Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games)

5.5 Million WoW Players, Lunar Festival 52

Posted by Zonk from the that's-a-lot-of-orc-killing-europeans dept.
Gamasutra reports that World of Warcraft has hit another milestone in subscribers, with One Million European players and 5.5 Million players worldwide. From the article: "The figure of 1 million customers is more than four times the previously estimated size of the entire European MMORPG market. According to data from Media Control and GFK panels, plus internal studies and account data from Blizzard itself, the company is also claiming that World of WarCraft was the best selling full price PC game in Europe last year." All those players will have a new world event to look forward to at the end of the month, as RPG Vault gives a preview on the Lunar Festival due to be released on January 27th.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

5.5 Million WoW Players, Lunar Festival More

5.5 Million WoW Players, Lunar Festival

Comments Filter:

  • Number of unsubscribers? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bradbeattie ( 908320 ) <bradbeattie&alumni,uwaterloo,ca> on Thursday January 19, 2006 @11:50PM (#14516370) Homepage Journal
    I'd be interested in seeing statistics on the number of people that have unsubscribed from WoW as well. I doubt Blizzard would be willing to share that information, but it would certainly satisfy my statistical curiosities.
    • Well, maybe 5.5 millions "subscribers" is bullshit and is really in fact the number of units sold, therefore including both subscriptions and un-subscriptions.

      As far as MMORPG usage statistics go, I don't really see why people care about them. We have zero proof the companies are showing up the real figures.
      • either way, 5.5 Million copys sold is still a huge aceivment for MMO games... I suspect that EA can say the same thing about UO, but thats only because they have released an update to purchase every year, and sometimes twice yearly.

        WoW probably stil has the biggest currently running subscriptions for a Western (non-asian) MMO.
        • MMORPGCHART.COM [mmorpgchart.com] Hasn't updated since last year sometime (when WOW had half the current numbers, but you can already see where it was going from the 120,000+ [mmorpgchart.com] page. Lineage (which had been the most at one time) capped out at around 3.25 million players.
      • Actually, 5.5 million subscriptions is an accurate representation of the number of current subscribers.

        Blizzard has said so in their previous press releases.

         
      • From http://www.blizzard.com/press/060119.shtml [blizzard.com]

        World of Warcraft's Customer Definition
        World of Warcraft customers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or purchased a prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the installation box bundled with one free month access. Internet Game Room players that have accessed the game over the last seven days are also counted as customers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expire

    • I know I've stopped playing. Haven't unsubscribed, but that's only because I'd purchased a 6 month chunk of time. I just can't handle the constant lag, wait times and stupid server-side crap that has become integral to the WoW experience.

      Blizzard can't handle the success it's won. I hope Hero's Journey [play.net] doesn't suck.

  • Omen the Chinese New Year Monster? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by biocute ( 936687 ) on Thursday January 19, 2006 @11:54PM (#14516400)
    Omen sounds like the Chinese New Year Monster which comes out every year on new year's eve to terrorize villages, who would have to set off firecrackers to scare the monster away.

    Chinese New Year is on 29 Jan this year by the way.

  • Good God that's alot of money! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ZephyrXero ( 750822 ) <zephyrxero AT yahoo DOT com> on Friday January 20, 2006 @12:10AM (#14516491) Homepage Journal
    It's kinda funny that Vivendi-Universal is doing so poorly with that kind of userbase on one of the products they publish...perhaps they aren't getting a very big cut of the service profits or maybe none at all? If so...good for you Blizzard ;D

    5.5 million users * between 12.99-14.99 per month * 12 months = A shit-ton of money! And that's not even counting the box cost... sure there are development and maintenance costs...but I'm sure they don't even compare... WOW indeed.
    • "5.5 million users * between 12.99-14.99 per month * 12 months = A shit-ton of money!"

      Most users may buy it just for the free month or so that they can get, then quit playing.
      I doubt blizzard is counting how many stop playing, they are probably going off accounts created.
      Still that is a freakin lot of money.
      • Agreed, but if we assume that there are at least 1 million still actively subscribing (a modest estimate) that's still 180 million per year. For a single game? That's astounding! Bear in mind that a fair chunk of that probably goes into maintenance, bandwidth, patching, admins, etc. They're probably left with a fair chunk of profit though. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they were already beginning development on WoW2, much like Valve and HL3 (unannounced, but who are we kidding).
    • Blizzard is not simply any given studio that has negotiated a publishing agreement with Vivendi. They are a wholly owned subsidiary of Vivendi Universal Games, much like Bungie and Rare are.

      In fact, when VUG was being shopped around, Blizzard was the 'crown jewel' in their portfolio of studios and assets. Consider the amount of fans and the loyal following that Blizzard has, and you'll realize why VUG was trying to get top dollar - around a billion for the division, with Blizzard being one of the few stan

    • 5.5e6 * (12.99+14.99)/2 * 12 = 923.34 million dollars (or 1 shit-ton dollars)
      I bet they're laughing all the way to the bank, which according to my calculations is approximately 0.00000000327 shit-ton meters from their headquarters office.
      • Two points:

        1. This doesn't include the cost of the box. A $50 boxed game does make at least a modest profit at the store, so they gained a bit of money from that.
        2. The 5.5 million figure is worldwide, including places like China. The Chinese players do not (and could not) pay $13-15 per month as we do here in the U.S.

        And, for the nay-sayers here, Blizzard claims those 5.5 million subscribers are current subscribers, not ones that have played and already canceled their account. So, there's probably a goo

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday January 20, 2006 @12:31AM (#14516595)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Play Vanguard. You can be as masochistic there as you want. You just don't get to have the sadistic glee of seeing others suffer with you just because they have no choice of playing a game that better suits their own play style. I played old school UO for years and old school EQ for a while, and I'm glad that WoW gives me the option to be a (little, virtual) hero on a mere two hours a night a couple of times weekly instead of a sheep to be slaughtered by the self-annointed elite. (Granted, after I hit s
      • It's an interesting balance that they need to create in order to make the game as addictive as possible. If rewards (like XP) are too difficult to get, people get frustrated and quit. If rewards are to easy to get, there's no sense of worth and the fan base has no sense of attachment. I think Blizzard's balanced between those two with calculated skill. It took a fair amount of effort for me to quit.
    • If you don't like MMO's designed for people who aren't losers with nothing better to do that play MMO's 40+ hours a week, play games like UO and FFXI, and leave WoW to people who just want to game a little and spend the rest of their lives doing something worthwhile.

    • Re:Slightly bothered by this (Score:4, Interesting)

      by bradbeattie ( 908320 ) <bradbeattie&alumni,uwaterloo,ca> on Friday January 20, 2006 @01:12AM (#14516799) Homepage Journal
      That's why I'd like Blizzard to make a few "hardcore" servers. If you die, you're dead. Make a new character. Instead of seeing about half of the population at level 60, we'd see fewer and fewer high level characters. Travelling alone or unprepared would be death. Just one or two servers like that. Please?
      • That's why I'd like Blizzard to make a few "hardcore" servers. If you die, you're dead. Make a new character. Instead of seeing about half of the population at level 60, we'd see fewer and fewer high level characters. Travelling alone or unprepared would be death. Just one or two servers like that. Please?

        That is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. Forget PVP on a server like that - you just know that a group of asshats would team up to prevent any progress at all. And forget the challenge of instance
        • Hey, I'm not suggesting that it'd be for everyone, but I think some players would be interested. Retired 60 NE Holy/Disc Priest.
        • A good player still takes at least 4-5 days of playtime (or more) to hit level 60.

          On a PvE server, maybe. On PvP servers, most players generally spend weeks (or even months if you play 'casually') just getting through levels 20-40. I hit level 60 in about 20 days playtime on my first character on a PvE server, on a PvP server? I still haven't broken level 30 yet and I'm nearing the 15 day playtime cause I get randomly interrupted/ambushed/ganked/corpse camped in contested territories (why is the Horde Sham

        • Some people actually do like a real challenge and taking real risk.

          How can you challenge yourselve if there is no risk?

          Of course the real problem with MMORPG games is that it is often no fun to be a low level character as you don't want to repeat the tutorial level. If I have to go the Trial Isle of EQ2 once more I am going to scream!

          But imagine a game that has lots and lots of content at low level. Where if you have to start over you do not have to redo the same quest you already did a 100 times but can

      • Do you know what certain summonings and encounter in WoW will require a death of a player?

        i.e Summoning a Doomguard will require one of the summoning players to be sacrificed.

      • Totally Impractical. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Shivetya ( 243324 )
        Until a guarantee can be made that technical issues beyond the player's control are fully addressed this type of scenario isn't going to fly.

        Now how it could be done and impart some of the same "thrill" and "consequence" is to have rules where characters don't start off as lower level but midway through the game progression. Limit the number of characters that the account can use during a set period, perhaps 30 days.

        This would reduce the investment but not to the point of making it meaningless. The reason
      • I think they should have a special competition - a hardcore permadeath PVP server, open for one week. Whoever has managed to get the highest level at the end of this time wins. They don't even have to be still alive, just whatever the best was in that time. This would be a lot of fun!

        And to make it even more fun, you could allow attacks on your own faction as well. ;-)
      • Heh. You know, just last week I was running around with my level 52 priest, and there was the most insane server lag spike I'd ever seen. I suddenly died when the lag cleared, to an enemy I never even got a chance to SEE.

        Hardcore servers don't work well in a game where things like that can happen.
      • The high end content in WoW requires a massive amount of teamwork, strategy, and most of all, practice, to conquer. I don't know how a "hardcore" server like the one you proposed would work in this context. There are certain fights that guarantee at least a few fatalities during the course of the battle. Not to mention the amount of "wipes" that happen when groups are experiencing a battle for the first time. Also, griefers pulling trains of mobs to you or getting disconnected in the middle of a fight w
    • Your comments really disturb me, Falcon. I'm trying to understand what exactly it is you want. Do you want to spend hours, day-in and day-out, just to have better gear than everyone else in a virtual world? What's wrong with not having to spend months to get just one item? You really should enjoy games for their own merits instead of how far you can distance yourself from other players.
    • The other big MMO company SOE has seen the light and dumbed down both SWG and EQ2. SWG used to have decay when you died wich could be a nuisance since repair was risky. Off course a player run economy meant that none of your items were irreplacable. Just expensive.

      EQ2 had only the punishement of having to go get your spirit shard while suffering reduced stats. The XP debt was no problem, fighting your way back to your spirit usually took care of it. There is no decay or other penalty, now even the shard ha

    • These games aren't being dumbed down. They are becoming more accessible to a greater number of people. WOW succeeds because more people can do well in the game. Regardless of what game you play you will always find "asshats" and the like. UO not easy? Ah, come on now. The only time it wasn't easy was when it was first released and even then the biggest impediment to playing the game was the stability of the servers. There were asshats galore the first year and still are.

      There is nothing wrong with ga

    • Re:Slightly bothered by this (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      One of the reasons I loved UO and play FFXI now is because its NOT easy, its infact somewhat hard to play.

      I never played UO, but I have played both FFXI and WoW. WoW is much harder to play well than FFXI. FFXI is easy. You mindlessly use the same three abilities. (Basically, FFXI is like WoW endgame all the time - mindnumbingly easy, and mindnumbingly boring. Except unlike WoW, there's no need for Teamspeak, because it's easy.)

      WoW did a lot to make MMO's accessable to the masses, but Im starting to won
    • Maybe Im just too oldschool I guess, I miss the days of when you died it really ment you where dead, your body was looted and you started from scratch.

      Old school hardcode people liked that, yes - and they complain constantly about WoW. They still play, though. Do you complain that everyone has the same weapons/levels in Counterstrike or Warcraft 3?

      Other people, like myself, never played any of the other MMORPGs precisely because they were so hardcore. I didn't want to be uber, I just wanted to have a

    • One of the reasons I loved UO and play FFXI now is because its NOT easy, its infact somewhat hard to play. WoW though I just jumped in and without much effort make a lot of gold and have really nice equips to the point there is really nothing seperating me from the rest of the 5 mil.

      You are a bit confused. A game being *complicated* to play -- or, better phrased, a game where ability to think confers in-game advantages -- is one thing. A game where it's hard to gain levels/gear/gold is quite another thing.

      Y
    • World of Warcraft is too easy?
      • Do you have a rank 14 character?
        Achieving this requires like 12+ hours of PvPing each day, for 3 months or so, without any breaks. (For those who don't know, the ranking system in WoW is relative - at the last few ranks, if you stop PvPing for a week, other people will overtake you and you'll have to put in lots of work to get back ahead).
      • Do you have a character with full epics?
        If you were in one of the first raid groups on your server, this will take maybe 4-6 months. If you j
  • Blizzard always refers to "X Million Players". In reality, they count players as box sales and users in China/Korea/etc who used game pubs and log in once (this is a LOT). The number people are truly interested in are "Subscribers", which would be people actively playing the game. Of course that number is no where near as impressive as the number of people who have ever tried it so they put their PR spin on it and dub it "X Number of Players". Really irks me.
  • Maybe I'm just to oldschool...

    Not to totally flame you, but maybe you're just elitist?

    For a hardcore, 6-hour-a-day player, yeah, maybe WoW is too "easymode".
    But you don't think they got to 5.5 million players because of the hardcore population, do you?
    I'd guess that something like 80%+ of the players are CASUAL, an-hour-or-two after work players, for whom the game is evidently fun and challenging (but not too challenging).

    The problem with games designed for the l33t is that only the l33t will play them, and
    • I can just see the headlines the next day:

      "Local feral druid murdered over inability to heal group"
    • Considering in the higher end instances you can expect a number of player deaths during each run, I think perma-death would make them virtually impossible.
      It is possible to have no deaths, but having good gear helps a lot. Those first runs with mostly green gear?
      I would sure hate to be a healer on those raids.
      I think if they went with a hardcore server they would have to adjust the raids and probably some of the quests.
  • i wonder how long its going to take for the EU or the UN to start asking for a WOW tax considering that wow now has more subscribers then finland has people. i can see the socialists in norway now, if you can afford to pay a monthly fee to play a game why not take a third of that to make the real world better.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Close