Merritt's charts do not include leveling in diplomacy as a criteria. He specifically excluded it. Also, one other small item. Using those same numbers that people are citing as showing such drastic declines, Merritt estimated the number of active subscriptions at 175K and climbing.
Come on Dude do you really believe that? Beside the point that people who only do diplomacy has to be extremely small, there is no way they have more than 50-75k people subscribed to Vanguard and shrinking every week.
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Merritt's charts do not include leveling in diplomacy as a criteria. He specifically excluded it. Also, one other small item. Using those same numbers that people are citing as showing such drastic declines, Merritt estimated the number of active subscriptions at 175K and climbing.
Make sure you use the correct term - 175K accounts not subscriptions. Of the 175K accounts,
some are real and some are buddy keys. The buddy keys never paid for the box or the monthly
fee so they are nothing more than a free ride and brought no income to Sigil.
The graph suggests that a cash crunch is coming sooner rather than later. Perhaps the
rumor has surfaced to prepare people for what is coming.
Yes, it was active accounts, not subscriptions and I suspect that the cash crunch is already here. Otherwise they most likely would not have released early.
Either way, that's "registered" accounts, not "active". All Meritt is doing is taking a count of all characters listed on Vanguard Players and making the guess that each account holds 3.4 characters out of the 12 possible allowed (8 for regular accounts).
Vanguard Players doesn't de-list characters on cancelled accounts, so on that fact alone it's impossible to know which characters belong to active accounts and which don't.
Merritt's charts do not include leveling in diplomacy as a criteria. He specifically excluded it. Also, one other small item. Using those same numbers that people are citing as showing such drastic declines, Merritt estimated the number of active subscriptions at 175K and climbing.
Come on Dude do you really believe that? Beside the point that people who only do diplomacy has to be extremely small, there is no way they have more than 50-75k people subscribed to Vanguard and shrinking every week.
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
He then assumed each person has 3.4 alts per account. That would give you about 180, 641 subscribers. For that to be true you have to assume that:
No one has canceled their subscription.
All the buddy key passes bought the game and have an active subscription.
People only make 3-4 alt characters per account.
They do not delete characters from the vgplayers db nor the game data in general. For example, I made 6 alts. I have canceled my account. My characters still show on vgplayers.com.
If you believe those 3 line items above are true then yes VG has 175 subs. Oh and to the "increasing" statement. VG only sold about 13k boxes last month (March 2007). That is not an indication that the game in increasing.
Studies have shown that about 40% of MMORPG Players remain loyal to a particular MMO, even if I give you that no one has canceled their VG sub and that the other 2 items above are true, that comes to a value of: 70,000 subscribers.
I am going to make the bold statement that all 3 items above are not true which would place the subscriber count around 40-60k. That number is far short of the 250k required to make a profit and way short of the 500k Brad estimated prior to launch.
Originally posted by Dawgrum Amazing how people will jump all over a chart they think shows Vanguard is dieing, yet dispute a chart made by the same person showing Vanguard is growing.
You can hardly blame them when the CEO and lead designer writes a post about how retail and subscription sales are not living up to expectations within three months of release.
The initial release period is when expectation and actual sales/subscriptions are at their highest. It only makes sense that there would be an expectation by observers that sales/subscriptions would only go down from that point and thus, any chart illustrating a reduction of sales/subscription numbers would have more legitimacy than one showing any increase.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq Adnihilo Beorn Judge's Edge Somnulus Perfect Black ---------------------- Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2 Everquest / Everquest 2 Anarchy Online Shadowbane Dark Age of Camelot Star Wars Galaxies Matrix Online World of Warcraft Guild Wars City of Heroes
A buyout wouldn't surprise me much but nevertheless I would hate see it happen. Regardless of ups and downs it would be pretty heavy on Brad and Crew. Also it is $OE at the end of the day throwing the bucks. The ugly hydra grows another head. Shame, really.
I hope Brad and crew screw themselves for the $50 each of us paid them. This game was in the crapper as of Phase 4 of BETA and absolutely NOTHING was done about. I truly hope they get what they deserve.
Merritt's charts do not include leveling in diplomacy as a criteria. He specifically excluded it. Also, one other small item. Using those same numbers that people are citing as showing such drastic declines, Merritt estimated the number of active subscriptions at 175K and climbing.
Make sure you use the correct term - 175K accounts not subscriptions. Of the 175K accounts,
some are real and some are buddy keys. The buddy keys never paid for the box or the monthly
fee so they are nothing more than a free ride and brought no income to Sigil.
The graph suggests that a cash crunch is coming sooner rather than later. Perhaps the
rumor has surfaced to prepare people for what is coming.
Yes, it was active accounts, not subscriptions and I suspect that the cash crunch is already here. Otherwise they most likely would not have released early.
Either way, that's "registered" accounts, not "active". All Meritt is doing is taking a count of all characters listed on Vanguard Players and making the guess that each account holds 3.4 characters out of the 12 possible allowed (8 for regular accounts).
Vanguard Players doesn't de-list characters on cancelled accounts, so on that fact alone it's impossible to know which characters belong to active accounts and which don't.Actually it was based on this statement : www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Merritt's charts do not include leveling in diplomacy as a criteria. He specifically excluded it. Also, one other small item. Using those same numbers that people are citing as showing such drastic declines, Merritt estimated the number of active subscriptions at 175K and climbing.
Come on Dude do you really believe that? Beside the point that people who only do diplomacy has to be extremely small, there is no way they have more than 50-75k people subscribed to Vanguard and shrinking every week.
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
He then assumed each person has 3.4 alts per account. That would give you about 180, 641 subscribers. For that to be true you have to assume that:
No one has canceled their subscription.
All the buddy key passes bought the game and have an active subscription.
People only make 3-4 alt characters per account.
They do not delete characters from the vgplayers db nor the game data in general. For example, I made 6 alts. I have canceled my account. My characters still show on vgplayers.com.
If you believe those 3 line items above are true then yes VG has 175 subs. Oh and to the "increasing" statement. VG only sold about 13k boxes last month (March 2007). That is not an indication that the game in increasing.
Studies have shown that about 40% of MMORPG Players remain loyal to a particular MMO, even if I give you that no one has canceled their VG sub and that the other 2 items above are true, that comes to a value of: 70,000 subscribers.
I am going to make the bold statement that all 3 items above are not true which would place the subscriber count around 40-60k. That number is far short of the 250k required to make a profit and way short of the 500k Brad estimated prior to launch.
At the time he made those charts, they were based on ACTIVE characters (ones who had gained an adventuring or crafting level over a given period of time) not total characters. He made that clear. Since there is no more recent data, there is no way to know how remotely accurate the numbers are today.
Forty percent remain loyal based on what total, and over what period of time? One day, one month, one year, five years? The only numbers I have ever seen are ones over the LIFE of a given MMO. Your assumptions are that 60% of everyone who even TRIES a given MMO immediately drop it. Probably neither you, nor I, nor probably anyone else posting on this forum even know the true numbers of how many people have actually tried the game. Forty percent of an unknown remains an unknown. That is a statistic that maybe people can talk about in a year or two assuming the game survives that long.
The sales numbers are also not an indication that the game is losing subscribers either. Do you have some numbers that show that VG lost more than 13,000 people during March? If not, then quoting the sales numbers means nothing.
All any of this means is that we all (inclucing Merritt) know nothing about what is really going on. We can all make bold statements, but it's all a bunch of noise without real information to back it up.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
At the time he made those charts, they were based on ACTIVE characters (ones who had gained an adventuring or crafting level over a given period of time) not total characters. He made that clear. Since there is no more recent data, there is no way to know how remotely accurate the numbers are today.
Forty percent remain loyal based on what total, and over what period of time? One day, one month, one year, five years? The only numbers I have ever seen are ones over the LIFE of a given MMO. Your assumptions are that 60% of everyone who even TRIES a given MMO immediately drop it. Probably neither you, nor I, nor probably anyone else posting on this forum even know the true numbers of how many people have actually tried the game. Forty percent of an unknown remains an unknown. That is a statistic that maybe people can talk about in a year or two assuming the game survives that long.
The sales numbers are also not an indication that the game is losing subscribers either. Do you have some numbers that show that VG lost more than 13,000 people during March? If not, then quoting the sales numbers means nothing.
All any of this means is that we all (inclucing Merritt) know nothing about what is really going on. We can all make bold statements, but it's all a bunch of noise without real information to back it up.
We each must decide what information we consider factual or not. Whether you choose to believe the data
or not is up to you.
It is no surprise that the VGPlayers website has not been updated. It evidently was providing a lot more
information than Sigil wanted to be disseminated. That may well be an indication that the mined data was
too close to the truth.
The only information available would either be an announcement by Sigil (highly unlikely and highly suspect)
or data provided by them (when they didn't know how much other info could be gleaned from it). Merrit's
info was taken from the latter.
When there was real information to back it up, you still cried foul. There are some people who will only
believe info from a specific source. Unfortunately sole source info is just as susceptible to being manipulated
as info obtained from other sources. We are talking about marketing and business and the truth is seldom
present in those environments. As a consequence, results from data mining are likely to be the closest
It's funny to see all thse drama queens come in here crying how Sigil ripped them off, and how they were misled by Brad's vision and how there life is in complete shambles because of this ...
If you don't play the game why do you care how many subscribers there are?
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
Brad knows, ask him. Or wait for the questline/memoires.
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
I don't remember the details anymore but what I do remember is Sigil burned through the money Microsoft gave them and amongst differences of money spent and release time they opted out with Microsoft and got into bed with Sony. Honestly they knew if they stayed with microsoft they're game would get shut off when it finally stopped or never made money, atleast with Sony the game will be alive for as long as people play it.
Sigil made alot poor design choices and changes burning up cash as they went. Honestly Brad may have fantastic ideas but I think he lacks the ability to pull it together and he's obvious really crap at money mangement or he'd of made some stuff finalized till release instead of constant changes over the past 7 long years.
Everyone can say crap about SOE but they do keep their games going even with small populaces. Personally I think if SOE takes over Vanguard it might help the game just as it did with IMO Everquest. I personally hated EQ when it first came out, I didn't get into playing the game solidly until right after SOE took over and the game considerably improved, though I DO hate how some of the expansion went after Kunark and Velious.
SOE / NGE whiners don't apply you guys always forget to blame Lucas Arts for PUSHING Sony into the NGE changes in an attempt to up population numbers.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
I dont know that much of business but aren't there two parts that have a contract with eachother?
You can actually force someone to buy out becouse otherwise the other part wont do what is said.
If that would have been the case couldn't just sigil waved the papers saying that MS have signed a deal?
Originally posted by elvenangel SOE / NGE whiners don't apply you guys always forget to blame Lucas Arts for PUSHING Sony into the NGE changes in an attempt to up population numbers.
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Not exactly. A contract leans towards the person issuing the contract. Atleast in my business.. If i write up a contract, and issue it to you, you sign.. The contract is now ineffect, and YOU the contractee are bound to the terms of the contract, where as i the contractor have more freedoms. Now if i keep my end of the contract YOU the contractee MUST keep your end, or it's a breach of contract. If you keep your end of the deal, but i fail to keep my end, that is a breach of contract...
However, as the contractor i, at my descretion may nullify the contract with you the contractee. However you as the contractee are bound to the contract, and MAY NOT nullify the contract. Now i have to supply what i state i will supply in the contract, however i am not bound to the contract. Where as you would have to keep up your deal, and cannot break the deal without my permission to do so.
So what we have here, based on the discussion ( since none of us truely knows) is Sigil was starting to look like it would be unable to fullfil the contract. M$ the contractor, is more interested in monetary recovery than chasing sigil into litigation over the contract. So they, offer an ultimatum to Sigil, buy out and we willingly nullify the contract, or you become inbreach of said contract and we litigate and both lose money. ( even though you win a court hearing in reguards to a contract DOES NOT MEAN YOU GET PAID.. M$ knows this, and was prolly the leading factor in them, " ending it nicely " )
So as Sigil is concerened, no they have no choice in whether M$ nullify said contract or not.
Originally posted by damian7 Originally posted by elvenangel SOE / NGE whiners don't apply you guys always forget to blame Lucas Arts for PUSHING Sony into the NGE changes in an attempt to up population numbers.
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
Kotor and SWG are two different kinds of beasts, try not to compare the developers to make an invalid point.
Originally posted by Orphes I dont know that much of business but aren't there two parts that have a contract with eachother?
Yes. Sigil and Microsoft would have been in a contract with each other, because there's no way that any company, least of all Microsoft, would spend millions on a game developer without everything spelled out in writing first.
You can actually force someone to buy out becouse otherwise the other part wont do what is said. If that would have been the case couldn't just sigil waved the papers saying that MS have signed a deal?
Not if Sigil didn't live up to the terms in the agreement, no. Also, Microsoft's army of lawyers probably put in several escape clauses, giving MS a legal out if the company felt it was in their best interests to walk away.
After four years and millions spent, they apparently felt that VG was no longer viable, but instead of just killing the game outright, they gave Sigil the ability to buy it back and find another publisher. MS wouldn't have done that if they hadn't seen something that sent up red flags. They're largely a development driven company, so for them to back out after all that time and money speaks volumes.
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
It's funny you say this because Microsoft is notorious for being behind schedule on all there products, especially Windows and Office.. No wonder they are astute at recognizing projects that are behind schedule
Originally posted by elvenangel SOE / NGE whiners don't apply you guys always forget to blame Lucas Arts for PUSHING Sony into the NGE changes in an attempt to up population numbers.
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
Didn’t what? Didn’t want to work with Lucasarts again? In fact Biowear refused to make KOTOR II because they had so many problems with Lucasarts the first time around.
I wonder who came up with the idea for those crappy minigames in KOTOR, they certainly don’t seem like Biowear…
Originally posted by monoth It's funny you say this because Microsoft is notorious for being behind schedule on all there products, especially Windows and Office.. No wonder they are astute at recognizing projects that are behind schedule.
Heh.
Think of it this way-- it wasn't the "behind schedule" part that was necessarily the problem. For all the delays that MS has with their own products, like Windows and Office, those are all but guaranteed to make money. VG wasn't. THAT was the problem.
If I had to guess, it wasn't so much that Sigil missed benchmarks, or fell behind and over any budget (although that certainly wouldn't help matters), but that Microsoft saw a game that wasn't going to be viable for whatever reason, so they cut their losses while giving Sigil the more dignified out of buying back their own game.
Comments
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
some are real and some are buddy keys. The buddy keys never paid for the box or the monthly
fee so they are nothing more than a free ride and brought no income to Sigil.
The graph suggests that a cash crunch is coming sooner rather than later. Perhaps the
rumor has surfaced to prepare people for what is coming.
Yes, it was active accounts, not subscriptions and I suspect that the cash crunch is already here. Otherwise they most likely would not have released early.
I assume you're referencing to this post maybe?
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?p=242091#post242091
Or another similar.
Either way, that's "registered" accounts, not "active". All Meritt is doing is taking a count of all characters listed on Vanguard Players and making the guess that each account holds 3.4 characters out of the 12 possible allowed (8 for regular accounts).
Vanguard Players doesn't de-list characters on cancelled accounts, so on that fact alone it's impossible to know which characters belong to active accounts and which don't.
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
Meritt came to that conclusion based on a total character count on vgplayers of 614,181. http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showpost.php?p=242091&postcount=40
He then assumed each person has 3.4 alts per account. That would give you about 180, 641 subscribers. For that to be true you have to assume that:
They do not delete characters from the vgplayers db nor the game data in general. For example, I made 6 alts. I have canceled my account. My characters still show on vgplayers.com.
If you believe those 3 line items above are true then yes VG has 175 subs. Oh and to the "increasing" statement. VG only sold about 13k boxes last month (March 2007). That is not an indication that the game in increasing.
Studies have shown that about 40% of MMORPG Players remain loyal to a particular MMO, even if I give you that no one has canceled their VG sub and that the other 2 items above are true, that comes to a value of: 70,000 subscribers.
I am going to make the bold statement that all 3 items above are not true which would place the subscriber count around 40-60k. That number is far short of the 250k required to make a profit and way short of the 500k Brad estimated prior to launch.
You can hardly blame them when the CEO and lead designer writes a post about how retail and subscription sales are not living up to expectations within three months of release.
The initial release period is when expectation and actual sales/subscriptions are at their highest. It only makes sense that there would be an expectation by observers that sales/subscriptions would only go down from that point and thus, any chart illustrating a reduction of sales/subscription numbers would have more legitimacy than one showing any increase.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
FUNCOM - putting the FUN in disFUNctional !
some are real and some are buddy keys. The buddy keys never paid for the box or the monthly
fee so they are nothing more than a free ride and brought no income to Sigil.
The graph suggests that a cash crunch is coming sooner rather than later. Perhaps the
rumor has surfaced to prepare people for what is coming.
Yes, it was active accounts, not subscriptions and I suspect that the cash crunch is already here. Otherwise they most likely would not have released early.
I assume you're referencing to this post maybe?
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?p=242091#post242091
Or another similar.
Either way, that's "registered" accounts, not "active". All Meritt is doing is taking a count of all characters listed on Vanguard Players and making the guess that each account holds 3.4 characters out of the 12 possible allowed (8 for regular accounts).
Vanguard Players doesn't de-list characters on cancelled accounts, so on that fact alone it's impossible to know which characters belong to active accounts and which don't.Actually it was based on this statement : www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
And your numbers are coming from which source?
Merritt explained his methods, where and how he got the data, and what he concluded from it. Do I believe the numbers are completely accurate? No.
Until, however, other people can come up with tangible, clearly explained information that proves more accurate than his, I'll tend to believe that his numbers are probably more accurate than theirs.
Meritt came to that conclusion based on a total character count on vgplayers of 614,181. http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showpost.php?p=242091&postcount=40
He then assumed each person has 3.4 alts per account. That would give you about 180, 641 subscribers. For that to be true you have to assume that:
They do not delete characters from the vgplayers db nor the game data in general. For example, I made 6 alts. I have canceled my account. My characters still show on vgplayers.com.
If you believe those 3 line items above are true then yes VG has 175 subs. Oh and to the "increasing" statement. VG only sold about 13k boxes last month (March 2007). That is not an indication that the game in increasing.
Studies have shown that about 40% of MMORPG Players remain loyal to a particular MMO, even if I give you that no one has canceled their VG sub and that the other 2 items above are true, that comes to a value of: 70,000 subscribers.
I am going to make the bold statement that all 3 items above are not true which would place the subscriber count around 40-60k. That number is far short of the 250k required to make a profit and way short of the 500k Brad estimated prior to launch.
At the time he made those charts, they were based on ACTIVE characters (ones who had gained an adventuring or crafting level over a given period of time) not total characters. He made that clear. Since there is no more recent data, there is no way to know how remotely accurate the numbers are today.
Forty percent remain loyal based on what total, and over what period of time? One day, one month, one year, five years? The only numbers I have ever seen are ones over the LIFE of a given MMO. Your assumptions are that 60% of everyone who even TRIES a given MMO immediately drop it. Probably neither you, nor I, nor probably anyone else posting on this forum even know the true numbers of how many people have actually tried the game. Forty percent of an unknown remains an unknown. That is a statistic that maybe people can talk about in a year or two assuming the game survives that long.
The sales numbers are also not an indication that the game is losing subscribers either. Do you have some numbers that show that VG lost more than 13,000 people during March? If not, then quoting the sales numbers means nothing.
All any of this means is that we all (inclucing Merritt) know nothing about what is really going on. We can all make bold statements, but it's all a bunch of noise without real information to back it up.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
At the time he made those charts, they were based on ACTIVE characters (ones who had gained an adventuring or crafting level over a given period of time) not total characters. He made that clear. Since there is no more recent data, there is no way to know how remotely accurate the numbers are today.
Forty percent remain loyal based on what total, and over what period of time? One day, one month, one year, five years? The only numbers I have ever seen are ones over the LIFE of a given MMO. Your assumptions are that 60% of everyone who even TRIES a given MMO immediately drop it. Probably neither you, nor I, nor probably anyone else posting on this forum even know the true numbers of how many people have actually tried the game. Forty percent of an unknown remains an unknown. That is a statistic that maybe people can talk about in a year or two assuming the game survives that long.
The sales numbers are also not an indication that the game is losing subscribers either. Do you have some numbers that show that VG lost more than 13,000 people during March? If not, then quoting the sales numbers means nothing.
All any of this means is that we all (inclucing Merritt) know nothing about what is really going on. We can all make bold statements, but it's all a bunch of noise without real information to back it up.
We each must decide what information we consider factual or not. Whether you choose to believe the dataor not is up to you.
It is no surprise that the VGPlayers website has not been updated. It evidently was providing a lot more
information than Sigil wanted to be disseminated. That may well be an indication that the mined data was
too close to the truth.
The only information available would either be an announcement by Sigil (highly unlikely and highly suspect)
or data provided by them (when they didn't know how much other info could be gleaned from it). Merrit's
info was taken from the latter.
When there was real information to back it up, you still cried foul. There are some people who will only
believe info from a specific source. Unfortunately sole source info is just as susceptible to being manipulated
as info obtained from other sources. We are talking about marketing and business and the truth is seldom
present in those environments. As a consequence, results from data mining are likely to be the closest
anyone is likely to be able to get to the truth.
It's funny to see all thse drama queens come in here crying how Sigil ripped them off, and how they were misled by Brad's vision and how there life is in complete shambles because of this ...
If you don't play the game why do you care how many subscribers there are?
I have a question please. Microsoft used to be behind this game with Sigil. Why did Sigil buy up Microsoft's share? Wouldn't they have been in the same situation then as now but Sigil wouldn't be so worse off for money?
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
I don't remember the details anymore but what I do remember is Sigil burned through the money Microsoft gave them and amongst differences of money spent and release time they opted out with Microsoft and got into bed with Sony. Honestly they knew if they stayed with microsoft they're game would get shut off when it finally stopped or never made money, atleast with Sony the game will be alive for as long as people play it.
Sigil made alot poor design choices and changes burning up cash as they went. Honestly Brad may have fantastic ideas but I think he lacks the ability to pull it together and he's obvious really crap at money mangement or he'd of made some stuff finalized till release instead of constant changes over the past 7 long years.
Everyone can say crap about SOE but they do keep their games going even with small populaces. Personally I think if SOE takes over Vanguard it might help the game just as it did with IMO Everquest. I personally hated EQ when it first came out, I didn't get into playing the game solidly until right after SOE took over and the game considerably improved, though I DO hate how some of the expansion went after Kunark and Velious.
SOE / NGE whiners don't apply you guys always forget to blame Lucas Arts for PUSHING Sony into the NGE changes in an attempt to up population numbers.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
I dont know that much of business but aren't there two parts that have a contract with eachother?
You can actually force someone to buy out becouse otherwise the other part wont do what is said.
If that would have been the case couldn't just sigil waved the papers saying that MS have signed a deal?
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Not exactly. A contract leans towards the person issuing the contract. Atleast in my business.. If i write up a contract, and issue it to you, you sign.. The contract is now ineffect, and YOU the contractee are bound to the terms of the contract, where as i the contractor have more freedoms. Now if i keep my end of the contract YOU the contractee MUST keep your end, or it's a breach of contract. If you keep your end of the deal, but i fail to keep my end, that is a breach of contract...
However, as the contractor i, at my descretion may nullify the contract with you the contractee. However you as the contractee are bound to the contract, and MAY NOT nullify the contract. Now i have to supply what i state i will supply in the contract, however i am not bound to the contract. Where as you would have to keep up your deal, and cannot break the deal without my permission to do so.
So what we have here, based on the discussion ( since none of us truely knows) is Sigil was starting to look like it would be unable to fullfil the contract. M$ the contractor, is more interested in monetary recovery than chasing sigil into litigation over the contract. So they, offer an ultimatum to Sigil, buy out and we willingly nullify the contract, or you become inbreach of said contract and we litigate and both lose money. ( even though you win a court hearing in reguards to a contract DOES NOT MEAN YOU GET PAID.. M$ knows this, and was prolly the leading factor in them, " ending it nicely " )
So as Sigil is concerened, no they have no choice in whether M$ nullify said contract or not.
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
Kotor and SWG are two different kinds of beasts, try not to compare the developers to make an invalid point.
Yes. Sigil and Microsoft would have been in a contract with each other, because there's no way that any company, least of all Microsoft, would spend millions on a game developer without everything spelled out in writing first.
Not if Sigil didn't live up to the terms in the agreement, no. Also, Microsoft's army of lawyers probably put in several escape clauses, giving MS a legal out if the company felt it was in their best interests to walk away.
After four years and millions spent, they apparently felt that VG was no longer viable, but instead of just killing the game outright, they gave Sigil the ability to buy it back and find another publisher. MS wouldn't have done that if they hadn't seen something that sent up red flags. They're largely a development driven company, so for them to back out after all that time and money speaks volumes.
Oh right, thanks for the replies. I think I understand now.
My guess would be that Microsoft saw the condition of the game and knew it needed another year before release, they probably didnt want to fund it any longer so Sigil bought them out... OR Microsoft wanted the game to be more simple like WOW or LOTRO to get bigger subscriber numbers and when Sigil wouldnt comply they had to buy MS out..
Your guess is as good as mine....
Microsoft has developed software for a very long time. They are probably very astute at recognizing
projects that are behind schedule and not meeting significant milestones. If a project misses enough
milestones, red flags start being waved. My guess is at some point, enough flags were raised that
Microsoft finally said either buy out our stake or this project is being killed. Brad decided to buy out
Microsoft's stake thereby putting Sigil in a financial bind.
We are all guessing since the parties involved aren't talking.
It's funny you say this because Microsoft is notorious for being behind schedule on all there products, especially Windows and Office.. No wonder they are astute at recognizing projects that are behind schedule
is that why bioware botched up kotor and it's sequel so horribly?
oh wait, they didn't....
Heh.
Think of it this way-- it wasn't the "behind schedule" part that was necessarily the problem. For all the delays that MS has with their own products, like Windows and Office, those are all but guaranteed to make money. VG wasn't. THAT was the problem.
If I had to guess, it wasn't so much that Sigil missed benchmarks, or fell behind and over any budget (although that certainly wouldn't help matters), but that Microsoft saw a game that wasn't going to be viable for whatever reason, so they cut their losses while giving Sigil the more dignified out of buying back their own game.
lol might as well mix and match a bit and say that swg will be with wow lol.in the same game.
just kidding.