dk_dunkirk wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

Steam Charts aren't a random sample. They are the numbers of a specific group of people. They can show trends that should be applicable to the general playerbase. But they aren't the same thing as a random sample.

So, if a new game releases on Steam but not on console, we can expect that it will likely pull significantly more players from Steam users than console users.

Or a game with most of its users on Steam (or all of them) may appear more popular than ESO based on the Steam Charts. But, that doesn't mean it actually has a larger playerbase as a whole. Most PC users of ESO aren't playing on Steam. And none of the console accounts are played through Steam.

You're obviously correct that Steam charts aren't made from random samples out of the entire ESO-playing population, but it doesn't matter. Normally, random sampling would get you data points all over the spectrum to calculate the mean and deviation. In this case, the chart represents the ENTIRE PC Steam-using population. You don't need sampling! You have all the data!

And, sure, the Steam chart it doesn't necessarily mathematically extrapolate to the whole population playing the game, but does anyone seriously expect me to believe that the PC Steam users play the game statistically any differently than other subgroups in terms of length or time of day? The only thing that chart is measuring is time in game, and it can't be that different between PC Steam and PC native. I just can't.

And what's with people saying that PC Steam users are a minority of the users of the game? Has anyone from ZOS ever confirmed that? Is there ANY data to show what percentage of players are on PC, Steam, native, Xbox, PS, NA, EU? Anything? Or is this just people trying to make the hard truth of the Steam chart go away by dismissing that subgroup as too small to matter?

You're right about it being the entire steam population. So, it's fantastic data for determining trends. And the trend is very clear that we're in a population decline.

I very much doubt that other PC users play the game differently to PC Steam users. I have good reason to believe that console does play differently. We have less competition and no add-ons. Console also is notorious for being a more casual playerbase than PC players. Those are all things that can affect player retention.

So, I would personally avoid the assumption that console users are leaving at around the same percentage. That said, there is no reason to believe that console players wouldn't have similar reactions to bad updates, bad performance, lack of content, etc. So, there's no reason to believe that console users are not also leaving, especially given just how much steam's population has declined.

As for the less use steam thing, iirc the devs have stated in the past less PC people use steam at one point. But, this information has been passed on so much by players and I don't remember where I saw that. So, take it with a grain of salt as I can no longer find the source. It was years ago.

I Googled "Is ESO is dying" and found multiple threads, many as far back as 2016. But it hasn't happened yet.

SilverBride wrote: »

I Googled "Is ESO is dying" and found multiple threads, many as far back as 2016. But it hasn't happened yet.

It's not difficult: In a game that relies on a population to survive, a drop in that population does, in fact, mean that game is dying. People can argue how close it is to dead. People can argue that because they haven't noticed it that it isn't real. Heck, someone can put their fingers in their ears and scream "I'm not listening!" all they want, but it doesn't change reality. The reality is that there are significantly less people playing today than there was two years ago.

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

And what's with people saying that PC Steam users are a minority of the users of the game? Has anyone from ZOS ever confirmed that? Is there ANY data to show what percentage of players are on PC, Steam, native, Xbox, PS, NA, EU? Anything? Or is this just people trying to make the hard truth of the Steam chart go away by dismissing that subgroup as too small to matter?

Well for one, the game was initially released without Steam. So anyone and everyone who bought the game early in it's lifespan is not playing on Steam.

Secondly, even with the Steam release, the game is also available through the ESO main website, giving 2 places to easily get the game on PC. I don't know whether Steam is a majority of the PC playerbase or not, but it is not even remotely outlandish to assume that Steam is not the majority of the playerbase. And whether it is the majority of the playerbase or not, it is far too small of a segment of the population to try to use total sums of players to judge the playerbase of the game.

Again, Steam is relevant for percentages and trends. It is not relevant for overall sums of players. The playerbase, including the PC playerbase, is divided amongst too many major platforms to be able to look at any one single platform as definitive over the others. People use Steam because it is easily accessible information, but put far too much weight on Steam's data, particularly when it comes to total sum of players.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

It's not difficult: In a game that relies on a population to survive, a drop in that population does, in fact, mean that game is dying.

I disagree. Population ebb and flow is a normal part of any long term game. The game is dying when the population starts to get low enough that devs can't sustain ongoing development. It is dead/maintenance mode when all meaningful content updates cease. Maybe it gets minor bug fixes here and there and the servers stay open a couple years more. But it's dead at that point.

If the population shows a steady, downward trend over two years as all of the available data shows here, you can't really classify that as normal ebb and flow.

Franchise408 wrote: »

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

I was there for the end of Warhammer Online where people were still claiming the game was doing fine even after they announced they were pulling the plug.

I was there in SWG after the NGE and watched people claiming the NGE actually made the game better and people were just overreacting right up until they pulled the plug.

I am still in SWtOR watching people claiming the game isn't in maintenance mode even though it has been sold to a company that literally only does MMO maintenance mode games.

The amount of willful ignorance that MMO players can display doesn't even surprise me anymore.

On the flip side, I've been seeing chicken little's saying the sky is falling and ESO is dying for years. I came back full time in 2019, and have been hearing people claiming the game is dying since then. I see people claiming games like Diablo 4 dead just because PoE2 came out, or even a single player game like Starfield dead, despite being one of the most played games on Gamepass and having continuous updates and expansions. Hell, I still see people claiming that EQ is dead, despite having yearly expansions and opening new servers annually, including one of their most recent openings having the largest single server population of the game's existence. ***, I've even heard the claims of New World being dead and they just re-released on console, and from everything I've heard (maybe I'm wrong?) it's breathed new life into the game and it's in a decent state at the moment.

So yea, I would believe the evidence that the population is currently in decline, and the game isn't as popular as it was even just a few years ago, but I would definitely reject any claim that the game is dead or dying.

If a population in a game that depends on population to keep going is in decline as most available data shows, isn't it by definition "dying"?

No, because a drop in population does not mean that it is going to be a perpetual drop, or a large enough drop to make the game unsustainable.

It's a 10 year old game with new alternatives coming out all the time. A drop of some level is to be expected.

Most businesses have to close their doors once enough customers stop shopping from them. We've shown that there has been roughly a 40% player loss since U35 went live. That's a huge number of customers to lose, and it is the most likely explanation for why ZOS has so radically reduced content, communication and other financial investments into ESO.

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

I’m not going to comment on whether or not the game as a whole is dying, because that means different things to different people.

I can say as a fact however that PvP has been dying for years and is basically dead at this point. Endgame PvE has only been seeing declines in more recent years, but at this point I think it’s safe to say that it is dying too.

There’s no way to argue this because both PvP and endgame PvE have observable metrics that tell us how populated it is. PvP has population indicators for both IC and Cyrodiil. It also has BG queue times and it’s pretty easy to see if people are dueling if you know the spots. All of these show a very sharp decline when compared to the past.

PVE has leaderboards and ESOlogs reports which are undoubtedly seeing way less activity than in the past too.

There’s many players like me who never touch overland, quests, housing, fishing, and all that other stuff unless it’s required to get an item. To us, ESO IS raids or it IS the PvP. When we objectively see those things dying, then to us the game is dying cause that’s all we play the game for.

Once again, Stamicka nails it. Great post!

We all know what happens to the ostriches that keep their heads in the sand too long. It ends up just as bad for them as it does for those who realize what is happening.

An aside, just to debunk the unfortunate ostrich meme https://www.clevelandzoosociety.org/z/2020/03/11/truth-or-tail-do-ostriches-really-bury-their-head-in-the-sand-when-scared-or-frightened#:~:text=Search:-,Truth or Tail: Do ostriches really bury their head in,sand when scared or frightened?&text=TAIL!,sand when scared or frightened.

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The game is 10 years old. Of course population will decline. That doesn't mean the game is dying.

Fallout 76 is 5 years old and it's up 15% from last year at this time.

Fallout 76 also had a very successful TV show hit a premiere streaming platform within that same time frame.

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The game is 10 years old. Of course population will decline. That doesn't mean the game is dying.

Fallout 76 is 5 years old and it's up 15% from last year at this time.

Fallout 76 also had a very successful TV show hit a premiere streaming platform within that same time frame.

Speaking of tie-ins, let’s not forget that TES VI was announced… 6 years ago… so…

And has had zero follow up since then. There is far less Elder Scrolls hype than Fallout hype at the moment.

I can't speak as much to the end game content of ESO before/after U35. I was just beginning to explore end game when it came about, and i can say that the community went from a positive place to be, to angry and defensive after U35. It burned so many people out that Zos lost a lot of not only experienced players, but those that wanted to join their ranks. It was a slap in the face to the community they had. I can only hope they felt the hit back on their P&L.

I took a over year off from ESO after U35. I've come back to bounce around and relax after work now but don't touch the end game content. the end game community feels like a shadow of what it was before. Divided and far more gatekeeping then before. I simply don't see the point of engaging with it. What i learned as i got used to the game no longer exists. I like ESO because its high fantasy, but i no longer see it as a MMO worth dedicating time too.

Franchise408 wrote: »

Again, Steam is relevant for percentages and trends. It is not relevant for overall sums of players. The playerbase, including the PC playerbase, is divided amongst too many major platforms to be able to look at any one single platform as definitive over the others. People use Steam because it is easily accessible information, but put far too much weight on Steam's data, particularly when it comes to total sum of players.

Yes, that's why I provided a lot of other data that captures the other platforms, in addition to what's available from Steam, to see if it shows similar percentages and trends.

It does.