak Concurrent could have happened on Day 1, when the game had only sold 1M copies, for all we know. That would lead the ratio of concurrent players to box sales a bit on the low side, and thus lead to a lower than actual percentage of the FFXIV player base locked out on 1017/queue than what is probably reality.
So while it's better than a blind hunch, and you recognize the assumptions your making introduce flaws into the data, I think it skews a bit toward putting S/E in a better light than what the actual case may be. But I think your as close as anyone will be able to get without actual numbers from S/E.
Still, very interesting case you make - and I think you are a lot closer than S/E probably figured anyone would be able to get.
Now THIS is a good retort. Very logical, very well presented.
I can only counter by saying that I HOPE SE realizes how many people are unable to play and is upping their service to allow all of those effected to play, not doing half ass measures that will only slightly alleviate the congestion problems.
I am HOPING a jump to 200K concurrent corrects the 1017 and queue issues for all.
As if I am way off, as you say, with the % of concurrent players or the total player count - then any half measures to relieve congestion by SE are not going to sit well with those effected (including me!)
Yo dawg, I heard FFARR has eleventeen million and a half box sales with 1.21 gigawatts of concurrent users. So that works out to like, some percent dawg.
Your math is good till the twitch effect!when people could stream it.after that?first few hour towellie streamed he had 6 k viewer ,him alone there was 30 or 40 k viewer .so it a safe to assume most can't login.
I would say, just on the Data front: Given GW2 has been out for a year - it's had more time to accrue box sales, while it's peak concurrent is from over a year as well.
Peak Concurrent could have happened on Day 1, when the game had only sold 1M copies, for all we know. That would lead the ratio of concurrent players to box sales a bit on the low side, and thus lead to a lower than actual percentage of the FFXIV player base locked out on 1017/queue than what is probably reality.
So while it's better than a blind hunch, and you recognize the assumptions your making introduce flaws into the data, I think it skews a bit toward putting S/E in a better light than what the actual case may be. But I think your as close as anyone will be able to get without actual numbers from S/E.
Still, very interesting case you make - and I think you are a lot closer than S/E probably figured anyone would be able to get.
Now THIS is a good retort. Very logical, very well presented.
I can only counter by saying that I HOPE SE realizes how many people are unable to play and is upping their service to allow all of those effected to play, not doing half ass measures that will only slightly alleviate the congestion problems.
I am HOPING a jump to 200K concurrent corrects the 1017 and queue issues for all.
As if I am way off, as you say, with the % of concurrent players or the total player count - then any half measures to relieve congestion by SE are not going to sit well with those effected (including me!)
You don't even realize his retort is EXACTLY what we were saying before do you?
He is saying what Mors did originally which is that GW2s peak happened early and around that time they had more like 1 million in sales as opposed to you saying that GW2 had a peak of 460k and has 3.2 million sales as if those peaks are happening now.
That all along is why we've been saying that you can't use the 3.2 million number and yet when this guy says it with a compliment to you at the end you decide to finally accept it.
To be even more clear, I don't have a dog in this fight as I could not possibly care less about FF and if it does good or if it does poorly. I simply say what the other guy was saying and his logic was more sound than yours so I was helping to point out what he was saying.
You don't even realize his retort is EXACTLY what we were saying before do you?
He is saying what Mors did originally which is that GW2s peak happened early and around that time they had more like 1 million in sales as opposed to you saying that GW2 had a peak of 460k and has 3.2 million sales as if those peaks are happening now.
That all along is why we've been saying that you can't use the 3.2 million number and yet when this guy says it with a compliment to you at the end you decide to finally accept it.
To be even more clear, I don't have a dog in this fight as I could not possibly care less about FF and if it does good or if it does poorly. I simply say what the other guy was saying and his logic was more sound than yours so I was helping to point out what he was saying.
I got Mors (and your) point a LONG time ago, you never answered my challenges to it.
As I have said again (you must have missed it) if the concurrent users of GW2 during early days having sold 1 million was in the 400k range, a 40% concurrent to total player would only allow for FFXIV to have sold 360K copies, which is completely unbelievable - which is a point that was never addressed by Mors or yourself.
I did the math on Mors 1,000,000 estimate on boxes sold, which worked out to 18% concurrent and is close enough to my numbers to be pretty much the same argument.
Is it possible FFXIV has sold more like a million or more boxes, and has the capacity for only 180K, yet the desire for concurrent players is closer to the 40% range meaning that hundreds of thousands of players want to play at any given time but can't?
Yes, of course. Never said it wasn't.
Which is why I asked - does SE know how many players are stuck? If they do know, would they half ass their expansion to only let in a fraction more of them?
40% of say 1,000,000 total players trying to play = 400,000 concurrent players.
Maximum capacity of 200k after upgrades = 200k not able to play still.
50 servers, 3600 per server at 180K, to host 400k players server expansion would have to more than double to 8,000 per server (unlikely) or they'd have to add another 50 servers (also unlikely).
So is SE half assing the expansion / upgrades, so that only 1/2 or so of the effected 1017 / queue players can play the game?
If you are making an order for new hardware... why stop at 200k if that is true?
Assumptions:
SE can see the numbers of players able to authenticate, but unable to log into a world.
SE can see the numbers who fail at authentication.
SE can see the numbers who fail to load into an instance after loading into the world, and/or are disconnected when trying.
id say a million sold. There were about 500k who are v1.0 players who didnt actually buy anything. Still ... 1.5 million paying subs sounds fantastic. Hope they stick.
Comments
1) Where the hell are you getting 6 million boxes
2) I think you are massively confused as to what we're saying
YOU are saying:
460k/3.2m = 190k/X where X is the suggested number of FF copies sold and you are therefore saying X = 1.32 million boxes
MORS is saying:
400k/1m = 190k/X where now X = 475k boxes
So Mors is saying that using your comparison, but instead comparing a similar point in time that FF has sold 1/3rd as many boxes as you suggest. Hence why in his first post on this thread he said 475k not 6 million.
To quote MORS-
"Assuming we accept these numbers, that means that out of 6 million sales, less than 200k people can play at any given time. 5.8 million people are locked out of the game? And this is minor?
Well, I haven't seen an official number saying 6 million(even though that is the number I keep seeing bandied about on the official forums) so let us go with the more modest number of 1 million(The number of sign-ups they had for beta 4?)
Out of 1 million sales only 200k can play at any given time, which means 4/5 people are locked out... And given that people leave their characters logged in indefinitely so as not to lose their spot, it means 4/5 people are locked out essentially permanently."
And BTW only 475K copies sold for FFXIV is a ridiculously low estimate.
And I introduced the idea that 100% of the people who buy a game are not trying to play it at the same time. I, for example, am not trying to play FFXIV right now.
So how many people, what % of total users ARE trying to play at any given time?
Sigh, the arguments against Spock are *so bad*.
Look, we don't know the sales figures when the peak concurrency happened. We also have no objective way to back into that number. Using peak concurrency vs. a known sales figure (total) AFTER the concurrency makes sense. Most products follow some sort of bell curve in selling. No trend is sustained and all non-commodity products eventually get replaced or forgotten.
Assuming there isn't a substantial lag between game purchase and period of play (why would there be one?), then it's fair to assume that the peak concurrency happened near the peak of sales velocity. I see no reason why the average player would suddenly play GW2 for a less amount of time regardless of time of purchase. Thus, since that concurrency number never increased it's fair to say that the rate at which people left game was faster than the rate of sales. Therefore, the bell curve had to be on the downward slope.
The reason why that's important is because it incorporates relatively less error into Spock's number. Yes, he will be underestimating because the denominator is too high. We all know that, he even acknowledges that.
However, when you *know* the source of error and you use a logical framework you can apply the answer in useful way. We know that it's unlikely less than Spock's number and probably more.
The chance that Spock is as far off as your numbers suggest is simply unrealistic.
While fun, the whole conversation is largely irrelevant. We know SE is increasing data center capacity within a week. Either it fixes the problem, or it doesn't.
Thank you.
Real question is "how many players are trying to play at any given time, on average."
I postulate around 13% - on average, and my "math" works out 3 times so far - even if the numbers and curves are quite skewed - it makes sense.
Snarl, that is from another post I did which then cause badspock to post this.
First off, 6 million is the number that the white knights(among others) keep quoting on the official servers. The forums were down when I posted, so I could not provide a reference.
Secondly, I agree 475k copies is a low estimate, which is why in my other post I suggested 1 million, which is the number of B4 sign-ups. I think 1 million is a reasonable number(which is why I suggested it) and that means that you are comparing the same(or similar) numbers of active accounts/subscribers from GW2 head start to the FFXIV early access.
Thirdly, everything I posted in this thread was purely about your math. Not trying to push anything from my other thread. I have no problem looking at other theories or mental excercises... But the logic and math you are using here (isolated and independent from any other thread) are wrong.
Agreed... if it wasn't fun I wouldn't engage in it. ;p
I think a realistic number is more around 200k people. Mind you that the PS3 people are tossed into the mix, though they have a much smaller population than PC gamers (I assume)
Also we have to count the JP population as well.
Either way its all guesswork, no matter how much you try to break it down. We don't know for sure, and will never know, unless they release their numbers publicly...which they wont do unless the game gets incredibly massive (think 50-100 servers), which I doubt will happen.
Either way, judging from my server which I never have an issue logging on to (which is on the no character create list of servers) the game is unbelievably packed, everywhere there are tons of people. I expect all the other servers are the same way, and perhaps a bit more on some of those servers that people cant even log on to ever.
This certainly isn't a game that seems to be struggling to get people to play. It does look good from a numbers standpoint, their only mistake was with EA and their choice to launch with so few servers. Other than that it does look like this games going to do pretty damn well. Unless of course endgame is atrocious and people leave in hordes...it seems unlikely to be the case. This game knows exactly what it is doing and who its appealing to, and doesn't seem to fall into the lame "lets try to make every type of gamer happy" which leads to everyone getting disappointed.
Also im a big believer that raw numbers is arbitrary and not really a good way to determine a games worth or success. If a game with a small budget can have one server with more than enough players on it to cover all aspects of gameplay...then to me that game is a success.
I never understood why some people are so concerned with numbers beyond their own server. Its not like it matters after your server is filled and lively...who cares if there is 5 more packed severs or 500.
And because this game is well made, knows its audience, and has the FF IP behind it...I really think this game is going to do just fine. Also im fairly sure the SE guy Yoshi or whatever has stated before that the game will go f2p over his dead body (or something along that line) so im feeling good about sticking with it.
What % of concurrent vs total players would you, on average, say a MMO would get - especially during a early access / launch period?
Given that %, and that we know FFXIV:ARR peaked at 180K concurrent, how many total players would you say FFXIV has?
If you postulate 1 million players, 180K is 18% - which again is not far off at all from my estimate of around 13% based on the numbers from EvE Online (readily available stats) and GW2 recently released figures. (Even with EvE on average around 8% we still have a range of 8-18% no where near the 40+% you mentioned earlier)
Then, given the number of servers, we've calculated 3800 players per server.
An increase from 180K to 200K concurrent players - would allow for an additional 200 players per server.
Some JP have no queue or 1017, some NA/EU are probably closer to double that waiting/unable to play.
Still only talking a % or less than 1% unable to play at any given time.
So again, we're talking about the same thing.
An increase of that size would hopefully be enough to end 1017 and server queuing - barring any further substantial growth.
So thank you for agreeing with me, you could have just made this a lot easier instead of arguing so much for no reason.
Apparently the logic capacity of badspock and Alamareth is not enough to understand Mors' point.
Oh....the humanity.......
They already have 50 servers... 25 JP and 25 NA/EU
Mors' point was that I'm wrong, and I never contended that I wasn't, just that I am far less wrong and my numbers make/made a lot more sense.
I'm not the one trying to prove the statistical relevance and accuracy of my made up numbers, just that my made up numbers fit the model and fit what we have seen, the numbers we do know, and fit nicely into the observable patterns.
I truly don't understand how this is hard for people to comprehend.
Because it is not your numbers that are the problem, it is your model... If your model is broken your source numbers may be right, but your resultant numbers cannot be less than wrong.
Says the guy using fan boys from the official forums to start a conversation about sales.
As for SnarkRitter - I'm not even going to engage that.
I'm solving for X. That's it. Nothing complex about the model.
Some of the numbers may be assumptions, but logical assumptions at least.
When you don't have real numbers, logical assumptions are as good as it gets.
Certainly when compared to illogical assumptions (like desperately high or low sales figures).
We have a situation. We have a couple of numbers. The rest is guesswork.
My guesswork has a higher probability of being closer to an accurate guess.
You do notice I say "guesswork," "higher probability," and "guess" and that last sentence right?
When you look at the quote "conclusions" I have come up with - they seem they could be probable.
Period. End of story.
1.4 ish million is a good guess.
13% or so concurrent population is a good guess.
That being said, the rest works - if you agree the above is a fair guess.
I hope they get all the support they deserve.
I hope they sold 1 million box sales and thats what i call a HUGE succes.
They now have to smooth out the problems, work on a new patch and focus on PVP !!!
Knowing Noaki yoshida he might surpise all pvpr's as this man was a legend in DaoC and rated #1.
Very happy with the game and already knew in beta they hit gold status with a little old grumpy bitter vet mmo player like me
I would say, just on the Data front:
Given GW2 has been out for a year - it's had more time to accrue box sales, while it's peak concurrent is from over a year as well.
Peak Concurrent could have happened on Day 1, when the game had only sold 1M copies, for all we know. That would lead the ratio of concurrent players to box sales a bit on the low side, and thus lead to a lower than actual percentage of the FFXIV player base locked out on 1017/queue than what is probably reality.
So while it's better than a blind hunch, and you recognize the assumptions your making introduce flaws into the data, I think it skews a bit toward putting S/E in a better light than what the actual case may be. But I think your as close as anyone will be able to get without actual numbers from S/E.
Still, very interesting case you make - and I think you are a lot closer than S/E probably figured anyone would be able to get.
(Retired)- Anarchy Online/Ultima Online/DAoC/Horizonsz/EQ2/SWG/AC1&2/L2/SoR/WoW/TMO/Requiem/Atlantica Online/Manibogi/Rift+(SL)/Lol/Hon/SWTOR/Wakfu/Champions Online/GW/Lotr/CO/TcoS/Tabula Rasa/Meridian 59/Vanguard/Shadowbane/Fury/SotW/Dreamlords/HGL/RoM/DDO/FFXI/Aoc/Eve/Warhammer Online/Gw2/TSW/Tera/Defiance/STO/AoW/DE/Firefall/Darkfall/Neverwinter/PS2/ESO/FF14/Archeage/Gw2
Now THIS is a good retort. Very logical, very well presented.
I can only counter by saying that I HOPE SE realizes how many people are unable to play and is upping their service to allow all of those effected to play, not doing half ass measures that will only slightly alleviate the congestion problems.
I am HOPING a jump to 200K concurrent corrects the 1017 and queue issues for all.
As if I am way off, as you say, with the % of concurrent players or the total player count - then any half measures to relieve congestion by SE are not going to sit well with those effected (including me!)
Yo dawg, I heard FFARR has eleventeen million and a half box sales with 1.21 gigawatts of concurrent users. So that works out to like, some percent dawg.
Irrefutable.
You don't even realize his retort is EXACTLY what we were saying before do you?
He is saying what Mors did originally which is that GW2s peak happened early and around that time they had more like 1 million in sales as opposed to you saying that GW2 had a peak of 460k and has 3.2 million sales as if those peaks are happening now.
That all along is why we've been saying that you can't use the 3.2 million number and yet when this guy says it with a compliment to you at the end you decide to finally accept it.
To be even more clear, I don't have a dog in this fight as I could not possibly care less about FF and if it does good or if it does poorly. I simply say what the other guy was saying and his logic was more sound than yours so I was helping to point out what he was saying.
I got Mors (and your) point a LONG time ago, you never answered my challenges to it.
As I have said again (you must have missed it) if the concurrent users of GW2 during early days having sold 1 million was in the 400k range, a 40% concurrent to total player would only allow for FFXIV to have sold 360K copies, which is completely unbelievable - which is a point that was never addressed by Mors or yourself.
I did the math on Mors 1,000,000 estimate on boxes sold, which worked out to 18% concurrent and is close enough to my numbers to be pretty much the same argument.
Is it possible FFXIV has sold more like a million or more boxes, and has the capacity for only 180K, yet the desire for concurrent players is closer to the 40% range meaning that hundreds of thousands of players want to play at any given time but can't?
Yes, of course. Never said it wasn't.
Which is why I asked - does SE know how many players are stuck? If they do know, would they half ass their expansion to only let in a fraction more of them?
So now that you are caught up...
40% of say 1,000,000 total players trying to play = 400,000 concurrent players.
Maximum capacity of 200k after upgrades = 200k not able to play still.
50 servers, 3600 per server at 180K, to host 400k players server expansion would have to more than double to 8,000 per server (unlikely) or they'd have to add another 50 servers (also unlikely).
So is SE half assing the expansion / upgrades, so that only 1/2 or so of the effected 1017 / queue players can play the game?
If you are making an order for new hardware... why stop at 200k if that is true?
Assumptions:
SE can see the numbers of players able to authenticate, but unable to log into a world.
SE can see the numbers who fail at authentication.
SE can see the numbers who fail to load into an instance after loading into the world, and/or are disconnected when trying.