Sign in to follow this  
Etherdrifter

Population Data So Far

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Jeston said:

think the loss of Sindusk was the marked ending of good updates and id love to see the ones who forced an actual content and update maker out removed themselves just the same. Why do you think he keeps posting population statistics in this thread? To laugh at you all in a round-about way. They literally removed the death tab out of spite.

Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jeston said:

Steam noob in my village alliance made 5+ gold selling blacksmith stuff last year and spent not more than his initial subscription,

Not possible on SFI where the market is oversaturated with 90 ql items with 90+ casts. 

 

The NFI economy was a fresh one where vets saw the obvious potential of quickly grinding up and sell basic things at a huge price. You won't see the same prices in a year or so. Items in game usually stay in game forever for a reason. Deeds disband and are quickly scavenged. Markets will go down like they've always done in Wurm. 

 

5 hours ago, Jeston said:

hate that Wurm Unlimited had taxidermy and other cool stuff that seems to just be an impossibility here for reasons unknown.

 

Stopping support for WU was a bad decision from the owners. I honestly don't see why they can't resupport the game, then see about importing the cool updates made for WU by individual people such as taxidermy, or various items added to WU by enterprising gamers. 

 

Not to give a bad comparison but it would be similar to how bethesda releases bare bones games then knows the modding community will add QoL aspects or new items, quests, mechanics, knowing the modding community will do their job for them. From a game design / moral perspective, it's obviously a bad practice, but from a business perspective, importing code that would be compatible with WO would make sense to add content for WO made by WU modders. 

 

One big update a year and a broken one at that such as the AH model is nothing but writing on the wall for WO at this stage. Wurm had to run out of steam eventually (no pun intended) if it relies on "volunteers" to keep it alive instead of actually paying people to develop it. This isn't sustainable. It's a pipe dream if anyone else thinks that.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, elentari said:

Not possible on SFI where the market is oversaturated with 90 ql items with 90+ casts. 

 

The NFI economy was a fresh one where vets saw the obvious potential of quickly grinding up and sell basic things at a huge price. You won't see the same prices in a year or so. Items in game usually stay in game forever for a reason. Deeds disband and are quickly scavenged. Markets will go down like they've always done in Wurm. 

 

 

Stopping support for WU was a bad decision from the owners. I honestly don't see why they can't resupport the game, then see about importing the cool updates made for WU by individual people such as taxidermy, or various items added to WU by enterprising gamers. 

 

Not to give a bad comparison but it would be similar to how bethesda releases bare bones games then knows the modding community will add QoL aspects or new items, quests, mechanics, knowing the modding community will do their job for them. From a game design / moral perspective, it's obviously a bad practice, but from a business perspective, importing code that would be compatible with WO would make sense to add content for WO made by WU modders. 

 

One big update a year and a broken one at that such as the AH model is nothing but writing on the wall for WO at this stage. Wurm had to run out of steam eventually (no pun intended) if it relies on "volunteers" to keep it alive instead of actually paying people to develop it. This isn't sustainable. It's a pipe dream if anyone else thinks that.  

LOL...

it's the same on nfi.. it's just way overpriced as only few people sell these services and there's no reason to lower the price, it's not like it's harder to do the same

* what I mean with the same.. - there's no market on sfi.. there's nobody to fill your order, it's harder to find a merchant as most moved to nfi or quit with rmt

 

both clusters have a few people doing services, difference is - on nfi it's 2x to 20x the price for some items

#wogic :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m amazed that there aren’t regular dev hosted events, such as mobs attacking starter towns that players need to defend. Teleports are available to the starter town being attacked, and back home again. Things to get the community engaged.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Goodwin said:

I’m amazed that there aren’t regular dev hosted events, such as mobs attacking starter towns that players need to defend. Teleports are available to the starter town being attacked, and back home again. Things to get the community engaged.

it's not that kind of game..

 

if the game needs upgrade to rifts.. or introduce another event like that.. maybe.. been a while since rift was introduced, and besides adding annoying sounds and 4th wave, nothing improved(you get points now, rather than random person grabbing a *something*, that alone lowered the stock of extra rift gear some people were piling up and having no use for.. besides selling them to others)

 

impalongs are the kind of event you crave.. gm occasionally comes and spawns a horde or easy kills with unique names.. or not so easy creatures, usually with some themed for the moment/place/.. names

 

there were gm quizzes.. where you have GM trivia 'bot' asking something and first to answer wins something, don't hold your breath for these.. normally 'same' 5-15 people get all rewards, half or most of the questions are wurm lore related, rest is easy to answer or fast to lookup on wiki.. but you're versing ~50-200 people for it, good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jeston said:

I saw less updates AFTER the steam release than before which is INSANE. 

That's because both Budda and Sindusk are gone and have not really been replaced by same caliber devs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Goodwin said:

I’m amazed that there aren’t regular dev hosted events, such as mobs attacking starter towns that players need to defend. Teleports are available to the starter town being attacked, and back home again. Things to get the community engaged.

MrBloodworth used to do that like 10 years ago... Noone else did since then apart from Enki posting cryptic text messages regarding treasure chest hunts that 90%+ of the population just couldn't be bothered to do and most likely had no idea existed if they weren't following the forums. I think the GMs are under very, very strict rules in what they can and can't do. 

Edited by atazs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Finnn said:

it's not that kind of game..

 

 

Actually, a couple of years back I was travelling north for a rift and came across a returning player.

 

Helped him get back to his old deed as he'd lost everything.

 

We stumbled across a dragon, which turned out to be a friendly GM who polymorphed us both and helped us locate the spot.

 

Honestly, the GMs of wurm do a lot of little things to make the game better; it'd be nice to give them a little more leeway for fun like that; newbie town attacks or even minor deed defence events.  Or, you know, just scaring the crap out of random travellers as a dragon!

 

Wurm is a game about community, and the GMs are part of that community.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Etherdrifter said:

Actually, a couple of years back I was travelling north for a rift and came across a returning player.

 

Helped him get back to his old deed as he'd lost everything.

 

We stumbled across a dragon, which turned out to be a friendly GM who polymorphed us both and helped us locate the spot.

 

Honestly, the GMs of wurm do a lot of little things to make the game better; it'd be nice to give them a little more leeway for fun like that; newbie town attacks or even minor deed defence events.  Or, you know, just scaring the crap out of random travellers as a dragon!

 

Wurm is a game about community, and the GMs are part of that community.

ok

I don't think we have any control over their actions, but you can believe in what you wish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonus data - Medians

 

I had a little free time so I did a median by month to get a rough feel for player medians over time.  Why did I do this?  Recently, the data is showing a lot of 0s due to reboots and downtime, and it may be impacting the means calculated, and I want to see if my calculated means and medians differ overly much.

 

Old Cluster
Month -> Median -> Mean -> Difference (mean-median)
2020-09 -> 195 -> 195.1306 -> 0.1305556
2020-10 -> 187 -> 186.4322 -> -0.5677852  
2020-11 -> 205 -> 208.9039 -> 3.9038997  
2020-12 -> 233 -> 233.1174 -> 0.1174089  
2021-01 -> 228 -> 233.7301 -> 5.7300945
2021-02 -> 234 -> 236.0149 -> 2.0149031  
2021-03 -> 219 -> 222.7224 -> 3.7223720  
2021-04 -> 192 -> 197.0389 -> 5.0388889  
2021-05 -> 201 -> 203.6142 -> 2.6142473  
2021-06 -> 205 -> 207.1583 -> -2.1583333


New Cluster
Month -> Median -> Mean -> Difference
2020-09 -> 1023.5 -> 1031.7528 ->  8.2527778
2020-10 -> 779.0 -> 769.6282 -> -9.3718121  
2020-11 -> 667.0 -> 661.0864 -> -5.9136490   
2020-12 -> 532.0 -> 532.9987 -> 0.9986505
2021-01 -> 472.0 -> 465.3914 -> -6.6086370   
2021-02 -> 405.0 -> 407.3055 -> 2.3055142   
2021-03 -> 347.5 -> 348.7668 -> 1.2668464   
2021-04 -> 322.5 -> 327.1528 -> 4.6527778  
2021-05 -> 289.0 -> 286.4274 -> -2.5725806
2021-06 -> 301.0 -> 294.0833 -> -6.9166667

 

In both cases, the pattern suggested by mean and median is the same same, which is a good indicator that the 0s are not impacting the mean overly much (indeed, on the old cluster something is pushing the mean up above the median, which may suggest that dragon hunts are more than compensating for the 0s).  The values are also reasonably "close" together for both servers.

 

Assuming an error margin of +/- 6 for the old cluster and +/-10 would be reasonable in light of the quick comparison above.

 

In terms of modifying interpretations one could assert that (in the best case scenario), the old cluster's average population may have been static over the past 3 months.  However, even if we interpret the gaps as generously as we can, the new cluster is definitely dropping.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2021 at 1:51 PM, Archaed said:

Lol

 

What's so funny?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2021 at 2:28 PM, elentari said:

This. I keep coming back to this. I need to vent about this. I apologise for the textwall. 

 

Consider me belatedly triggered. Especially this part ...

 

On 3/19/2021 at 2:28 PM, elentari said:

The rest are subjective points of views. 

 

... when combined with:

 

On 3/19/2021 at 2:28 PM, elentari said:

So wurm needs to really ditch the entire "free" thing and people need to stop arguing that you can enjoy wurm as a fremium player. Nope. You can't. 

 

Enjoyment is subjective. Whether you can enjoy Wurm as a freemium player is out of my control. Whether I can enjoy Wurm as a freemium player is out of your control. Telling me that I "can't" is flat-out wrong.

 

To briefly consider the intended target of your statement "the rest are subjective," my mind boggles at how calling a game "slow" is somehow exempt from the list of subjective statements.

 

That leaves the sole "objective" statement that Wurm isn't free but says it is. That argument isn't subjective versus objective. It's semantics. The base game is free. Full stop. The premium content is not. Nor (in most cases) is the computer on which it runs. Nor (in most cases) is the internet connection on which it relies. So just how ludicrous do we want to be about caveats around "free"? What's actually being argued here is how players think a game "ought" to be marketed. And unless that argument is being made in a court proceeding on legal definitions and merits, it's just as subjective as players' opinions on how "fast" or "pretty" a game should be.

 

On 3/19/2021 at 2:28 PM, elentari said:

I dare any player that argues "you can enjoy wurm without subscribing once" play for an  entire year having all their skills locked at 20 and play with those limitations. Let's see how you handle rifts. Or unique hunts. Or running from a troll on your 5 speed cow. 

 

Dare accepted post facto. I played over a year as a free-to-play character on Xanadu from May of 2015 to at least November of 2017. I did not buy silver. I was not "tweaked" by any of my premium characters. I did live by a 50 QL guard tower. I was converted to a follower of Fo by a premium player. And I bought (but ultimately never used) a 50 QL toolbelt from another player -- using money I foraged. I didn't go to rifts. I didn't go to unique hunts. I ran from trolls on my own two feet. Frequently. And I enjoyed playing that character in Wurm Online.

 

I'm late to the whole thread. Mea culpa. And you clearly preface this as you venting. Fair enough.

 

Here's my venting: players need to stop trying to justify as "objective" their desire for this game, or any other game, to accommodate their preferences. I don't mean to single you out. This whole forum is filled with players expressing what they want. Nothing wrong with that. Where it goes wrong (yep; in my subjective opinion) is when it is expressed as either objectively correct or with a sense of entitlement. That's my clearly subjective vent.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kohle
There is a mix of good points here with a few more controversial ones.

 

I, too, did a long stint as a free player, and the game offers enjoyment in that form.  Indeed, I am somewhat known for my "sabbaticals" (just letting my premium drop) and have written the guide on how to live as a free player.  [Edit note for clarity: I only play one character, so when my premium drops that's all I have, I do not have other premium toons to hop to!]

 

However, the evidence is beginning to suggest that wurm's current free-to-play ("never-preme") offering isn't contributing noticeably to the games population.  It isn't conclusive (and is unlikely to be given the paucity of data available), though it would be the simplest explanation as to why a new mob 100% aimed at "never-preme" players has little, to no, statistically significant impact on population.  This does suggest wurm's current free offering has a VERY narrow appeal in the long run.

 

Alternative explanations could be poor marketing, player exchange (a lot of older players really hated the nerf the update brought), or even just seasonal variance cancelling out gains.  Though, these seem less likely.

Edited by Etherdrifter
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kohle said:

That argument isn't subjective versus objective. It's semantics. The base game is free. Full stop. The premium content is not.

Talk about "semantics" right here. 

The base game  vs premium content. Hmmm...Base game seems to be a pretty sucky experience then if it doesn't draw players into premium content. I don't know how you see the premium model for wurm, but I see it as a punishment if you don't prem your character not as a reward. Your parent skills and body stats will not raise and you'll end up losing some sweet points if you simply raise your other skills to 20. You'll realise you can't do a lot of things and the play experience will be slowed down for you as such. 

 

And if your prem drops? Well punishment again. Besides having your skills dropping to 20, you are vulnerable to mobs again, you can't ride a horse nor cart to secure your things if your deed disbands, on pvp servers like Epic you can't see local if you don't pay for prem. End content like rifts will be close to inaccessible since you'll die like crazy without a horse. Dragon hunts won't be available since hide doesn't drop for non prems. Can't priest, can't pave, can't load crates, can't build stone houses, can't pilot anything other than a slow rowboat. I'd say more than a huge chunk of the game is actually locked to you if you don't prem. The skills obviously playing the biggest part of all. 

 

https://imgur.com/a/tw5LjIr

 

Wurm appears next to WU , which obviously has a price tag. Wurm Online has the "free" tag next to Wurm Unlimited. By association and contrast, why do you think there are so many negative reviews  on steam aimed at the fact Wurm isn't actually free? What mental picture does that create to an average consumer? If i'd go into a bar and I saw a sign displaying 2 beer bottles, one that cost 10 euros, and 1 that said "free", I'd pick the free one out of curiosity. But if the bartender only hands me a tequila shot with an inkling of beer saying that I have to pay 10 euros for that bottle, I'd probably leave and find a better establishment. 

 

The game is either free or it isn't. Any sentence that starts with "it's free but...", is pretty much a typical marketing lie. I'm not saying you can't enjoy free content. If it wasn't clear, my phrasing was in the direction of you can't access all the enjoyable things in Wurm without premium. One of them is the ability to ride a fast horse. Or build a castle for yourself.  Or actually become decent in any skill. Or anything that strikes your fancy. 

 

7 hours ago, Etherdrifter said:

However, the evidence is beginning to suggest that wurm's current free-to-play ("never-prem") offering isn't contributing noticeably to the games population. 

 

Anecdotal evidence here, but out of all my 4 years of running a newbie-training deed on Epic/ MRH , no non-prem player stuck around for more than maybe a month or two. Never to be seen again. 

 

Anyway my entire argument could be boiled down to this : Wurm can have real free content for "the base game" as Kokhle put it. But the base game can be way more than the paltry - punishing non-prem offering right now (my subjective view, of course,). Allow non prem to skill up as prem, allow them to ride horses, ride carts, sail boats, priest, and switch to a hybrid monetization model that implies things such as

 

1. Prem players get to unlock skill perks, which non prem cannot.

 

Skill perks are a thing that have been talked in game for a long time. Having  cooldown based abilities for skills at thresholds 30-50-70-90-100 would expand Wurm's content by a mile. For example unlocking 3 perks at blacksmithing 50:

A) Faster imping timer for BS = lasts 15 minutes. Cooldown 24 hrs.

or 

B ) Increase creation ql of BS items = lasts 15 mins, CD 24 h.

 

or C) Increase BS skillgain for 15 mins, cd 24 h. 

 

Stuff like that can make a real difference between being prem or non prem but at the same time still give people a feeling they're not being locked out of most of the game's content. 

 

2. Only prem players can access the mark shop. This is already a thing but it would make more sense in this context. Also add more things from the marks shop you can buy. 

 

3. Non prems are limited in # spells they can cast. 

 

4. Non prems can meditate but can't have a med path. 

 

5. Add the ability to "build" support buildings for deeds that actually have an ingame effect such as : Mill = improves baking related skillgain and ql. Lumberyard = improves chopping ql, plank / shaft creation timers, etc. Blacksmith workshop = increases % to successfully imp an item by a few percentage points. Only prem players can create such buildings. 

 

I could probably think of a few more things, but the idea is to make the premium - hybrid model a reward, and not as a punishment if you don't subscribe. These examples are just random and you don't have to take them as face value, they are just thoughts that might make the game grow. At the current stagnation / loss of players rate, wurm will most likely survive, but the QoL gameplay will go down immensely. Wurm needs to grow. It can't do that without having more attractive gameplay. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Etherdrifter

I don't dispute anything you've said there.

 

So is this a thread about server populations (or population trends), donkeys, or how players think the game ought to be managed and marketed? Is it opinion or fact? "Can't it be both?" Yes, it can. What I object to is conflating the two -- presenting opinion as fact.

 

Server populations have declined. That's a fact. Why they have declined, "given the paucity of data," is the writer's opinion. Whether a decline is "good" or "bad" is an opinion. Is an opinion valid? Usually. Does being valid make that opinion a fact? No, it does not.

 

Server populations have declined. Fact.

Some of you don't like it when server populations decline. Opinion.

Some of you don't like how Wurm Online has been marketed. Opinion.

Some of you don't like the business decision made around Wurm Unlimited. Opinion.

Some of you don't like certain changes to Wurm Online. Opinion.

Some of you think the work spent making changes you don't like should have been spent making changes that you would like. Opinion.

 

@elentari 

 

Lovely ideas. Lovely opinions. Thought out. Reasonable. Your experience? Totally valid and within your rights to express.

 

1 hour ago, elentari said:

If i'd go into a bar and I saw a sign displaying 2 beer bottles, one that cost 10 euros, and 1 that said "free", I'd pick the free one out of curiosity. But if the bartender only hands me a tequila shot with an inkling of beer saying that I have to pay 10 euros for that bottle, I'd probably leave and find a better establishment. 

 

You might. Absolutely. You might also try that shots-worth of beer, spit it out, and be damn glad you didn't pay 10 euro for the full bottle. Or you might think to yourself, "Hmm. That's pretty good. I'd take a bottle of that," and feel good about spending your 10 euro. Can you sit there, drinking one shots-worth of beer at a time, in between waiting for the bartender to come 'round again, until you've consumed a beer bottle's worth of beer? Yes, you can. Is that why bars or brewers offer free beer? Usually not. Would you enjoy it? Apparently not. Would someone else? They might.

 

Do players like free stuff more than stuff they have to pay for? Almost universally. Wouldn't it be great if we could all get all the free stuff we want? Hard to argue against. Do I believe that you're smart enough to know that's not how reality works? Yes; yes, I do. Do I believe that you are passionate about Wurm Online and that you have come up with, in your opinion, a reasonable compromise that will lead to a long-term benefit to the game? Again, yes.

 

Are these two very different statements? Yes, they very much are - as much as the difference between "it's free" and "it's free, but..."

Quote

So wurm needs to really ditch the entire "free" thing and people need to stop arguing that you can enjoy wurm as a fremium player. Nope. You can't. 

Quote

 If it wasn't clear, my phrasing was in the direction of you can't access all the enjoyable things in Wurm without premium. 

 

I'm triggered by you -- and many other players -- expressing yourselves by telling me what I should and shouldn't, can and can't, do. by telling Wurm what it should and shouldn't, can and can't, do.

 

Check yourselves. And if you can't be arsed to, then don't be surprised when your passionate and otherwise well-thought-out expressions and suggestions vanish into a dark void.

Edited by Kohle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kohle said:

@Etherdrifter

I don't dispute anything you've said there.

 

So is this a thread about server populations (or population trends), donkeys, or how players think the game ought to be managed and marketed? Is it opinion or fact? "Can't it be both?" Yes, it can. What I object to is conflating the two -- presenting opinion as fact.


Oh, it's mostly me just reporting population as time goes on, and using my professional skills to draw inferences from them as to what might be ailing wurm.  Also, that wurm is ailing isn't an opinion, it is a cold hard fact if one defines the health of a game by its population and its stability.

 

30 minutes ago, Kohle said:

@Etherdrifter

Server populations have declined. That's a fact. Why they have declined, "given the paucity of data," is the writer's opinion. Whether a decline is "good" or "bad" is an opinion. Is an opinion valid? Usually. Does being valid make that opinion a fact? No, it does not.

 

Server populations have declined. Fact.

Some of you don't like it when server populations decline. Opinion.

Some of you don't like how Wurm Online has been marketed. Opinion.

Some of you don't like the business decision made around Wurm Unlimited. Opinion.

Some of you don't like certain changes to Wurm Online. Opinion.

Some of you think the work spent making changes you don't like should have been spent making changes that you would like. Opinion.

On that note, your semantics are a bit off there....

 

"Some of you don't like it when the server populations decline" would be a fact, (similarly from the other summary points); you are simply stating that others have said or expressed a thing.  "The server population declining is a bad thing" is much closer to an opinion; though here we could argue some inference since the decline in population isn't the bad thing (it just is), it is the inferred closer of the game that follows logically from continued decline that most people take issue with.

 

"the evidence is beginning to suggest that wurm's current free-to-play ("never-preme") offering isn't contributing noticeably to the games population" would be an inference, and a tentative one at that.  It's not quite a hard observed fact ("we saw the lion eat dave") but it's certainly not just an opinion ("I think a crocodile ate dave"), it is an inference ("Dave was last seen around a lion and his remains show signs of lion tooth marks, so I think a lion ate dave").  Something lying between the two, one may call it an "inferred fact" or an "educated opinion" depending where on the continuum it lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

On that note, your semantics are a bit off there....

 

"Some of you don't like it when the server populations decline" would be a fact, (similarly from the other summary points); you are simply stating that others have said or expressed a thing.  "The server population declining is a bad thing" is much closer to an opinion; though here we could argue some inference since the decline in population isn't the bad thing (it just is), it is the inferred closer of the game that follows logically from continued decline that most people take issue with.

 

Fair point. I admit to using a bit of shorthand. As you point out, all of those statements are, semantically, facts. However, all but the first actually represent underlying opinions. That opinions exist is a fact. That people hold opinions is a fact. That people sometimes base their opinions on underlying facts -- is a fact. None of those makes an opinion into a fact. The implication -- or outright explicit statement -- that so-and-so should do such-and-such is a "fact" -- or that failing to do such-and-such is factual evidence of antipathy, negligence or animosity is wrong. It's also unproductive (in my experience).

 

I want to make very clear that you, @Etherdrifter, are generally staying away from that line of conversation.

 

Since you've now brought it up twice in short order, let me address this:

30 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

"the evidence is beginning to suggest that wurm's current free-to-play ("never-preme") offering isn't contributing noticeably to the games population" would be an inference, and a tentative one at that.

 

So -- who said that "never-preme" has, or should, contribute noticeably to the game's population? You're welcome to show me where I missed it, but I don't remember once seeing Code Club or Game Chest say, "We expect a noticeable percentage of our player population to be never-premmers." My experience with freemium has always been clearly targeted at "try-before-you-buy." Whatever vague recollection I have of statements made by Code Club would be that they fell somewhere in line with the "try-before-you-buy" model.

 

I disagree that Wurm Online's current free-to-play offering is intended to be, or equivalent to, "never-preme". I therefore reject the inference that Code Club / Game Chest should do away with their free-to-play offering as being based in facts somehow.

 

I'm also going to walk out onto a limb and start sawing by challenging this statement a bit:

52 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

that wurm is ailing isn't an opinion, it is a cold hard fact if one defines the health of a game by its population and its stability.

 

Reducio ad absurdum, yes. A zero-population game isn't a healthy game. A declining population is not, in and of itself, "unhealthy." The list of games whose populations skyrocketed and then dropped is a long one. If you'd like to argue that every one of those games is unhealthy -- well, it's your right, but it isn't factual. My definition of game "health" is whether the developer and/or publisher are profitable, or are seen by their creditors as likely to be. And the only ones who know that are Code Club, Game Chest and their creditors. Here again we arrive at the paucity of data. (I liked your use of the phrase, so I'm reusing it.)

 

My point, by the way, is not that "I'm right and you're wrong." My point is that you and I define game "health" in different ways, and the "if" of your "cold, hard fact" is neither indisputable nor does it actually promote the opinion of Wurm Online's health into being factual.

 

We care about this game. We are creative. We have professional-level skills. Brainstorming for ideas and giving feedback constructively is a blessing for any community. Sharing data is great. Sharing ideas is great. Being passionate is great. Keep it positive -- or at least neutral. Have empathy. Be excellent,.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help if this thread wasn't some attempt at "look the games dying" and actually contained any reliable information other than "this many players were online at this random time" 

 

For the record, none of this is reliable data, it's just all conjecture with a continued clutching at straws because three less players were logged in at a specific time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate Ether supplying this quantitative data.

 

Its certainly far better than nothing. All of the squabbling about the inferences drawn from it is just going to sap his will and muddy the post. Even if you disagree with the "why", the numbers themselves can be referenced in our own analysis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Reverent said:

I appreciate Ether supplying this quantitative data.

 

Its certainly far better than nothing. All of the squabbling about the inferences drawn from it is just going to sap his will and muddy the post. Even if you disagree with the "why", the numbers themselves can be referenced in our own analysis.

It's interesting to see, but I'd like to point out the inferences being drawn are being drawn by him, highlighting minor reductions as proof of a downward slide, and ignoring even or upticks as "insubstantial" 

 

I disagree "why" because it's from a mindset of "this is the result of them not doing what I'd like to see", which comes from many people in here. 

 

Also because it's up to the People In Charge about what constitutes healthy or sustainable, not players. 

Edited by Archaed
me fail english? that's unpossible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reverent said:

I appreciate Ether supplying this quantitative data.

 

Its certainly far better than nothing. All of the squabbling about the inferences drawn from it is just going to sap his will and muddy the post. Even if you disagree with the "why", the numbers themselves can be referenced in our own analysis.

 

I appreciate @Etherdrifter sharing the data. I've said so. Repeatedly. Granted, I'm less enthused by characterizations like "in freefall" and "unhealthy", but he's entitled to express his opinion. The numbers are quite public and available for anyone to use to perform their analysis.

 

Except there's really not much analysis of anyone else's own, is there? There's eleven pages of, as @Archaed put it, "this is the result of them not doing what I'd like to see." And I let it roll off my back until @elentari threw down the gauntlet of "I dare any player that argues "you can enjoy wurm without subscribing once" play for an entire year having all their skills locked at 20 and play with those limitations."

 

As for "muddying the post," after eleven pages of "squabbling" about "this is the result of them not doing what I'd like to see," I believe that ship sailed long before now. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2021 at 8:06 PM, Archaed said:

It would help if this thread wasn't some attempt at "look the games dying" and actually contained any reliable information other than "this many players were online at this random time" 

 

For the record, none of this is reliable data, it's just all conjecture with a continued clutching at straws because three less players were logged in at a specific time. 

 

They aren't random times, they're intervals. Measuring active players over time always uses some form of interval. Whether it be a minute, an hour, or when the number changes, there's an interval somewhere. Can you explain how this information, using 1 hour intervals, is not reliable?

 

On 7/12/2021 at 10:03 PM, Archaed said:

It's interesting to see, but I'd like to point out the inferences being drawn are being drawn by him, highlighting minor reductions as proof of a downward slide, and ignoring even or upticks as "insubstantial"

 

Where do you see the upticks? I want to see those, but I can't find them in the data being collected. Month over month the active player count has declined. Combined with the investor relations press releases from GameChestGroup, it's evident that subscriber numbers continue to decrease.

 

So far, nothing I've stated in this post has been "conjecture" or "opinion" - everything stated above is simply fact. With that said, from here on I will begin adding some opinion.

 

The game continues to decline completely in spite of existing updates. Take a look at the Steam Charts, with tags for each significant update over the past year.

 

n9Twj37.png

 

This information does not include non-steam players, but tracks at a roughly stable percentage of the data in this thread (about 1/3 of the total player count).

 

Compare this information to other games, and you'll see a very stark difference.

 

unYMfUs.png

 

"But wait, No Man's Sky has a huge studio of many people working on the game! It's not a fair comparison!"

 

You don't need a huge team to have a successful update structure. Take a look at the game recently added to Steam "Legends of Idleon MMO" - a game developed by a single developer which includes a mobile version not present in the Steam Charts data. Here is an image taken directly from their dev blog post discussing the health and future of the game.

 

RoHeJQy.png

 

He then goes on to analyze the data, describing how he interprets it as the game community growing.

 

qOaUiNn.png

 

Updates with games almost always coincide with an increase in players. Generally, it's players returning to engage with the new content. However, with upticks in player activity, new players are also more willing to try out the game. Wurm has a significant lack of this happening, and the result is players blaming the development team. Whether it's actually the fault of the development team is definitely an opinion, but one backed by significant amounts of data. Not just data from Wurm, but the gaming industry as a whole. When every other game has a pattern of growth that can easily be seen through the data, when Wurm is devoid of that same pattern, it's a red flag that something has gone wrong.

 

The current data tracks similarly to other games that have completely died out due to the game losing so many players that development could no longer be sustained. A few examples of games that I used to adore which have died out completely with a similar data trend.

 

Firefall

J9fs0Oc.png

 

Bloodline Champions

WfwX9oM.png

 

Magicka: Wizard Wars

bPAfTop.png

 

So, Archaed, I propose a challenge. Can you make the case that the game is stable? Not that the game is growing - that's an unreasonable ask. I want you to convince me that the game is stable and that it's not in decline. If I come back in 2 years, will there still be people playing Wurm Online for me to play with? Will the servers still be online?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you completely in that breakdown, and you are correct, lack of updates is a sore issue in this community both from a player perspective, and a business perspective. 

 

What I am calling out is the idea that this whole "service" is in some way altruistic and not self serving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Archaed said:

What I am calling out is the idea that this whole "service" is in some way altruistic and not self serving. 

I don't see how this is self serving to OP or anyone who is looking at the data that shows Wurm is losing players. If anything, this should be a big red alert sign to the owners that they have to do something if they want to grow Wurm. 

 

OP merely presents facts and the tone has been nothing but professional from a methodological point of view, reminds me a bit of my old statistics teacher, minus the ice cream addiction. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Archaed said:

What I am calling out is the idea that this whole "service" is in some way altruistic and not self serving. 

Exactly what do I have to gain here by pointing out that the game is in decline?

 

23 minutes ago, elentari said:

OP merely presents facts and the tone has been nothing but professional from a methodological point of view, reminds me a bit of my old statistics teacher, minus the ice cream addiction. 

 

Fun fact, I actually teach data science at a university.  Though, in my case the addiction is ginger tea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this