Maintenance for the week of February 23:
· [IN PROGRESS] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [IN PROGRESS] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [IN PROGRESS] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [IN PROGRESS] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [IN PROGRESS] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [IN PROGRESS] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Fantastic news
-
LariahHunding✭✭✭✭I wish these numbers were true, but I believe that they pulled them out of a dark place."Give a man a sweet roll, he only has one to steal. Give him a sweet roll recipe, he have bunches to steal."
1 -
I'm not sure about that. Though this isn't a great, new awakening in MMOs it IS a niche MMO. This was never going to appeal to the masses as maybe WoW did/does. At its heart, weather successful or not...it tries to be an Elder Scrolls game. As such it is only going to find a certain audience.0 -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭tishromanoveb17_ESO wrote: »The Elder Scrolls Online seems to be doing well despite the overall MMO market decline in both players and total revenues, as the average ESO revenue per user continues to rise according to SuperData which cites 772,374 ESO subscribers.
There are only 2 ways that revenue PER user can rise.
1) More users are paying the full monthly sub instead of the discounted longer term options.
2) cash shop purchases.
Neither tells us anything about the health of the game. In fact 1) is more of a negative than a positive.
Unless they mean that people are resubing or people that bought the game started paying for a sub. If you bought the game and never subbed their revenue for you as a user is $60. If you also purchased a months sub it is now 75. Otherwise It is hard to figure out what they would mean by that.0 -
ShedsHisTail✭✭✭✭✭
✭Oh, sure...
I make a thread about this and all I get is, "We already have one of these threads!" and ZOS closes it.
Apparently if I'd just waited a few days for everyone's goldfish memory to reset, the response would have been better. :P"As an online discussion of Tamrielic Lore grows longer, the probability of someone blaming a Dragon Break approaches 1." -- Sheds' Law
Have you seen the Twin Lamps?0 -
WebBull✭✭✭✭✭
✭tishromanoveb17_ESO wrote: »The Elder Scrolls Online seems to be doing well despite the overall MMO market decline in both players and total revenues, as the average ESO revenue per user continues to rise according to SuperData which cites 772,374 ESO subscribers.
There are only 2 ways that revenue PER user can rise.
1) More users are paying the full monthly sub instead of the discounted longer term options.
2) cash shop purchases.
Neither tells us anything about the health of the game. In fact 1) is more of a negative than a positive.
Unless they mean that people are resubing or people that bought the game started paying for a sub. If you bought the game and never subbed their revenue for you as a user is $60. If you also purchased a months sub it is now 75. Otherwise It is hard to figure out what they would mean by that.
Re-subbing wouldn't increase the average revenue per user unless more people are resubbing under the higher monthly instead of the other discounted options.
0 -
OrangeTheCat✭✭✭✭✭
✭A nice "slap in the face" to all the whiners and doom-mongors we have had to put up with.3 -
Innocente✭✭✭✭Arguing details about BS subscription numbers and rates of income of a private company is pointless.
Better to watch the price of box sales, the population of instances, and Cyrodiil populations. Those are much better indicators of the health of ESO at this stage, in my opinion.0 -
OrangeTheCat✭✭✭✭✭
✭This post and the others you commented on mean nothing without an official comment from ZoS. All numbers from this and the other linked thread are only generalized guesstimates based on market sales that they may not even have full access to. ESO is doing fine and that's all anyone needs to know.
Yes, but since the estimates for all the games come from the same source, are derived using the same methodology, whatever bias and/or error is probably systematic and applies equally to all of the games reviewed. So there is, as they say, internal validity. It is valid to compare across games. So the conclusions still hold or at least are stronger than naysayers would like to believe.0 -
0
-
ThisOnePosts✭✭✭✭✭I think there are more subscribers than that, still this is as I expected.
I will gladly pay a subscription just to keep all of the botters and hackers out... do you know how F2P games attract botters and hackers? It's like white on rice. It's so easy to change your IP these days and just make a new account. At least with a subscription, it's going to cost them money so eventually they will just give up. And after using some lowbie alts recently, I am happy to say I think ZOS has done a great job at reducing botters, etc..2 -
gunplummer✭✭✭tishromanoveb17_ESO wrote: »Where are these number from? Sales? Server log? ZoS rep?
It's hard to comment on a number without knowing the detail.
The data doesn't explicitly state where the figures have come from, however SuperData's MMO earnings are compiled from "the monthly spending of 36.9 million digital gamers, worldwide, collected from developers, publishers, and payment service providers." We can presume the numbers have come from the same source.
It is a sad world when you're willing to accept something that someone else tells you because you assume to know their source despite that someone being unwilling to tell you where they got their info.
http://www.healio.com/hematology-oncology/news/print/hematology-oncology/{241d62a7-fe6e-4c5b-9fed-a33cc6e4bd7c}/cigarettes-were-once-physician-tested-approved
But it was on the internet and everyone knows since it was on the internet it must be true.1 -
Enjinir✭✭✭The value is cited as "revenue per user."
The value is NOT cited as "revenue per user per month."
In the evaluation, I suspect they are talking about total revenue earned from each unique user.
Someone who purchases ESO but never subs has a total revenue of $60.
Someone who purchases ESO and subs for 3 months has a total revenue of $105.
For the average revenue per user to decrease, dropped subs would have to relatively outweigh the continued subs.
For the average revenue per user to increase, continued subs would have to relatively outweigh the dropped subs.
If they are using the number in this way, then it would seem that, of course, the revenue per user would continue to increase, however if the dropped subs were indeed as significant as some users on these forums imply they are, the revenue per user would be decreasing sharply, considering the base revenue has also decreased between steam sales and OTC discounts.
This would seem to be a good indication of ESO's success.
Actually, the only way this number would be silly and/or a bad sign, is if it was per month and only included currently active users and not all unique accounts created since launch. Other than that... this is a good sign.Edited by Enjinir on July 23, 2014 8:55PM0 -
Shergar✭✭Almost as many threads as the dog
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/120698/775-000-subs/p1 0