Confusing Numbers

[Swampratt]

Every day we have diffrent people posting server population numbers for the various servers. Accurate? Semi-accurate? Dead-on? Who knows? I do however know that at the current state of Vanguard a consildation of the servers would only promote a healthier game.

I see so many against this. That is also very confusing. Who would not want the game to feel more alive? Who would not want more options to group for quests/dungeons? Who would not want more crafters, diplomats and adventures scurring around giving us who are left a more enjoyable game?

If we all took into consideraton the numbers being posted the last several weeks one would think Vanguard has less then 15k subs currently. If thats the case we would only need 1 PVP server, 2 PVE servers and 1 RP server to get us by untill they decide to re-luanch and promote this game with advertising not just word of mouth and the negative publicity it gets from all the reviews.

I for one would love to see more people running around and at the moment the world seems so dead other then guild chat. We still have 70+ members and seem to have anywhere from 20-35 on at any given time. Above and beyond the occasional guild group I might see 2-3 other players in a 3-5 hour gaming session.

Swampratt

[Chae668]

Every day we have diffrent people posting server population numbers for the various servers. Accurate? Semi-accurate? Dead-on? Who knows? I do however know that at the current state of Vanguard a consildation of the servers would only promote a healthier game. most are not acurate

I see so many against this. That is also very confusing. Who would not want the game to feel more alive? Who would not want more options to group for quests/dungeons? Who would not want more crafters, diplomats and adventures scurring around giving us who are left a more enjoyable game?because the peeps like me have a healthy server, and dont want more. the world is huge. its going to seem a bit empty. depends also when you play.

If we all took into consideraton the numbers being posted the last several weeks one would think Vanguard has less then 15k subs currently. If thats the case we would only need 1 PVP server, 2 PVE servers and 1 RP server to get us by untill they decide to re-luanch and promote this game with advertising not just word of mouth and the negative publicity it gets from all the reviews.and that number is wrong. you have to understand that most of these tallies are from peeps that no longer play. they come here and gnome the forums as much as possibe. why they come to the forums on a game they dont play is beyond me. there was one tally that showed a steady 1700 subs playing in a 24 hour period, on just his server.

I for one would love to see more people running around and at the moment the world seems so dead other then guild chat. We still have 70+ members and seem to have anywhere from 20-35 on at any given time. Above and beyond the occasional guild group I might see 2-3 other players in a 3-5 hour gaming session.

Swampratt
yea. all depends on where you are, and what time you play. also depends on the health of your particular server. all i know is there are a few servers that have a healthy population. my server in particular have new peeps every day.

good day to you:pirate:

[Tanaril]

yea. all depends on where you are, and what time you play. also depends on the health of your particular server. all i know is there are a few servers that have a healthy population. my server in particular have new peeps every day.

good day to you:pirate:

Hate to tell you this but 1700 subs is low considering there arent exactly a load of servers to choose from.

VG is loosing numbers daily. But your right,stick your head in the sand and ignore the facts. Its the way forward :rolleyes:

[Swampratt]

yea. all depends on where you are, and what time you play. also depends on the health of your particular server. all i know is there are a few servers that have a healthy population. my server in particular have new peeps every day.

good day to you:pirate:

I wish I could feel like my server is "full". I play on Hillsbury which is one of the "healthier" servers and it still feels void. The world is big, but with riftways, guild port and normal gate, we have plenty means of getting around now, which makes the world feel a little smaller becuase more stuff is quickly accessable. Never over the last 2-3 weeks do you see more then one server meduim with the others at low. Low is 2k or less? 1.5k or less? I am not sure. I am sure though that Sigil stated they wanted each server to house upwards of 8-10k players with 3-5k on at any given time.

So if you server is at medium, which is a rarity, I do not understand how to you it feels "alive"? I want it to feel alive and will be here untill the servers shut down(hopefully never) but I will not wear blinders while I do so........


Swampratt

[rhagz]

I Low is 2k or less? 1.5k or less? I am not sure. I am sure though that Sigil stated they wanted each server to house upwards of 8-10k players with 3-5k on at any given time.

Low is 1 to 1000 people, medium is 1000 to 2000, and high is over 2000.

[Gecon]

... actually the fact that Vanguard offers such a huge gameworld was my main motive to choose this game over others.

Plus the traditional fantasy setting and the company slogans, including that they wanted to fix things by making them better than traiditional MMORPGs, not by making it otherwise (such as using instances etc).

[miir]

Hate to tell you this but 1700 subs is low considering there arent exactly a load of servers to choose from.

VG is loosing numbers daily. But your right,stick your head in the sand and ignore the facts. Its the way forward :rolleyes:

A comparison:

The latest figures I could find shows DDO having around 20-25k subs... their servers have around 150-200 concurrent primetime logins. DDO also has the same number of servers as Vanguard.

You do the math.

[rhagz]

A comparison:

The latest figures I could find shows DDO having around 20-25k subs... their servers have around 150-200 concurrent primetime logins. DDO also has the same number of servers as Vanguard.

You do the math.

DDO actually has more servers if you count the ones in Europe. It's over 20 total iirc.

[Swampratt]

A comparison:

The latest figures I could find shows DDO having around 20-25k subs... their servers have around 150-200 concurrent primetime logins. DDO also has the same number of servers as Vanguard.

You do the math.

And DDO is cut up into instances and maybe a 10th of the size of Vanguard...... Plus I bet they didnt spend 30+ million to make the game? So 25k subs is making them a nice profit? Just wondering.

Do the math?

I was looking for more of a yes or no to mergers in this thread and reasoning behind peoples choice..... Clearly my stance is "for" mergers and I listed why.....

Swampratt

[Tanaril]

A comparison:

The latest figures I could find shows DDO having around 20-25k subs... their servers have around 150-200 concurrent primetime logins. DDO also has the same number of servers as Vanguard.

You do the math.

Sweet, nice to see your comparing VG to the dog of a game DDO ;)

[miir]

DDO actually has more servers if you count the ones in Europe. It's over 20 total iirc.

There are only 2 EU servers now.

Atari/Turbine doesn't run those servers so they are not included in their subscription figures.

[miir]

Sweet, nice to see your comparing VG to the dog of a game DDO ;)


Well people are throwing around sub 20k subscription numbers.
I thought a server population comparison to a game with 25k subs would be appropriate.

If Vanguard servers were running at primetime populations of 150-200, the 20k subs guess might actually be believable.

[Kwahn]

Hate to tell you this but 1700 subs is low considering there arent exactly a load of servers to choose from.

VG is loosing numbers daily. But your right,stick your head in the sand and ignore the facts. Its the way forward :rolleyes:

Just curious Tanaril, where is your data reflecting the "losing numbers daily" or is that just more general purpose doomsday talk? I'd LOVE to see that data.

[rhagz]

There are only 2 EU servers now.

Atari/Turbine doesn't run those servers so they are not included in their subscription figures.

Well it's hardly fair to compare VG US+EU servers and DDO US only and neglect the EU servers.

Didn't realize they merged servers in EU, but that still puts them at 17 or so, with about 5k peak pop /snicker.

Not a good state to be in even if VG triples the DDO population.

[miir]

I was looking for more of a yes or no to mergers in this thread


Well perhaps you should have made that more clear.

[elorei]

I for one would love to see more people running around and at the moment the world seems so dead other then guild chat. We still have 70+ members and seem to have anywhere from 20-35 on at any given time. Above and beyond the occasional guild group I might see 2-3 other players in a 3-5 hour gaming session.

Swampratt

I cant go anywhere without seeing a ton of people in the outposts/dungeons. Seems most of the server pop on flor is in their 30s/40s, so there are tons around those areas catering to those levels. Already I have run into overcrowding issues where we were competing for bosses/groundspawns in Thel, or the sisters in POA. I would hate to see this increase. Do what you want with these ghosttown servers, but please leave florendyl alone.

[Tanaril]

Just curious Tanaril, where is your data reflecting the "losing numbers daily" or is that just more general purpose doomsday talk? I'd LOVE to see that data.

Sub payers posting on forums how their guilds are shrinking daily, The fact that Sigil are in talks with SoE about selling up. Common sense really. If the population was steadily growing there wouldnt be these sorts of posts and Sigil wouldnt need to sell out.

[arorot]

Just curious Tanaril, where is your data reflecting the "losing numbers daily" or is that just more general purpose doomsday talk? I'd LOVE to see that data.

While its far from concrete data by any means I personally do a /who all count 1 10 , 11 20 etc changing the level brackets as needed for results of 200+ . Ive been doing this 3-4 times a week for the last month or so. Usually around prime time PST 6-8pm.
On Thunderaxe We seem to hit about 900 - 1100 people on in the last two weeks or so.
About 5 weeks ago I was getting return results of of 1200 - 1400 on average.
No I didn't log my findings correlate it into a pie chart and put it in a excel spread sheet or anything similar.
But since the launch of LOTRO I would estimate from my personal and very casual data gathering that theres been about a 15%-20% decrease in population on my server.
And bear in mind 2 months ago or so when Merrit still posted numbers Thunderaxe was the 4th most populated server. So perhaps the top 2 servers feel there is no need for mergers the rest of the servers seem to disagree.

[kohl]

I cant go anywhere without seeing a ton of people in the outposts/dungeons. Seems most of the server pop on flor is in their 30s/40s, so there are tons around those areas catering to those levels. Already I have run into overcrowding issues where we were competing for bosses/groundspawns in Thel, or the sisters in POA. I would hate to see this increase. Do what you want with these ghosttown servers, but please leave florendyl alone.

This is the nature of the beast when you have non-instances content, but look at what you are saying. You have a game that has a huge "world", and yet players are going to flock to areas with other players because *shock*, VG is a group-oriented game.

So you have a game that should be housing a LOT more players, if VG hadn't had such a horrible launch, and yet you say its overcrowded because people compete for mobs and spawns?

[elorei]

This is the nature of the beast when you have non-instances content, but look at what you are saying. You have a game that has a huge "world", and yet players are going to flock to areas with other players because *shock*, VG is a group-oriented game.

No, players flock there because the rewards are so great.

have a game that should be housing a LOT more players, if VG hadn't had such a horrible launch, and yet you say its overcrowded because people compete for mobs and spawns?

I have never been in khal, donovan's, wardship, poa, river valley, southwatch, etc etc etc without seeing a large number of players. Is it overcrowded when I have to wait four hours to do the sisters? To me, yeah. It sure is.

Maybe others like to go through a dungeon in easy mode where 4 groups are killing all the mobs so its a breeze. Myself, I like the challenge of breaking into it myself. Thankfully, VG has enough content "off the beaten path" to allow this. Wanna crack a dungeon with just your group? Go to hakrel. Want to watch the zerg rush? Go to thelaseen.

Good mix to me. Leave florendyl population alone please.

[Swampratt]

A comparison:

The latest figures I could find shows DDO having around 20-25k subs... their servers have around 150-200 concurrent primetime logins. DDO also has the same number of servers as Vanguard.

You do the math.

No, players flock there because the rewards are so great.



I have never been in khal, donovan's, wardship, poa, river valley, southwatch, etc etc etc without seeing a large number of players. Is it overcrowded when I have to wait four hours to do the sisters? To me, yeah. It sure is.

Maybe others like to go through a dungeon in easy mode where 4 groups are killing all the mobs so its a breeze. Myself, I like the challenge of breaking into it myself. Thankfully, VG has enough content "off the beaten path" to allow this. Wanna crack a dungeon with just your group? Go to hakrel. Want to watch the zerg rush? Go to thelaseen.

Good mix to me. Leave florendyl population alone please.

Honestly you sound like a selfish kid. LESS then 2000 players at any given time on any given server! Open your eyes this game was not created for "you" to enjoy the content all to yourself. Tough luck you have to wait to do said encounter.. The world is HUGE go do something else. Void of life everywhere... so you might have 5-6 groups doing 50+ content all at one location... thats 30 freaking PEOPLE! Is that a good number? Hell no! But you act like there of tons of people everywhere just waiting in line to do content.

I will accept reasons of thought.... but when someone post a selfish plea becuase 30-40 level 50's have to compete for content as an excuse that your server is "over Populated" or "fine" get over it.

Swampratt

[rhagz]

I find it rather ironic to see people want no instances, but hate crowding enough to justify extremely low-pop servers to circumvent the need for instances. It's all very amusing really.

[skjaybe]

What's truly amusing is everyone's casual sidestep of the real conversation: why is everyone all tightwadding about server mergers (and not just some guy who enjoys posting about his gg time in Vanguard)?

Its just like when you post a bug in Vanguard. You get 99 asshats jumping down your throat saying the game runs fine and they've never encountered any of those bugs. The defense in this situation is that "Our server is fine. YOU must not be playing during the right time! lawlol noob!" It doesn't matter what GD time people get on, there clearly is a problem finding a group. At any given time there're about 10 people LFG...on two servers I play on...for levels 1-50. Server merger? I'm surprised it hasn't been done already, it NEEDS to be done.

-skjaybe

[Swampratt]

What's truly amusing is everyone's casual sidestep of the real conversation: why is everyone all tightwadding about server mergers (and not just some guy who enjoys posting about his gg time in Vanguard)?

Its just like when you post a bug in Vanguard. You get 99 asshats jumping down your throat saying the game runs fine and they've never encountered any of those bugs. The defense in this situation is that "Our server is fine. YOU must not be playing during the right time! lawlol noob!" It doesn't matter what GD time people get on, there clearly is a problem finding a group. At any given time there're about 10 people LFG...on two servers I play on...for levels 1-50. Server merger? I'm surprised it hasn't been done already, it NEEDS to be done.

-skjaybe


Wow there is intelligent life on this Planet called Silky Venom........ Glad to see someone else has left the "Matrix" and has there "Eyes wide open".... Glad to see soemone agrees on mergers.


Swampratt

[Mreynolds]

I say merge em. But not that low. should be 5 pve, 2 pvp (different rulesets) and the 1 rp. That should make things playable while not overcrowding areas to the point your getting 2fps all the time.

[Cyene]

What's truly amusing is everyone's casual sidestep of the real conversation: why is everyone all tightwadding about server mergers (and not just some guy who enjoys posting about his gg time in Vanguard)?

Its just like when you post a bug in Vanguard. You get 99 asshats jumping down your throat saying the game runs fine and they've never encountered any of those bugs. The defense in this situation is that "Our server is fine. YOU must not be playing during the right time! lawlol noob!" It doesn't matter what GD time people get on, there clearly is a problem finding a group. At any given time there're about 10 people LFG...on two servers I play on...for levels 1-50. Server merger? I'm surprised it hasn't been done already, it NEEDS to be done.

-skjaybe

I like how everyone think's there's some fanboi conspiracy out there to hide the truth that the "game is dying" or the "servers are ghost towns".

Isn't it more likely that (omg shocker) not everyone shares your point of view? That there might be people, who in their eyes the servers look populated just fine?

And, is there clearly a problem finding a group, or do YOU clearly have a problem finding a group?

My point is, you are being one of the 99 asshats here, you are just on the other side.

Feel free to post your opinion, but don't sit there like you have some secret cache of info. the rest of us do not have access to that makes your opinion superior to the rest of the speculation.

FYI, personally I never have a problem finding a group and our guild still has 25+ logging in on weeknights. No amount of you "doom and gloomers" posting on these forums has changed that one bit.

Cy

[miir]

Wow there is intelligent life on this Planet called Silky Venom........ Glad to see someone else has left the "Matrix" and has there "Eyes wide open".... Glad to see soemone agrees on mergers.


When you imply that everyone who disagrees with you is unintelligent and unable to think for themselves you are inciting an argument... not a discussion.

[rhagz]

IIsn't it more likely that (omg shocker) not everyone shares your point of view? That there might be people, who in their eyes the servers look populated just fine?

Sounds more like tunnel-vision. The people on the top of the bell curve regarding level range don't see it because there is 2-3 areas that everyone congregates at, has the highest population density and they can kind of group. The problem is with the other 95% of the game world and anyone not in the perfect level range and/or in the most populated 2 or 3 chunks.

So yeah, if you only consider yourself and assume that the rest of the game is identical to your specific area, then you won't see a problem.. too bad the rest of the game is nothing like what you claim to experience.

[Unbelievable]

I like how everyone think's there's some fanboi conspiracy out there to hide the truth that the "game is dying" or the "servers are ghost towns".

Isn't it more likely that (omg shocker) not everyone shares your point of view? That there might be people, who in their eyes the servers look populated just fine?

And, is there clearly a problem finding a group, or do YOU clearly have a problem finding a group?

My point is, you are being one of the 99 asshats here, you are just on the other side.

Feel free to post your opinion, but don't sit there like you have some secret cache of info. the rest of us do not have access to that makes your opinion superior to the rest of the speculation.

FYI, personally I never have a problem finding a group and our guild still has 25+ logging in on weeknights. No amount of you "doom and gloomers" posting on these forums has changed that one bit.

Cy


You just reiterated what he said thought. because you don't have that issue, therefore it must not exist. That is simply not true.

[Twiz]

Wow there is intelligent life on this Planet called Silky Venom........ Glad to see someone else has left the "Matrix" and has there "Eyes wide open".... Glad to see soemone agrees on mergers.


Swampratt

There are probably lots of us that wouln't mind server mergers...we just aren't as vocal as those who need to be the #1 (insert any player/guild stat you like here) in order to feel a sense of "accomplishment".

I started in beta 3, bought pre-release, and signed up for one year (which ends next March 08). So, you could say I am dedicated to the game. Not that I am a big grouper, but it would be nice to see some life in the world. I ran around Tursh last night playing around with a psionist for the first time. I don't think I saw 10 others between 6-8 pm CST.

Server mergers did wonders for EQ2 (although the marketing of it was a bit flawed). There is no reason not to suspect the same benefit would happen here.

And although there are no data sources to identify how many people are leaving the game, I will say that I play pretty consistently in the evenings and on weekends...and there are less and less people around whenever I log in. Statistical use? Not really. Reality that people are leaving? Absolutely.

I just hope they can save it because come next Mar, I would really hate to be one of a hundred people playing around in Telon...

[Swampratt]

When you imply that everyone who disagrees with you is unintelligent and unable to think for themselves you are inciting an argument... not a discussion.

If anyone can honestly come on this thread and say Vanguard is fine, its all good and the servers are bustling with life and groups are abundant.... they are in more or less words IDIOTS! Yes this may start a flame session , but man ,call a spade a spade. You may be having fun! You may have to fight a few other groups for content at 50. Khal and maybe 2 other cities may have 20-30 people running around them at any given time but dont try to sugar coat a turd. Simply put subs are low and a merger would help fuel the game. You may not like that idea, I may like that idea but the point remains the world is void.

People who try to act like Vanguard is fine population wise imho are not intelligent in the least.

Now... no one said you or I do not enjoy the game and we may have diffrent views but to try and say that server populations are not lacking is wrong and untrue.

Swampratt

[elorei]

I find it rather ironic to see people want no instances, but hate crowding enough to justify extremely low-pop servers to circumvent the need for instances. It's all very amusing really.

I have been 100% for limited instancing from the get go.

[miir]

If anyone can honestly come on this thread and say Vanguard is fine, its all good and the servers are bustling with life and groups are abundant.... they are in more or less words IDIOTS! Yes this may start a flame session , but man ,call a spade a spade. You may be having fun! You may have to fight a few other groups for content at 50. Khal and maybe 2 other cities may have 20-30 people running around them at any given time but dont try to sugar coat a turd. Simply put subs are low and a merger would help fuel the game. You may not like that idea, I may like that idea but the point remains the world is void.

People who try to act like Vanguard is fine population wise imho are not intelligent in the least.

Now... no one said you or I do not enjoy the game and we may have diffrent views but to try and say that server populations are not lacking is wrong and untrue.

Swampratt

What server are you on?
On Targonor, the population is pretty healthy.
That's not to say a server merge wouldn't help, but I don't see much urgency to it.

[dwarfman420]

I do however know that at the current state of Vanguard a consildation of the servers would only promote a healthier game.

I see so many against this. That is also very confusing. Who would not want the game to feel more alive?


Server merges for "most" servers would promote a healthier game.


The problem is from what I can summerize is: IMO

1) People want the world to be huge. Having less people per server helps some gamers feel the world is bigger.

2) A good majority of people who are still playing did not want/have the money to upgrade/replace their somewhat dated (takes only a few months right?) computers. This means they have to run on the lower settings. More people on the server will cause them to lag/drop frame rates even more.

A.k.a the coding is making people not want decent populations.

3) Some people, even though the official numbers per server are not being released for obvious reasons (low subs = bad publicity) would claim that "their server" is fine. They will discredit an write off any/most attempts of players to post their server numbers as "inaccurate" while believing that their "opinion" holds more water. Even if a player from their same server says otherwise.

This is my opinion only.

[KombatJesus]

What server are you on?
On Targonor, the population is pretty healthy.
That's not to say a server merge wouldn't help, but I don't see much urgency to it.

Just like with what this gentleman said, "The population is pretty healthy"; many other people say. And they say that not because they actually see the population as pretty healthy, but from their own experience of being able to find a group in a respectable amount of time.

If these people who thought things were fine went through the same thing that other players go through in regards to finding a group then they would sing the same tune. Remember that there are other people playing the game besides your own guilds and your own groups of regulars. While it may be just fine for you to find a group - because you are in the right place at the right time or because they know people, not everyone is as fortunate. Maybe they come on 5 minutes to late and someone who was just looking for a member missed it by that ] [ much and then they go on for the rest of the night possibly unable to find a group.

I personally think that on some servers there are not enough players for the different areas/content and that balanced groups are not capable of being made fast enough on many servers that would enable everyone to have a good time grouping in the game.

[elorei]

Honestly you sound like a selfish kid. LESS then 2000 players at any given time on any given server! Open your eyes this game was not created for "you" to enjoy the content all to yourself.

Obviously, it was created for YOU.

Tough luck you have to wait to do said encounter.. The world is HUGE go do something else.

Yeah, exactly as I stated before, perfect mix. Some areas crowded, some areas empty. Try to read th post next time.

Void of life everywhere...

not on my server

so you might have 5-6 groups doing 50+ content all at one location... thats 30 freaking PEOPLE! Is that a good number? Hell no! But you act like there of tons of people everywhere just waiting in line to do content.

Not a single area I listed is above lvl 40.

I will accept reasons of thought.... but when someone post a selfish plea becuase 30-40 level 50's have to compete for content as an excuse that your server is "over Populated" or "fine" get over it.

Swampratt

I do not know what "reasons of thought" means, but my wanting the server I play on to remain as it is is no more selfish than you wanting it to change. And again, here you are talking about lvl 50 content. Where did I ever even mention lvl 50 content?

[Cyene]

Sounds more like tunnel-vision. The people on the top of the bell curve regarding level range don't see it because there is 2-3 areas that everyone congregates at, has the highest population density and they can kind of group. The problem is with the other 95% of the game world and anyone not in the perfect level range and/or in the most populated 2 or 3 chunks.

So yeah, if you only consider yourself and assume that the rest of the game is identical to your specific area, then you won't see a problem.. too bad the rest of the game is nothing like what you claim to experience.

You make an assumption abouyt my playstyle I did not write, which makes your points of course look more valid.

You assume that I base my opinion on the precept that I congregate in 2-3 areas of the server. This is not true. I am not sure why you would make this assumption, but neverthelsess, there it is.

When you get that part out of the way, you don't really have a point.

Let me re-iterate mine: everyone is going to have an opinion of how populated each server is, and I am OK with that. What I am not OK with is one person or group of folks who assume their opinion somehow became fact because they wanted it to bad enough or because they whine louder or more often about it.

Do the servers need merging? Some say yes, others say no, but damned if none of them really have an inkling of a clue about the real numbers.

Show me irrefutable data that A MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION across ALL SERVERS is having a hard time finding groups, and then we can talk.

Until then, you opinion, mine, and the rest of the garbage on these boards is exactly that...speculative, anecdotal garbage.

And FYI, most people only attempt to speak intelligently on their own experience. To say "if you only consider yourself" as if I should have been considering the other 100k people who play this game, while admirable, is just plain dumb. Could you not argue that I am considering them by responding to their posts on this forum? Or were you suggesting I send each individual a /tell in game to make sure I had considered their opinion before formulating my own?

I think what you really meant was, since my opinion differs from what you consider the majority, I must need some "re-edumacation".

Cy

[rhagz]

Do the servers need merging? Some say yes, others say no, but damned if none of them really have an inkling of a clue about the real numbers.

Hi, my name is Sony and I am buying your game because you can't make it float.

Need any more evidence? Populations are trash. The 13 servers + the world size was designed to cater to 250k-300k people, not 35k, 50k or even 100k.

[Swampratt]

Obviously, it was created for YOU.

1) It was created and pushed as a "Group" game with some solo content and some raid content. I assure you that was what was stated. Not for me..but for the masses. Take a poll I bet you are in the minority on this stance of the people who still play.

Yeah, exactly as I stated before, perfect mix. Some areas crowded, some areas empty. Try to read th post next time.

2) So becuase 25%( I know its more like 10%) of the World seems crowded or has more then 20 people in it at any given time the other 75%(again imo more like 90%) of the world is void or contains less then 10 people a chunk? The server you are on is fine?

not on my server.

What server do you play on? Low pop=1-1000 med pop =1001-2000 as someone posted ealier, I believe? So a world that was meant to maintain 5k+(some older post even said they were shooting for 8k) at any given time does not feel empty with 20% of that number? Low numbers are fine for me and other people like you who have set groups or bigger guilds. Thats right its fine with me, always has been(even though it feels empty and is), I just know whats good for the life of the game. And openly admit it.



Not a single area I listed is above lvl 40.

In most cases the 35+ areas have a few more options for grouping then other chunks. More so in the 45+ areas (which I consider 50ish content). I used this as an example becuase most people in these areas have set groups/guilds, so grouping never seems a problem.

Sorry I did not pin point the content areas you listed.What level is it?



I do not know what "reasons of thought" means, but my wanting the server I play on to remain as it is is no more selfish than you wanting it to change. And again, here you are talking about lvl 50 content. Where did I ever even mention lvl 50 content?

Its when you actually put thought into what you say. To give reason. To make a valid point above and beyond your personal opinion. To see the point someone makes and think about the statement with an open mind.

As for change I HATE it, but like I said for the good of the game a merger is the valid thing to do, and I would accept it with an open mind, becuase it would be for the good of the game as a whole.

Sorry for the delayed response I just returned from a lunch meeting ;) .

Swampratt

[Letsinod]

To anyone who thinks this game is thriving needs to only go to the login screen. When the game went gold every server was HIGH. Now they are all low (less than 1000 per server). In such a short time frame thats completely horrid. To the person who said there is a ton of people at the outposts, there really isn't. Because the populations have dwindled so much, you really only see people are the top couple of spots. Before I cancelled my sub (due solely to low pop) I would go to places and there would be no one there. Sure, I could go to the ONE spot that people in that level range would be, but thats it.

[kohl]

Because the populations have dwindled so much, you really only see people are the top couple of spots. Before I cancelled my sub (due solely to low pop) I would go to places and there would be no one there. Sure, I could go to the ONE spot that people in that level range would be, but thats it.

Yet you still have gem posts like "Look.. I saw at least 10 people at XX; obviously the game is thriving!!"

[Cyene]

Hi, my name is Sony and I am buying your game because you can't make it float.

Need any more evidence? Populations are trash. The 13 servers + the world size was designed to cater to 250k-300k people, not 35k, 50k or even 100k.

Need more evidence.

How about...yes.

Sorry, but to keep it simple, I don'y believe any of the crap you or anyone w/o a green name posts on these boards.

Show me a green name post to back up those numbers, and I might be inclined to believe you.

Cy

[kohl]

Show me irrefutable data that A MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION across ALL SERVERS is having a hard time finding groups, and then we can talk.

Until then, you opinion, mine, and the rest of the garbage on these boards is exactly that...speculative, anecdotal garbage.

Sony buying the game isn't enough "irrefutable" evidence? I mean seriously, what more do you need? Do you want Smedley to come to your house and draw a diagram? Did you not read Brad's most recent post? He stopped short of saying "the subscriber levels are not what we hoped; the game is tanking; SOE is bailing us out". Do you think such measures would be needed for a healthy, thriving game?

[kohl]

Need more evidence.

How about...yes.

Sorry, but to keep it simple, I don'y believe any of the crap you or anyone w/o a green name posts on these boards.

Show me a green name post to back up those numbers, and I might be inclined to believe you.

Cy

People with green names are not going to come and explain the obvious to dim bulbs such as yourself. If you can't read Brad's post and draw your own conclusion, no amount of posting by anyone is going to matter.

[Unbelievable]

Need more evidence.

How about...yes.

Sorry, but to keep it simple, I don'y believe any of the crap you or anyone w/o a green name posts on these boards.

Show me a green name post to back up those numbers, and I might be inclined to believe you.

Cy

Why would the game be getting sold to Sony this early after release if things were going stellar? Do yu really need a dev to tell you that? Does it take a rocket scientist to see that server pops have gone from high when the game came out to low (I'm referrring to server select screen)? Are you really this blind? I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just really curious as to why you seem hellbent on not even admitting that going by login screen/server select screen alone, pops are not what they were when the game was released. It's not a conspiracy, it's not haters hating VG, it's the data in front of you, albeit minus numbers becuase they don't show numbers.

[Cyene]

People with green names are not going to come and explain the obvious to dim bulbs such as yourself. If you can't read Brad's post and draw your own conclusion, no amount of posting by anyone is going to matter.

Future refernce, kohl, I won't be able to see you posts as I will have you ignored.

I mention because...I honestly thought I had done it already.

Cy

[Unbelievable]

Future refernce, kohl, I won't be able to see you posts as I will have you ignored.

I mention because...I honestly thought I had done it already.

Cy

Ah, the bury your head in the sand approach. Please let us know how that works out for you.

[Swampratt]

People with green names are not going to come and explain the obvious to dim bulbs such as yourself. If you can't read Brad's post and draw your own conclusion, no amount of posting by anyone is going to matter.

QFT

Some people just dont get it. How hard is it to see.........That has to be the most frustrating thing in life when someone defends something simply becuase they like it.

Its fine to defend something you like as long as you know whats going on. I love Vanguard and will be here forever but I am not blind to numbers now compared to the numbers in February. I can feel the diffrence in game every time I log in. We have had to recruit people to the guild to keep the numbers we have. We lost a lot of people but stay active recruiting to keep those who play together in a great game. There is a thin line between being blind and playing ignorant. I would hate to think this many people are either.

Swampratt

[kohl]

Future refernce, kohl, I won't be able to see you posts as I will have you ignored.

I mention because...I honestly thought I had done it already.

Cy

Thats right :) Stomp your feet, plug your ears and close your eyes like a little child. No sense in trying to explain the obvious to simpletons.

[Cyene]

QFT

Some people just dont get it. How hard is it to see.........That has to be the most frustrating thing in life when someone defends something simply becuase they like it.

Its fine to defend something you like as long as you know whats going on. I love Vanguard and will be here forever but I am not blind to numbers now compared to the numbers in February. I can feel the diffrence in game every time I log in. We have had to recruit people to the guild to keep the numbers we have. We lost a lot of people but stay active recruiting to keep those who play together in a great game. There is a thin line between being blind and playing ignorant. I would hate to think this many people are either.

Swampratt

The moment you realize poeple are critisizing the accuracy of the numbers and not the game changes you propose, you will get it.

Its not ignorance, its skepticism.

And do you really, truly in your heart, believe "you know what's going on"?

And what numbers by the way? You aren't really referring to those posts on the boards where people are whitewashing data they get from vgplayers.com until it says what they want it to say....even the guys that post that crap usually have a disclaimer that says the data cannot be depended upon. If it is some other source of numbers, I'd live to see a link to them.

Does it look like SOE will buy Sigil? Sure, but its not definite. Once again, even intelligent speculation is not fact.

Do the servers look underpopulated? Yes to some, but not to others. Are you really so egocentric that you think people are lying just to argue with you? If people say they aren't having a hard time getting a group, maybe they genuinely aren't? But if it is easier for you to swallow that they are maliciously lying to make your stance look bad...

Can one of you guys just riddle me this....to what end does this crusade to inform EVERYONE that the game is dying serve? Is this some kind of twisted public service announcement? If someone says they don't think a server merge is necessary, have you tried a dialogue to see if they have a point, or did you just assume they are an idiot?

What difference does it make if people who are enjoying the game appear naive to you? Is there some reason why you guys feel the need to "preach the truth" to the masses like you are protecting everyone from that big bad Brad-monster who lies to us with malice?

Feel free to continue with your crusade (like anyone could stop you), but don't expect me to believe that pile of crap you guys keep calling facts. At best it is popular conclusions drawn from random posts . If that's all you need to be satisfied, awesome, just don't expect everyone to share that gullibility with you.

/rant off


Cy

[rhagz]

And what numbers by the way? You aren't really referring to those posts on the boards where people are whitewashing data they get from vgplayers.com until it says what they want it to say....even the guys that post that crap usually have a disclaimer that says the data cannot be depended upon. If it is some other source of numbers, I'd live to see a link to them.


You really can't argue with multiple player taken censuses, taken on various servers on different days that all show that peak populations are in the neighborhood of 700-800 on most servers with a select few reaching just over 1k.

On servers with a world designed for 4-5k, this is extremely low, no matter how you want to spin it.

[Multiplex]

Are you really so egocentric that you think people are lying just to argue with you? If people say they aren't having a hard time getting a group, maybe they genuinely aren't? But if it is easier for you to swallow that they are maliciously lying to make your stance look bad...

To borrow from you: "That's not egotism it's skepticism."

I think (and so do many others) that a lot of folks in the community try to spin things and ignore issues to try to paint a gigantic happy face on VG. "Everything is great! Seriously, Brad is the greatest man to ever live!" and so some of us are very skeptical about people coming in an saying things like:

"I can always get groups... it's easy!" or...
"Dude, I have a 2 year old computer but I get 30FPS all the time! You must not know anything about computers!" or...
"My server has a huge population and it feels wonderful and lively and vibrant all the time... seriously it's like time square in every chunk!"

Because it's probably all bull.

[elorei]

You really can't argue with multiple player taken censuses, taken on various servers on different days that all show that peak populations are in the neighborhood of 700-800 on most servers with a select few reaching just over 1k.

On servers with a world designed for 4-5k, this is extremely low, no matter how you want to spin it.


Do I always find a group when I want one in an area I am close to or can get to quickly? Yes.

Do I have a choice to go to a crowded area to play or an empty area to play? Yes.

Are populations just fine to me? Yes.

Do I give a damn if they are not fine to you? No.

Yes, I am selfish. I play a game to enjoy myself, and I can do that here. I could care less if you are having fun. I do not play this game for your sake.

I have fun, and I like the populations on my server. Do I care at all if the server says low, high, or ludicrous speed? No, why would I? Why do you?

[danbala]

I cant go anywhere without seeing a ton of people in the outposts/dungeons. Seems most of the server pop on flor is in their 30s/40s, so there are tons around those areas catering to those levels. Already I have run into overcrowding issues where we were competing for bosses/groundspawns in Thel, or the sisters in POA. I would hate to see this increase. Do what you want with these ghosttown servers, but please leave florendyl alone.

That is my observation in Florendyl too. Its really busy enoughnow. I wouldn't want to compete for mobs any more than I already do.

[Tanaril]

Do I care at all if the server says low, high, or ludicrous speed? No, why would I? Why do you?


The whole gaming world knows the dire straits VG is currently in so you better start caring about the server status, do you honestly think SoE are going to buy VG and not try to improve things from a monetry perspective if they cant get some decent figures? One of the easiest ways is to merge servers and cut costs in the process.

VG needs the SoE takover because they sure as hell cant repay the 30 odd mill they've spent with current sub levels.

[Swampratt]

Do I always find a group when I want one in an area I am close to or can get to quickly? Yes.

Do I have a choice to go to a crowded area to play or an empty area to play? Yes.

Are populations just fine to me? Yes.

Do I give a damn if they are not fine to you? No.

Yes, I am selfish. I play a game to enjoy myself, and I can do that here. I could care less if you are having fun. I do not play this game for your sake.

I have fun, and I like the populations on my server. Do I care at all if the server says low, high, or ludicrous speed? No, why would I? Why do you?

Well becuase if they do not get subs up the game will not last? If they do not cut corners( Merger of servers) they wil waste money they do not have atm?

Everyone busting our balls do 3 things tonight.

1) Before you log on take a glance at what the servers populations say.
Remember kiddies low population = less then 1000.

2) Every chunk(zone) you enter tonight do a /who see what it looks like as you move around.

3) Realize that sever population is needed to...PAY THE BILLS! and with 1k or less on most given nights means roughly 3-4k paying customers per server. Sure we are guessing but if each server had 10k subs we would see more then 700 freaking people on! Like I said you choose to be blind.

No one ever stated we hate the game or want it to fail. I have stated numerous times I love VANGUARD! LOVE IT! But I want to see it thrive and succeed and if a merger is one step that will help I would accept it.

Last post here..... We all know my feelings for the game and where I will be. Atleast my eyes are open........

Swampratt

[elorei]

The whole gaming world knows the dire straits VG is currently in so you better start caring about the server status, do you honestly think SoE are going to buy VG and not try to improve things from a monetry perspective if they cant get some decent figures? One of the easiest ways is to merge servers and cut costs in the process.

VG needs the SoE takover because they sure as hell cant repay the 30 odd mill they've spent with current sub levels.

Then if the game changes to the point I no longer find it fun, I wil stop playing it. What is the problem?

Why does everyone treat an MMO like it is the point of their existance. Game is fun? Play it. Game is not? Do not play it.

If the game changes to a degree that I am no longer having fun, I will just go away. Like I said before, I play this game to have fun, that is all. Not to fill some hole in my life. Not to benefit the community. How dare me have fun in vanguard. How dare me have a differing point of view. How dare me like the population on the server I am on.

[Cyene]

To borrow from you: "That's not egotism it's skepticism."

I think (and so do many others) that a lot of folks in the community try to spin things and ignore issues to try to paint a gigantic happy face on VG. "Everything is great! Seriously, Brad is the greatest man to ever live!" and so some of us are very skeptical about people coming in an saying things like:

"I can always get groups... it's easy!" or...
"Dude, I have a 2 year old computer but I get 30FPS all the time! You must not know anything about computers!" or...
"My server has a huge population and it feels wonderful and lively and vibrant all the time... seriously it's like time square in every chunk!"

Because it's probably all bull.

First, thanks for the well-thought-out, no-flame reply. It's nice to see SOMEONE on the other side of the fence is at least partially getting my message.

It really is all bull, both sides, and that's why I am skeptical. It's the pinnacle of irony for someone to say something like "You really can't argue with multiple player taken censuses" when the actual players who are taking those censuses say themselves that the data is not reliable (I can read old posts too rhagz).

Try this one on for size...if anyone is skeptical about Brad or Sigil being truthful, why would they just blindly believe any of the data contained on vgplayers.com? Would it not be prudent to assume that the data on that site has just as much of a chance to be inaccurate and buggy as the game itself?

And, keep in mind, the doom and gloom folks are looked upon with just as much disdain as the fanbois. No one really has to be either. If you take people at their word, engage them in conversation about why their reality differs so much from yours, you may actually learn something (fyi, this is not directed at anyone in particular, just rhetorical).

Cy

[Cyene]

Then if the game changes to the point I no longer find it fun, I wil stop playing it. What is the problem?

Why does everyone treat an MMO like it is the point of their existance. Game is fun? Play it. Game is not? Do not play it.

If the game changes to a degree that I am no longer having fun, I will just go away. Like I said before, I play this game to have fun, that is all. Not to fill some hole in my life. Not to benefit the community. How dare me have fun in vanguard. How dare me have a differing point of view. How dare me like the population on the server I am on.

WTF Elorei, you don't play VG because of what the whole gaming world thinks??!

HOW COULD YOU!!

Cy

[Gaijin]

The game is dead.

Codemasters today announced that The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar, the first and only massively-multiplayer online game based on the Books of J.R.R. Tolkien, has officially topped the PC sales charts across North America and Europe. The first update is scheduled to be released this coming June and will include an entirely new landscape region, over 60 additional quests, the Battle for Helegrod raid, nine new monsters and major enhancements to monster play and the music system

[elorei]

WTF Elorei, you don't play VG because of what the whole gaming world thinks??!

HOW COULD YOU!!

Cy

I hear that a spot in hell is already being warmed up for me.

[Tanaril]

Then if the game changes to the point I no longer find it fun, I wil stop playing it. What is the problem?

Why does everyone treat an MMO like it is the point of their existance. Game is fun? Play it. Game is not? Do not play it.

If the game changes to a degree that I am no longer having fun, I will just go away. Like I said before, I play this game to have fun, that is all. Not to fill some hole in my life. Not to benefit the community. How dare me have fun in vanguard. How dare me have a differing point of view. How dare me like the population on the server I am on.

Sorry, my fault i assumed your cared about your hobby.

Oh and its how dare *I* have a...... how dare *i* like etc :p

[elorei]

Sorry, my fault i assumed your cared about your hobby.

Oh and its how dare *I* have a...... how dare *i* like etc :p

"How dare me" is a common colloquialism, but good effort, anyway. Maybe next time you can find a better way to disqualify what I have to say.

Playing games is a hobby. Playing Vanguard is just one facet of that. And no, I have no vested interest in either. I do not "care" about it anymore than I "care" if something good comes on television.

I watch it, or I do not.

I play it, or I do not.

And next time you want to play grammar cop, at least make sure yours is impeccable. Should I start the lesson on "it's" versus "its" now, or would you like to schedule an appointment for later?

[Twiz]

The game is dead.

Codemasters today announced that The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar, the first and only massively-multiplayer online game based on the Books of J.R.R. Tolkien, has officially topped the PC sales charts across North America and Europe. The first update is scheduled to be released this coming June and will include an entirely new landscape region, over 60 additional quests, the Battle for Helegrod raid, nine new monsters and major enhancements to monster play and the music system

I think if you do some checking, you will find that VG had high "sales" numbers at one point as well. High sales of boxes and continued subscriptions are two completely different animals.

To be honest, I've been reading up on LotR to see what all the fuss is about...and I can't get past the choice of only four races and in one of them there is apparently no females? Give me freedom of choice like VG anyday!

[Chae668]

Hate to tell you this but 1700 subs is low considering there arent exactly a load of servers to choose from.

VG is loosing numbers daily. But your right,stick your head in the sand and ignore the facts. Its the way forward :rolleyes:
1700 ALL DAY LONG. is waht i was getting atand steadly increasing. not at one time.

besides, i was giving an example of a tally i saw on these forums. it wasnt my tally. i didnt come up with the numbers.

dont blame me for numbers i didnt make.

[Chae668]

I wish I could feel like my server is "full". I play on Hillsbury which is one of the "healthier" servers and it still feels void. The world is big, but with riftways, guild port and normal gate, we have plenty means of getting around now, which makes the world feel a little smaller becuase more stuff is quickly accessable. Never over the last 2-3 weeks do you see more then one server meduim with the others at low. Low is 2k or less? 1.5k or less? I am not sure. I am sure though that Sigil stated they wanted each server to house upwards of 8-10k players with 3-5k on at any given time.

So if you server is at medium, which is a rarity, I do not understand how to you it feels "alive"? I want it to feel alive and will be here untill the servers shut down(hopefully never) but I will not wear blinders while I do so........


Swampratt
never said it was "full"

[etchazz]

Need more evidence.

How about...yes.

Sorry, but to keep it simple, I don'y believe any of the crap you or anyone w/o a green name posts on these boards.

Show me a green name post to back up those numbers, and I might be inclined to believe you.

Cy

i suppose what they say is true: ignorance is bliss.

[tinman_au]

I generally have no problems getting a group on Targonor (and thats just before and after DT which is usually a "low pop" time), though some days of the week are better than others (it was exactly the same for me in EQ2/WoW/etc, so it's not a VG specific problem, just Aussie prime times suck compared to RotW).

I think, however, that there may be a case for some of the Euro servers and the PVP servers (not 100% sure on the Euro servers, but there do seem to be a few posts from people on one of those that consistantly complain about this being an issue). PVP especially, as while it's not that popular with "the masses", it does require a certain critical mass to be "fun".

And just a general observation not directed at anyone in particular: I notice some of the people complaining about lack of groups (not just in this thread) seem to have.......attitude issues. You don't suppose that could be a reason why you have trouble finding groups do you?

While the internet is an anonymous medium, when you group with people in a MMO certain personality traits still "leak" through. A fat arrogant bastard may try and act "nice", but eventually he/she will start to slide back into "RL" mode and start getting a name for themselves.

Thats the number one reason most MMO's don't allow name changes...

[etchazz]

Need more evidence.

How about...yes.

Sorry, but to keep it simple, I don'y believe any of the crap you or anyone w/o a green name posts on these boards.

Show me a green name post to back up those numbers, and I might be inclined to believe you.

Cy

2. Underpopulated servers. The reason we are enhancing the LFG system (other than it's always a good idea in general) is because it's too hard to find a group. One of the biggest reasons it's too hard to find a group is that we were overly worried the newbie yards would be over populated the first couple of weeks post-launch that we opened with too many servers. That's why we are working on better LFG tools, having to seriously consider overland teleports, etc. If a world at peak hours had 4-5k people on it, this wouldn't be nearly the problem it is.

this is from brad mcquaid himself. you may have heard of him...he created the game and is the head of sigil. is this enough proof for you for the server pops?

[skjaybe]

A few pages back in this thread some true champion completely proved my point and someone noticed, and that in and of itself is cause for celebration.

Either the servers are low pop, or they're something else. And I'll give you a hint: The answer is not "something else".

We can conclude from this, oddly enough, that the server populations are low. Just because Jackoff Jerry and his crew of merry LAN brethren can always group together doesn't mean anyone else can. Even if the situation is seen as favorably as possible, and you claim that you can find a group any day at peak time, I can still point you to the server populations as being "not something else...aka, Low Pop".

Thus, some people are not finding groups. A significant amount of people. And these people pay to play with other people, a distinct part of the MMO drive.

Now, we can stick our heads in the grounds and say that everyone not finding a group can go jump off a cliff, or we can pull our heads out and realize that without a certain number of people playing the game there will be only Jackoff Jerry and his crew left. If you need proof of less people playing the game, I would refer you to the servers once again. I'm going to give another hint here: The answer to the problem is not "Put head in ground: accuse all others of not finding a group of having some sort of idiot problem."

Some people feel that the solution is to do a server merge. I'm in agreement. Make no mistake, I and others have been wrong before. But make no mistake, once more; doing nothing isn't going to solve anything. Nor is claiming that you can always get a group.

-skjaybe

[charta77]

I have been queued into WOW and not being able to find groups for specifik instance.

. I have heard same thing over and over since Gelenia was regurarly on high on evenings. No I can't find group one says, spreading the bad word, someone else jumps the bandwagon.

Yes the pop has been decreasing compared to release, I even think considered just 1 month ago. But when people say the don't have problem to find groups I am as sure as they have as right as those that says they can't.

If you spit long enough on a stone it get soaked.

This is not sticking head in ground. It is a reflection that dooming get bas vibration. One cant expect to wait to find groups in VG because of the doom posts. And one thinks 'Oh well they was right grouping is impossible and give up'.

In other game you can look for specific groups for hours end, and when you get one you say 'Oh well they was right finding group is easy, and enjoy'.

[Vaernimus]

So we have two camps, the believers and the non-believers, when it comes to 'healthy' servers.

Couldn't Sigil/SoE just merge the servers with the least characters on them? That would leave the 'healthy' (yeah, i love using those quote marks ;) ) servers untouched, but consolidate the borked servers into something that could resemble a populated world.

Sorry if its been mentioned before, and i'm sure it has massive loopholes.

[QforQ]

I didnt read the pages before, I just wanted to throw out some pretty concrete information:

I've heard, from very reputable sources, that Vanguard has about 95k subscribers currently.

Besides that point, I would like to say that I think they need to merge servers. They launched with way too many servers, even they admit that(Sigil). So merge some, the world is HUGE and it makes the world seem even more empty than it actually is.

[Multiplex]

@OP

The title of the thread: Confusing Numbers

I don't see what is confusing at all about doing a /who all count "Class", adding them up and posting them for both prime time and non prime time hours.

[Kayd]

I'm amazed at the number of people who are sure SOE is buying Vanguard, and conclude it must be because Sigil is in trouble. As a general rule companies like Sony are not in the business of charity. They don't buy companies so they can loose money for them instead of the current owners. How exactly would you explain to the shareholders that the purchase of Sigil was justified on the basis that their game was crap and they were loosing money. Sure they may have an investment in Sigil, but that's a horrible reason to loose more money. No matter what, subs can't be a total disaster or SOE would walk away.

If SOE is indeed buying out Sigil, it is because they believe it has potential and they can scale back the group and redeploy the people on other projects while they improve Vanguard and wait for it to grow. In all likelyhood they have seen the plan for Vanguard and like the ideas and future direction. They already have EQ2 as a competitor to Wow, I seriously doubt they are looking to turn Vanguard into another EQ2. They are more than likely looking to capture, as Brad has said, the previous EQ players. Most probably they believe that with the right marketing and timing they can get subs up. Then they'd have products at both ends of the spectrum. Sigil probably sees it as a way to avoid layoffs and keep a team the the current subs can't support gainfully employed, while they work on growing the game so it can support a larger team.

Does that mean SOE will change everything? Possibly, but somehow I doubt it, though the term "reintroduce" worries me greatly. I doubt SOE would buy a game they thought needed radical change, especially given their track record with radical changes to SWG and EQ2.

[Vaernimus]

I'm amazed at the number of people who are sure SOE is buying Vanguard, and conclude it must be because Sigil is in trouble. As a general rule companies like Sony are not in the business of charity. They don't buy companies so they can loose money for them instead of the current owners. How exactly would you explain to the shareholders that the purchase of Sigil was justified on the basis that their game was crap and they were loosing money. Sure they may have an investment in Sigil, but that's a horrible reason to loose more money. No matter what, subs can't be a total disaster or SOE would walk away.

If SOE is indeed buying out Sigil, it is because they believe it has potential and they can scale back the group and redeploy the people on other projects while they improve Vanguard and wait for it to grow. In all likelyhood they have seen the plan for Vanguard and like the ideas and future direction. They already have EQ2 as a competitor to Wow, I seriously doubt they are looking to turn Vanguard into another EQ2. They are more than likely looking to capture, as Brad has said, the previous EQ players. Most probably they believe that with the right marketing and timing they can get subs up. Then they'd have products at both ends of the spectrum. Sigil probably sees it as a way to avoid layoffs and keep a team the the current subs can't support gainfully employed, while they work on growing the game so it can support a larger team.

Does that mean SOE will change everything? Possibly, but somehow I doubt it, though the term "reintroduce" worries me greatly. I doubt SOE would buy a game they thought needed radical change, especially given their track record with radical changes to SWG and EQ2.


I think you may be mixing your definitions of what the players believe in. I'm fairly confident that noone expects SoE to govern VG because of charity. The general concensus is based on what you said from your second paragraph onwards.

Secondly, surely improving a game to realise its potential, but outside of the control of the original developers (or at least, supporting them financially) is indicative of a struggling product?

[uncommon]

I love threads like these. Arguments take about one and a half steps before people pull out the name-calling.

"Hey guys, I'm having trouble getting groups. They need to merge servers."

"I find groups fine, and I'd rather they didn't do a merge."

"WHAT?!? The servers are dead all the time they have to merge!"

"I always see people when I'm on-line, in fact I have to wait in line for some encounters."

"How can you not see that the servers are dead?!? You just have blinders on!"

"Hey, I don't see a problem personally, but if you can show me (with data) that a merge is needed then I'll support it 100%"

"Everybody but you KNOWS that mergers are needed! If you can't see it you're stupid! Get your head out of the sand!"

"Do you have an actual argument here or is it all 'Agree with me or you're dumb'?"

"ANYBODY THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME IS DUMB!!"

[tinman_au]

That about sums it up Uncommon ;)

Edit: I think it boils down to some sort of religious war between people like multiplex, poke, et al and anyone still actually subscribed to VG. /shrug. As long as I'm still having fun I don't care too much about their opinions.

I'm sure Sigil (or SOE, or god or something) will do whats right for the game eventually...

[Unbelievable]

I'm amazed at the number of people who are sure SOE is buying Vanguard, and conclude it must be because Sigil is in trouble.

If SOE is indeed buying out Sigil, it is because they believe it has potential and they can scale back the group and redeploy the people on other projects while they improve Vanguard and wait for it to grow.

Most probably they believe that with the right marketing and timing they can get subs up. Then they'd have products at both ends of the spectrum. Sigil probably sees it as a way to avoid layoffs and keep a team the the current subs can't support gainfully employed, while they work on growing the game so it can support a larger team.

Does that mean SOE will change everything? Possibly, but somehow I doubt it, though the term "reintroduce" worries me greatly. I doubt SOE would buy a game they thought needed radical change, especially given their track record with radical changes to SWG and EQ2.


10 points for answering yourself.

[rhagz]

"Hey, I don't see a problem personally, but if you can show me (with data) that a merge is needed then I'll support it 100%"

How is all servers having under 1k people when they are designed to hold 5k.. and all of this confirmed by Brad himself not enough data? I think that is where the 'blinders' comments comes from.

You really can't get any more concrete than 'we launched with too many servers, we didn't sell enough to fill them up as intended and as a result people are having a lot of trouble finding groups'.

[Hatto]

I love threads like these. Arguments take about one and a half steps before people pull out the name-calling.
Its basically a problem of a lack of proper moderation on these boards, in the end. If they would remove a very few people things would not develop that way.

[PerritoBites]

In case you missed them before here are the ones I posted :P

Taken from Varking (team pvp) using the find tool available in-game.
May 8, 2007

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/silentseba/vgplayersmay8at9pm.gif

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/silentseba/vgplayersmay8at2pm.gif

[Fingis]

I might see 2-3 other players in a 3-5 hour gaming session.

There's a big bubble of players in the 20-40 range but if you are a lowbee, your lowbee areas will be empty because there are few new people coming to VG.

[uncommon]

How is all servers having under 1k people when they are designed to hold 5k.. and all of this confirmed by Brad himself not enough data? I think that is where the 'blinders' comments comes from.

You really can't get any more concrete than 'we launched with too many servers, we didn't sell enough to fill them up as intended and as a result people are having a lot of trouble finding groups'.

To show (with a link) that developers have stated that server population is lower than desired IS a valid argument. Those aren't the posts I was parodying. I was making fun of the posts that didn't have any substance other than "you're stupid because you have different experiences than me."

[miir]

Kinda like....

Just because Jackoff Jerry and his crew of merry LAN brethren can always group together doesn't mean anyone else can. Even if the situation is seen as favorably as possible, and you claim that you can find a group any day at peak time, I can still point you to the server populations as being "not something else...aka, Low Pop".


I find it puzzling the need for some people to insult those who observe different trends and have a different experience within the game.

My groups are quite often pickup groups.

[jelloskins]

Although the populations at prime-time are low, they are certainly workable and groups are formed.

The problem is that you need tightly packed servers at prime-time so that non-prime-time play has even a chance of being fun. I play a lot of off-hours and can often find my self the only one in CiS looking for a group. A who all at around my level (25) shows 5 people spread out across the world. It is not always this way during odd-hours. Sometimes the same who can produce 10 and I can put a group together. More often I do a LFG in the /OOC channel and get one person say "I will go, I have been looking for 2 hours". The two of use spend another hour looking for more and then I go find some place to solo the night away.

[arorot]

To show (with a link) that developers have stated that server population is lower than desired IS a valid argument. Those aren't the posts I was parodying. I was making fun of the posts that didn't have any substance other than "you're stupid because you have different experiences than me."

You're asking for a Sigil employee to come out and say something that would be detrimental to their company and job to prove to you that server merges are needed?
Well best of luck with that.
Personally with 1000ish people on Thunderaxe at prime time I still find the world too empty for my liking.
I feel bad for those on even less populated servers , under 800 at prime time ? ugh

[uncommon]

You're asking for a Sigil employee to come out and say something that would be detrimental to their company and job to prove to you that server merges are needed?
Well best of luck with that.
Personally with 1000ish people on Thunderaxe at prime time I still find the world too empty for my liking.
I feel bad for those on even less populated servers , under 800 at prime time ? ugh

Rhagz is telling us that exactly that has already happened. I don't believe I've read it but that statement is what I responded to.

[rhagz]

Rhagz is telling us that exactly that has already happened. I don't believe I've read it but that statement is what I responded to.

You can track the posts by Brad saying 'underpopulated, too many servers, trouble with grouping, etc.' It's not hidden secrets.

[uncommon]

You can track the posts by Brad saying 'underpopulated, too many servers, trouble with grouping, etc.' It's not hidden secrets.

Nor did I ever claim it was hidden secrets. Please direct Arorot to these posts, since he is the one who seemed to suggest that such statements would not exist.

[Gaijin]

I think if you do some checking, you will find that VG had high "sales" numbers at one point as well. High sales of boxes and continued subscriptions are two completely different animals.

VG is dead




.

[Chae668]

.
MOOBAH!!

[ikaoma420]

And DDO is cut up into instances and maybe a 10th of the size of Vanguard...... Plus I bet they didnt spend 30+ million to make the game? So 25k subs is making them a nice profit? Just wondering.

Do the math?

I was looking for more of a yes or no to mergers in this thread and reasoning behind peoples choice..... Clearly my stance is "for" mergers and I listed why.....

Swampratt

Turbine says that DDO turns a profit after 35K subs. I don't think its as low as 25K current subs.

[gervaise]

I'm amazed at the number of people who are sure SOE is buying Vanguard, and conclude it must be because Sigil is in trouble. As a general rule companies like Sony are not in the business of charity. They don't buy companies so they can loose money for them instead of the current owners. How exactly would you explain to the shareholders that the purchase of Sigil was justified on the basis that their game was crap and they were loosing money. Sure they may have an investment in Sigil, but that's a horrible reason to loose more money. No matter what, subs can't be a total disaster or SOE would walk away.


Agree 100% BUT it depends on what terms SoE buy Vanguard (or maybe Sigil). One of Sigil's big problems is low subscribers combined with a large debt. If they can acquire VSoH essentially debt free then the number of subscribers that Vanguard needs to turn a profit is a whole lot less.

Quick example: assume VSoH cost $36M and they want to pay back those costs over 3 years - and forget the interest. That is $1M a month to clear the development costs. At $15 per subscriber that is about 66k subscribers just to burn down the debt. (Obviously the longer it takes / any month that VSoH makes a loss etc. means the numbers just grow).

This is the hole that Sigil must fill.

Add in the CSR costs, bandwidth, servers, tech support, developer costs and so forth and you can see that you need a whole lot of subscribers.

If SoE can acquire VSoH and / or Sigil without the debt then it becomes a different proposition (maybe they do a deal that says any profit over such and such an amount is split between SoE and the initial developers). This will be the carrot.

To be sucessful in any negotiation SoE must a) be prepared to walk away b) do something to sweeten the deal for those who stand to lose $X million.

We wait for the announcement.

[Poke]

Agree 100% BUT it depends on what terms SoE buy Vanguard (or maybe Sigil). One of Sigil's big problems is low subscribers combined with a large debt. If they can acquire VSoH essentially debt free then the number of subscribers that Vanguard needs to turn a profit is a whole lot less.

Quick example: assume VSoH cost $36M and they want to pay back those costs over 3 years - and forget the interest. That is $1M a month to clear the development costs. At $15 per subscriber that is about 66k subscribers just to burn down the debt. (Obviously the longer it takes / any month that VSoH makes a loss etc. means the numbers just grow).

This is the hole that Sigil must fill.

Add in the CSR costs, bandwidth, servers, tech support, developer costs and so forth and you can see that you need a whole lot of subscribers.

If SoE can acquire VSoH and / or Sigil without the debt then it becomes a different proposition (maybe they do a deal that says any profit over such and such an amount is split between SoE and the initial developers). This will be the carrot.

To be sucessful in any negotiation SoE must a) be prepared to walk away b) do something to sweeten the deal for those who stand to lose $X million.

We wait for the announcement.

An even better scenario is if Sigil just files bankruptcy for the $30 million and the debt does not go to SOE. VG is a shell that SOE can then create a game from. This will save them the normal start-up development costs. The only problem and what could mean the shutting down of the servers is if the game engine is fundamentally broken and can not be fixed. If the foundation is broken SOE can not build on the VG shell.

Either way VG will not see much money thrown at it in regards to new content or expansions due to it's low subscriber numbers. If the Matrix Online has 1 Developer then VG will have 3-4 based on subscriber numbers.

All this also is dependent upon every other game coming out in the next 2-3 years being bad. If any of the new games in the next 2-3 years are successful (which is how long it will take to make VG), VG will not have a chance at all.