Grunim wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

LOL. I think i recall hearing that ESO was topping the charts in revenue from sales and subs.

I want some of what your smoking. Techage... Lols

I would love to see your references.

But to be fair, there were reports of that when the game was released. I have seen credible reports of up to 1.5 million sales.

Trouble is, Steam quickly marked it down to half price to generate some sales. Walmart marked it down 75% within 2 months of release.

Look at the Steam metascores: Final Fantasy XIV has an 83. Rift--84. Eve--88. Everquest 2--83.

ESO? 71.

Pathetic numbers. People just don't like this game.

Funny you mention rating numbers. Today I noticed that the User Rating score for ESO on MMORPG.com recently increased to 7.9 where it had been holding steady at 7.8 for a couple of months.

It's a small approval increase, but MMORPG.com is known for a having critical users and ESO is trending in a more favorable direction.

Well, it is a 1% fluctuation in the positive direction. I would suspect it has more to do with the smaller number of dedicated niche players grading it than the initial flux of people. Overall, as the game has fewer and fewer players and goes F2P (in 6 months is my guess), the game will only attract people who are actually suited to it, and the numbers may climb as high as 8.2 within a year.

This game will probably survive for years, but not as the game it was supposed to be. ESO is a FMMORPG*, and will survive with casual players who like solo play.

Nothing wrong with that.

*Faux Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

The people in the industry follow Raptr's data trends with a keen eye know that Raptr had 1 million users 4 years ago, has 22 million now, and is adding 1.5 million per month.

That is a LOT of data. And people far smarter than you who work in the industry base their business decisions upon it.

Reading the Raptr marketing materials?

Typically companies that base monetary/ ad targeting on statistical data pay for much more detailed information than we have access to here on the forum. The fact is we here on the forum don't have that information...

But if you have those details share... or just stick to the ad hominem.

You have got to be kidding--they don't have Google where you live?

Wow, must suck to be you.

Or are you too lazy to embark upon a process of self-education when you have been pointed in the right direction?

Again, must suck to be you.

Regardless, not for you, since you are obviously not able to self-educate regardless of how much you are spoon fed, I post the following for other people to learn more about Raptr, and learn how extensively the gaming and press industries consider it to be the wonderkid of providing not just information on game usage, but providing information on why people adopt, play, and abandon, games.

Enjoy!

http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/13/raptr-fong-thresh-tech-personal-cx_af_0915raptr.html

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110927006094/en/Raptr-Report-Reveals-Zynga-Games-Rival-Core

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/08/17/finishing.videogames.snow/

http://www.statista.com/statistics/300284/longest-average-video-game-session-during-launch-month-raptr/

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/12/game-rewards-are-leading-to-new-business-models-for-raptr-and-kiip/

http://venturebeat.com/2010/07/20/with-more-than-1m-users-raptr-formally-launches-social-network-for-gamers/

http://blog.raptr.com/press/

http://blog.raptr.com/category/stats/

http://mashable.com/2008/09/03/raptr-video-game-community/

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-03-11-raptr-now-adding-1-5-million-users-per-month

http://www.privco.com/private-company/raptr-inc

http://notsovirtual.eu/tools-resources/games-industry-stats-resources/

http://icrontic.com/article/raptr-aims-to-leverage-your-gaming-clout

http://www.scoop.it/t/insert-coin-gaming/p/4017482197/2014/03/12/raptr-now-adding-1-5-million-users-per-month

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/10/the-sims-social-siphoning-neighbors-from-zynga-raptr-report.html

http://www.g4tv.com/articles/67970/Raptrs-Dennis-Thresh-Fong-Interview/

http://massively.joystiq.com/2010/07/20/massively-talks-with-raptrs-dennis-fong

I'll end there.. you get the point.

lol just look at the comment section of that article, a guys asks where wildstar is on the list, the auther 'forgot'about it, tells you how accurate his list is, he prob also forgot ESO
and secondly, the author is called rob(bie) williams....

One thing I have to say about raptr is that of all the multi game guilds I have been in the people who use raptor use it pretty much the same way I do, and that is to measure game play time and achievements for single player games as most mmos do that for you which would be indicative of the fact that raptr does not have much of a base in mmo, why would it when the game already does the same thing.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Not entirely correct. A sample size of as few as fifty can be used to demonstrate trends for groups of thousands with a reliability has high as 95%.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

There are maybe 5 of us left. Out of over 100 that pre-ordered. That is a 95% attrition rate.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

*Hint, it doesn't take much data to get to 95% reliability of plus or minus 3%.

On the surface, you seem to have a fixation on the number 95.

To answer your first statement, which I should have done eons ago, you can have a sample size of 50 scaled up to thousands with high accuracy, but that does not mean that every sample size of 50 can do it. There is no indication that what Raptr has done is create a representative sample of the target gaming community, or even a suitable random sampling of the community.

At best, what can be said about the Raptr numbers is that it reflects the interests of the Raptr users. Stepping outside of that box, I do not believe that there is basis to assume a 95% reliability with respect to ESO.

This was the entire point of me mentioning Steam at all. The Steam population is most definitely not a representative sample and isn't even a good random sample. The Steam numbers are meaningless, even inside the Steam community, due to reported issues with Steam itself.

Coming back to the Raptr data, I also have to agree with others who have questioned the population that uses Raptr. I keep hearing about millions of people. You can have 10 million people but if those 10 million samples do not represent the target gaming community, the numbers can be just as inaccurate as with 50 samples extrapolated to 10 million.

To start with, the market ESO is in is not the same as the general computer gaming market. To accurately judge the success of ESO, you need to find out the adoption rate among fantasy MMO players in the PC and Mac markets. The next layer above that is the adoption rate among general MMO players and FRP players, separately. The Raptr numbers sit a couple layers outside of this, and that is why I do not feel that they represent anything but what Raptr users are playing.

lordrichter wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Not entirely correct. A sample size of as few as fifty can be used to demonstrate trends for groups of thousands with a reliability has high as 95%.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

There are maybe 5 of us left. Out of over 100 that pre-ordered. That is a 95% attrition rate.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

*Hint, it doesn't take much data to get to 95% reliability of plus or minus 3%.

On the surface, you seem to have a fixation on the number 95.

To answer your first statement, which I should have done eons ago, you can have a sample size of 50 scaled up to thousands with high accuracy, but that does not mean that every sample size of 50 can do it. There is no indication that what Raptr has done is create a representative sample of the target gaming community, or even a suitable random sampling of the community.

At best, what can be said about the Raptr numbers is that it reflects the interests of the Raptr users. Stepping outside of that box, I do not believe that there is basis to assume a 95% reliability with respect to ESO.

This was the entire point of me mentioning Steam at all. The Steam population is most definitely not a representative sample and isn't even a good random sample. The Steam numbers are meaningless, even inside the Steam community, due to reported issues with Steam itself.

Coming back to the Raptr data, I also have to agree with others who have questioned the population that uses Raptr. I keep hearing about millions of people. You can have 10 million people but if those 10 million samples do not represent the target gaming community, the numbers can be just as inaccurate as with 50 samples extrapolated to 10 million.

To start with, the market ESO is in is not the same as the general computer gaming market. To accurately judge the success of ESO, you need to find out the adoption rate among fantasy MMO players in the PC and Mac markets. The next layer above that is the adoption rate among general MMO players and FRP players, separately. The Raptr numbers sit a couple layers outside of this, and that is why I do not feel that they represent anything but what Raptr users are playing.

The industry experts disagree with you. Either you are wrong, or they are wrong.

Believe as you like--maybe you are smarter than all of them combined.

And maybe not.

Cheers!

PS. 95% is a critical number in statistics, which is why I referenced it. (Of course, if you knew squat about statistical analysis, you would already know that.)

As for the other 95, hey, not my fault if 100 minus 5 is 95.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

LOL!!! OMMFG!!! You are pathetic! Forbes and BusinessWire and CNN and Statistica and Venturebeat are all writing "PR fluff pieces" for Raptr!

RIGHT!!!

Actually if you have read the BusinessWire "article" it is a press release piece with the contacts for the Raptr PR department at the bottom of the page. If you read the wording, it reads like an advert. These other articles feature interviews with the Raptr CEO, which are basically ads for the company.

Yes, Forbes, CNN, BusinessWire all feature PR pieces often written by guest writers or listed as a "featured article". These are equivalent to "game previews" featured in gaming journalism. Which are just hype pieces designed to advertise the product with very little critical analysis.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Go away, child, the adults want to talk.

More ad hominem...

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

The industry experts disagree with you. Either you are wrong, or they are wrong.

Believe as you like--maybe you are smarter than all of them combined.

And maybe not.

More ad hominem... Who started this thread? In this forum? And asked what do the users thought happened to ESO? And now is not happy with our answers because we are not experts?

Not being an expert in a certain field does not preclude someone from making valid points on the subject.

lordrichter wrote: »

At best, what can be said about the Raptr numbers is that it reflects the interests of the Raptr users.

Exactly.

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

LOL!!! OMMFG!!! You are pathetic! Forbes and BusinessWire and CNN and Statistica and Venturebeat are all writing "PR fluff pieces" for Raptr!

RIGHT!!!

Actually if you have read the BusinessWire "article" it is a press release piece with the contacts for the Raptr PR department at the bottom of the page. If you read the wording, it reads like an advert. These other articles feature interviews with the Raptr CEO, which are basically ads for the company.

Yes, Forbes, CNN, BusinessWire all feature PR pieces often written by guest writers or listed as a "featured article". These are equivalent to "game previews" featured in gaming journalism. Which are just hype pieces designed to advertise the product with very little critical analysis.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Go away, child, the adults want to talk.

More ad hominem...

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

The industry experts disagree with you. Either you are wrong, or they are wrong.

Believe as you like--maybe you are smarter than all of them combined.

And maybe not.

More ad hominem... Who started this thread? In this forum? And asked what do the users thought happened to ESO? And now is not happy with our answers because we are not experts?

Not being an expert in a certain field does not preclude someone from making valid points on the subject.

lordrichter wrote: »

At best, what can be said about the Raptr numbers is that it reflects the interests of the Raptr users.

Exactly.

LOL! Now you are claiming that Forbes and all the other industry leaders are in the business of publishing press releases for companies and thus everything you disagree with is a lie!

ROFLMAO!!!

Seriously, go back to talking talk to your garden gnome... you have gone from ignorant to downright silly.

To add a dose of common sense to this thread, let me explain the reality of MMO playing. MMOs are a long term game commitment for gamers, and do not follow the same gaming patterns as non-MMOs. You cannot generalize any amount of success or failure based on only a few months of play, and *definitely* cannot compare play patterns of MMOs to non-MMOs (as Raptr did) because there are inherent fluctuations in play patterns for MMOs which don't apply to other types of games

I've been playing multiplayer online games from the days of the original MUD, through games like Kingdom of Drakkar on MPGNet, through UO, EQ, WoW, LotRO, SW:TOR, and now ESO (Not to mention others I tried but didn't stick with for any length of time…), and I've seen the same exact pattern for EVERY one of those games. It goes like this:

The game is launched. People flock to sign up based on the hype. A significant percentage leaves within the month - the game isn't for them. Another percentage maintains a subscription but doesn't play very much if at all, at least at first. A core percentage sticks with the game and become regular players. Slowly, over months, they convince more people to play - usually pulling from the subscribers who haven't been playing.

Whenever a major other game is released, especially an A-list non-MMO, a large percentage of the regular players stop playing the MMO for a time, and slowly filter back after a while.

Conversely, when a major update is released, hype happens again, and people who haven't been playing sign up/renew their subscription and you get a big boost in people playing.

When you hit the first major holiday season after launch, you get a BIG influx of new players, especially if the game has been out long enough for the initial instability to be ironed out, and especially if you combine it with a major content release in, say, October or November. (I'll note that ESO's development seems to be chugging along at *exactly* the right timing for this, BTW, which surprises me not at all.)

So yes, I have little doubt people playing ESO dropped by a significant percentage after the free trial period ended. Of course it did - this is how MMOs work. The fact it did has NOTHING to do with the overall long term performance of the game. It says nothing about how many of those people subscribed or didn't. It says nothing about how many of those people left to go play some other thing for a little while but are still likely to return to ESO later. It says nothing about how much money the game is making.

Give me a full *year* of those Raptr reports, and we might have a better clue of ESO's progress. But based on only three months, two of which included a lot of free trial time? Those statistics are pretty much worthless for making any kind of conclusion right now, and serve only as a meaningless distraction. The only relevant question you should be asking is: Do you enjoy the game? Are you looking forward to things they're planning to do with the game?

And come back in April of next year and *then* we can see if ESO is really succeeding or not.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

LOL!!! OMMFG!!! You are pathetic! Forbes and BusinessWire and CNN and Statistica and Venturebeat are all writing "PR fluff pieces" for Raptr!

RIGHT!!!

Actually if you have read the BusinessWire "article" it is a press release piece with the contacts for the Raptr PR department at the bottom of the page. If you read the wording, it reads like an advert. These other articles feature interviews with the Raptr CEO, which are basically ads for the company.

Yes, Forbes, CNN, BusinessWire all feature PR pieces often written by guest writers or listed as a "featured article". These are equivalent to "game previews" featured in gaming journalism. Which are just hype pieces designed to advertise the product with very little critical analysis.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Go away, child, the adults want to talk.

More ad hominem...

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

The industry experts disagree with you. Either you are wrong, or they are wrong.

Believe as you like--maybe you are smarter than all of them combined.

And maybe not.

More ad hominem... Who started this thread? In this forum? And asked what do the users thought happened to ESO? And now is not happy with our answers because we are not experts?

Not being an expert in a certain field does not preclude someone from making valid points on the subject.

lordrichter wrote: »

At best, what can be said about the Raptr numbers is that it reflects the interests of the Raptr users.

Exactly.

LOL! Now you are claiming that Forbes and all the other industry leaders are in the business of publishing press releases for companies and thus everything you disagree with is a lie!

ROFLMAO!!!

Seriously, go back to talking talk to your garden gnome... you have gone from ignorant to downright silly.

rofl right because CNN is, for example, such a haven of objective reporting. Especially lately, when I sometimes think I am watching E-entertainment news, or when they do pieces in conjunction with their "sister network" HLN which is laso objective and totally not National Enquirer TV.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

LOL! Now you are claiming that Forbes and all the other industry leaders are in the business of publishing press releases for companies and thus everything you disagree with is a lie!

ROFLMAO!!!

Seriously, go back to talking talk to your garden gnome... you have gone from ignorant to downright silly.

Oh my god, I've been trolled on the internet. :'(

As I said, your garden gnome misses you. So, run to it it tell it how the world is wrong and you are right.

you obviously have no argument if all you can do is attack your opponents personally.

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

M

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Grunim wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

LOL. I think i recall hearing that ESO was topping the charts in revenue from sales and subs.

I want some of what your smoking. Techage... Lols

I would love to see your references.

But to be fair, there were reports of that when the game was released. I have seen credible reports of up to 1.5 million sales.

Trouble is, Steam quickly marked it down to half price to generate some sales. Walmart marked it down 75% within 2 months of release.

Look at the Steam metascores: Final Fantasy XIV has an 83. Rift--84. Eve--88. Everquest 2--83.

ESO? 71.

Pathetic numbers. People just don't like this game.

Funny you mention rating numbers. Today I noticed that the User Rating score for ESO on MMORPG.com recently increased to 7.9 where it had been holding steady at 7.8 for a couple of months.

It's a small approval increase, but MMORPG.com is known for a having critical users and ESO is trending in a more favorable direction.

Well, it is a 1% fluctuation in the positive direction. I would suspect it has more to do with the smaller number of dedicated niche players grading it than the initial flux of people. Overall, as the game has fewer and fewer players and goes F2P (in 6 months is my guess), the game will only attract people who are actually suited to it, and the numbers may climb as high as 8.2 within a year.

This game will probably survive for years, but not as the game it was supposed to be. ESO is a FMMORPG*, and will survive with casual players who like solo play.

Nothing wrong with that.

*Faux Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

Ok now i am curious. When is the review number valid. For example here you imply that in the future there will be less people playing the game and the people who do will like it, so down the road in a years time you could see the score go up. So my question is When is the review score of a game valid and for how long? 3 months? 1 year?

Im also confused because earlier when you were comparing ESO to other MMO it didn't seem to matter that their scores are probably no longer accurate since some of the examples you gave have been out for years, and obviously as such have been very corrupted by people who like the games.

Im not very good at reading, and there are barely any pictures in this thread, as an adult could you please tell me what this all means?

It means subjective things like player endorsements (which is all those ratings are) will tend to go up a percent or two over time as dedicated players are the only ones raking them anymore. But, the numbers move slowly as the number of people giving rankings falls significantly. Thus, I fully expect to see ESO climb 2-3 points, as most MMOs do.

However, a game that starts in the toilet is unlikely to make it to even as high as "urinal" level.

Therefore, the ratings numbers are an indicator of overall appreciation of the game. A game with a score of 5.1 is not doing anywhere near as well as a game that scores 8.5, and is unlikely to ever climb up there. They do fluctuate a little over time, which means you can safely add .2 or .3 to ESOs current number to compare future ESO with current EQII.

The reason why ESO scored so low, and had so many people leave, is it because it:

1. Did not meet their expectations, and
2. Did not exceed their expectations

Thus, when their free time was done, or the first payment came up for renewal, they were gone.

I'm not sure numbers from a single site are all that indicative. Last I heard from reliable industry sources is that World of Tanks was the top MMO as far as monthly revenue but that hardly matters here as this is the good-versus-evil-magic-and-medieval crowd. Well...and the all important cute elves category. No cute elves in World of Tanks and no plans for any in any future update.

Probably the most remarkable - best design and execution - of any online game in recent years is Dota 2 but, again, that's hardly relevant here. Very different scope and focus.

From experience all I can say is that when I'm upset with a game I tend to initially feel that it's more than a matter of taste - it's a matter of right and wrong until I take a few days off and cool down.

Only truth I've stuck with - from both sides of the divide - is that when folks stop howling about your game the battle is over. Only then is a game in trouble.