Slashdot Log In
World of Warcraft Hits 9.3 Million Players
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Nov 15, 2007 03:17 PM
from the azeroth-needs-its-own-zipcode dept.
from the azeroth-needs-its-own-zipcode dept.
Gamasutra is reporting that, along with Vivendi's ever-increasing earnings, recent information has been released updating the current player stats for World of Warcraft. Despite suspicions of falling numbers due to the long wait between now and Rise of the Lich King, Blizzard's Massive title is larger than ever, with some 9.3 million players. "Vivendi has chalked up the increase not only to its WoW subscriber base, but the release of its The Burning Crusade expansion, which saw release in China in the latter part of the third quarter ... The company also noted that its subscriber base has continued to grow from the 9 million mark it celebrated in July to more than 9.3 million, which it says is up more than one million subscribers since December 31 of last year."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Frightening (Score:4, Funny)
It's the biggest botnet in the world.
That would be true... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That would be true... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Quite a milestone (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Quite a milestone (Score:4, Funny)
I also hope this isn't foreshadowing another post when they hit 9.4M...
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
And yet... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
It's similar to the situation with Counter-Strike. After 8 years, no other FPS has the same number o of players. People want to play what everyone else is playing, when it comes to multiplayer games (even Xbox Live! suffers from this. Ever tried to play a multiplayer game that wasn't Halo? The
Who are these people? (Score:2, Insightful)
Everyone I know is quitting the game.
Even I haven't played since this summer.
I just don't have the time to devote to something like this and still lead a meaningful life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm certain many people who are "subscribed" are inactive, the numbers don't tell us how active the subscribers are on an individual basis. I'm certain many wow players only play a little bit a month. My sister is one of them, she'll play a few days a month, the rest of the time she'll be out doing her thing. You have to understand that many wow players ONLY play wow and don't do much other gaming, so $15 a month is nothing.
Then there is the fact that people are continuously leavin
Very important milestone (Score:4, Interesting)
*ahem...*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The MMORPG market SUCKS. (Score:5, Interesting)
Frankly, the majority of these companies other than Blizzard just don't get it. There was an article linked here from a MMORPG developer of high standing who did a talk about what gamers want, who they are, and the games they play. He then went into a point by point discussion about what makes a good game.
The real problem, the game designers who are failing are designing games for people like them. They are not designing for the market, let alone new markets. A great example is Turbine. They had Asheron's Call and then followed it up with a sequel which failed miserably and was shut down. The primary reason was, it wasn't what the players wanted. It was more of a tribute to the developers (cities that if nothing else where monuments to Turbine). It had lots of great ideas but horrible execution. It forced player cooperation in areas where people never expect nor will cooperate (like crafting). Then comes D&D Online. A group centric game which for some reason people put huge unrealistic expected subscriber numbers on. Why didn't it generate the numbers? Simple, group mechanics require coordination out of game to experience properly in game. With your gaming population spread across time zones and such that coordination breaks down over time; usually not a long time. This title probably would have excelled with a Guild Wars model where the players could take NPCs along. Then comes along LOTRO, another game of great expectations hit by implementation and perceived need to group to trudge through higher levels (mostly unfounded but still it was a very pretty game that just felt empty - turbine's problem with having buildings you have to zone in breaks immersion and combined with walking dead human npcs doesn't help)
WOW's churn numbers are probably greater than most of the top twenty game's current playing population. But why? Simple, you can log in and accomplish something in a short time without ever having to wait for others. Friends can pop in for brief periods and play along, you can pick up with others as you go, but for the most part you don't have to rely on others to enjoy the bulk of the content.
There is also the major fact that none of the wow-killers has lived up to their hype or haven't released. Every time one of these games comes along and fails the blame game starts but always ignores the fact. The game isn't polished, the game is bug laden, the game requires a lot of grouping, or the game's hardware requirements are too high for the real MMORPG desiring player base.
WOW is only going to lose a large number of people to the next Blizzard game. Blizzard set a very high standard and continues to keep their own game at that level. This provides enough satisfaction and enjoyment for many people. Why should the majority of them even care what else comes out?
Too me it seems too many developers are actively relying on dissatisfied WOW players to swell their subscription numbers. If your looking for people who don't like such a successful and executed game just what in the hell are you aiming for?
Oh well, WOW will persist for years because Blizzard has learned that you cater to the needs of the individual player and build up from there. You keep the individual happy and then provide then avenues for more fun with opportunities that reward grouping and playing with others. You never require that as the price of just playing.
Re: (Score:2)
You make a lot of good points. Early on, WoW suffered from a lot of these same faults, except in those days the competition was EverQuest, which sucked so much more that WoW was seen as a huge step up. Blizzard has learned a lot about what people want in the years since launch. The 40-man raid has given way to the 10-man and 5-man raid. They added battlegrounds with rewards on par with raiding, so you don't have to raid to get great loot. The crafting system, while it does in fact require some cooperation a
Re: (Score:2)
The 2.3 patch and the switch from client to server side targeting, along with the interaction with the global cooldown, has also had a crippling effect on melee classes, especially in PvP, which may cause some loss of customers.
Re:The MMORPG market SUCKS. (Score:4, Interesting)
I would argue Blizzard doesn't really innovate, but they take the best ideas, and continually refine the process. (i.e. Warcraft 3 took the best elements of RTS's and combined them.) And at the end of the day, that's what matters -- the basic gameplay. As a game programmer it is sad to see so many MMORPGs that can't even get that right. Diablo 2 and Wow aren't the prettiest games around, but the gameplay is addicting and "good enough." One can trace the evolution (not revolution) of their games and almost see the paradigm shifts in the industry with their game UI and design in their products.
> Why should the majority of them even care what else comes out?
Having gamed since the early 80's, I sadly have to agree. Because as bad as Wow is, everything else sucks worse, and I don't see anyone raising up meet that challenge of getting past that hurdle anytime soon. I used to thank Sony for Everquest -- "How NOT to design a game."
The _real_ innovation in MMORPGs these days is the UI -- how accessible is your game to players (even to people who have NEVER gamed -- we still have a LONG ways to go.) Blizzard has a history of polishing their game, streamlining the UI. i.e. no click-and-drag when a single click will toggle picking up/dropping an item, right-click for the default action, etc. The latest patch 2.3 _finally_ organized Alchemy recipes. It is not much, but the little refinements here and there, add up to a more intuitive, and logical whole. And I think that is one of the reasons wow will continue to be around. Not because it is great, but because everyone else has this tremendous bar to overcome.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Even the new 2.3 patch - which is quite nice in general - seems quite broken in the "facilitate grouping" part. For a specific example - the level requirements for the instances were made more narrow. WHY?? I had a class-specific quest to do at the Sunken Temple, but due to a simple, unneccesary restriction I cannot a) use the LookingForGroup interface to find people for this instance, and b) use summoning stone for this instance.... does it really
Re: (Score:2)
Disclaimer: If you check my post history, it's obvious that I am an avid EvE Online player, and even maybe fanboi.
Having said that, to be honest there are some things that EvE really, really does wrong. The 4 year paid beta test is one of them, ISK farmers are another (though that's not specific to any one MMO). Another common complaint is that many EvE players have said they tried out the game and found it wholly unapproachable
It's *Wrath* of the Lich King (Score:2)
The view from the top is great... (Score:2)
I've been playing WoW since beta (blah, blah), but I predict that in a few years we'll look back on the announcement of the forthcoming expansion as the peak in the life of WoW.
Note that in the past they announced subscriber numbers in even millions but now we have this 9.3 number. What's gone wrong that they didn't hit 10 millio
Impressive! (Score:4, Funny)
Considereing they spent 100 Million $ building it (Score:2)
Resist pushy releasing, playtest, build for mid-range machines, playtest, see that the game is fun after 30
Re: (Score:2)
Re:9.3 what? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:9.3 what? (Score:4, Informative)
It's the number of active accounts.
Direct from the site:
World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards. Subscribers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules.
But it won't stop people from trying to dump on the leader. What's really pathetic are the people talking about how their fantasy MMORPG is sooo much better than WoW, despite the numbers clearly proving it isn't.
Parent
Re:9.3 what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:9.3 what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why aren't you making this argument every time that someone "dumps" on Windows, WalMart, Coors Lite, Britney Spears, McDonalds or a Chevy Cobalt?
Despite anything you might think anyone's favorite MMORPG or whatever is based on their opinion. Can someone come up to me and say that WoW is the best and I can say EQ2 is the best and both of us still be right? Absolutely. We choose what's right for ourselves in any particular place and time. Media like games, books and movies cater to target crowds. Maybe I'm just happier with EQ2's vision of the Drow? I don't know.
By the way.... 50,000,000 Elvis fans are wrong... at least for my tastes.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wouldn't be as popular today but deserves respect for what it did in it's day because everyone's standing on the shoulders of giants.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to string this on because I really find your "point" not only to be pointless but also incorrect...
If you wanted something valid when making a real comparison of MMORPGs you'd have to find players that played each game for a significant period of time and at that point find out who's still playing what or who prefer what game if they're not playing either anymore.
Do you know how many people play
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not when "better" is entirely subjective, there isn't. The higher subscriber numbers of WoW is proof that WoW is more popular (an objective standard), but say nothing whatsoever about the subjective nature of quality, either independently or relative to any other game. By your logic, the burgers from the stand down the street can only ever be "slightly better" than a Big Mac.
Not that you don't have a point abo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This portion makes up a huge amount of the "subscribers" and they generate a lot less income. WoW is indeed making ooodles of money but nothing like the equivalent of 9 million normal subscribers.
Re: (Score:2)
It's okay to dump on the leaders. Sometimes there's good reason, and sometimes they will be forced to improve.
(For the record, I'm a WoW player, and while I do have fun, there are elements I find weak or entirely missing. An example is the trade-off made that allows all players to complete important quests, but
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know if you've ever logged onto a new WoW server the day it goes online, but people race to be the first to level 20, level 30, and so on. They want to be the first on that server to down Ragnaros (well, okay, honestly, I'm not sure they even bother with that any more...), or the first player in the Outlands, or whatever goal they set for them
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Did you not see this at the end?
"The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards. Subscribers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules."
So if your account expired or was cancelled, it is not counted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
As the owner of several Macs over the past 8 years, I truly appreciate their in-house mac dev team.
Blizzard's simultaneous Mac/Win releases FTW (Score:2)
Either way though, I'm really glad that Blizzard has,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)