World of Warcraft Hits 9.3 Million Players
Posted by
Zonk
on Thursday November 15, @03:17PM
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."
World of Warcraft Hits 9.3 Million Players
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 117 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Frightening (Score:4, Funny)
It's the biggest botnet in the world.
Re:That would be true... (Score:4, 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...
And yet... (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://www.mangaschool.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 03 2006, @07:51AM)
Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who are these people? (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://www.wonderwedge.org/)
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.
Market research does pay (Score:1)
Very important milestone (Score:4, Interesting)
*ahem...*
Long Wait? (Score:1)
The MMORPG market SUCKS. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
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: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.
It's *Wrath* of the Lich King (Score:2)
Just think, 9.3 million possible (Score:1)
(http://www.users.qwest.net/~waffleck-asch/ | Last Journal: Wednesday November 07, @04:46PM)
But, the big question is, if I need 1000 gold to buy 96 slots for the guild bank, how many of those 9.3 million accounts are on my server and aren't gold farmers who will try to join so they can siphon gold out of the guild?
And how many will be online when I am?
And will they all help me in my mythical quest for coffee, nuts, and Foamy the Squirrel?
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 million? After all, they've been continuously releasing the game into new markets over the last few years, so there has been a constant source of new players to help inflate the subscriber numbers.
WoW in the U.S. has been in decline for several months now. While there are many die-hard players who have been there for three years or more and will likely be playing WoW five years from now, there are also many many player who have gotten bored and have either moved on, or are now ready for a "next big thing" to come along at which point they'll jump so fast it will make Blizzards' heads spin.
There is an enormous potential opening in the market resulting from Blizzard's stumble. The window will likely last a year or two until Blizzard realizes they're in trouble and does something about it. It will be interesting to see if any of next year's big challengers is able to capitalize on this. Games like Age of Conan or Warhammer have a big opportunity, but will they be able to take advantage of it?
One of the biggest problems with new games (Lord of the Rings Online is a perfect example) is that in many cases they copy so much from WoW as to be almost indistinguishable from it. Someone who has gotten tired of WoW is unlikely to be inspired by a poor clone of it.
Blizzard has all the talent required to get back on track, but I think a significant shakeup in their design group will be needed. They can't just keep pushing another identical 10-level grind + new endgame raiding content on people every 18 months and expect them not to notice that it's just the same thing all over again.
The announcement of the new forthcoming expansion turned a lot of people off as simply being more level and gear inflation that will invalidate everything they've accomplished so far and make them go through the whole process again. Especially those people who were brought into gaming for the first time by WoW.
More of the same is no longer a recipe for success, and the new subscriber numbers suggest that the engines on the high-flying Blizzard ship have flamed out. Whether they can recognize this and get themselves restarted by coming up with something NEW will have to be seen.
If there's one thing that WoW suffers from it's the word "static". Everything is fixed, very little is dynamic. Dungeons are exactly the same every time you run them, and you need a fixed number of people and skills to beat them. Imagine if the dungeon layouts were randomly generated each time and the monsters and rewards automatically scaled to the number of people in the party and their abilities? In my opinion, it's only through major changes like this that Blizzard has any hope of returning to a growing subscriber base.
G.
Impressive! (Score:4, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
WoW will hit 10 Million (Score:1)
9.3 million players... (Score:1)
Blizzard is giving away WoW in Asia. (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Thursday June 29 2006, @07:39AM)
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 seconds the latest, playtest, build it so that a total newbie can understand the game in 5 minutes flat, build top-notch art for the low end tech-specs, playtest, playtest and don't forget to playtest. If all publisheres followed these simple rules we'd have much more games that would be as much fun as WoW or other Blizzard stuff.
Re:9.3 what? (Score:2)
Re:9.3 what? (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re:9.3 what? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:OT: L:inux (Score:2, Informative)
As the owner of several Macs over the past 8 years, I truly appreciate their in-house mac dev team.
Re:OT: L:inux (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Saturday March 03 2007, @04:33AM)
Re:9.3 what? (Score:1)
For example, even if you attribute fully 50% of their sales revenue to ongoing WoW subscriptions only (no other games, no initial cost of expansions, no new purchase sales, etc), that's only $17 per subscriber per quarter, or $5.65 a month. So most of those subscriptions are outside the US, and with terms netting much less $ for Vivendi than the US subscriptions. When you start thinking about subscriptions as, say, $1/month, it's not hard to see how they could accumulate them to inflate their subscription numbers by just lowering the price.
A meaning number would be revenue from ongoing WoW subscriptions compared to previous quarters. Good luck getting them to show you that downward trend, though.
Re:OT: L:inux (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Saturday March 03 2007, @04:33AM)
Re:OT: L:inux (Score:2)
Re:OT: L:inux (Score:1)