concurrent player ratio

A bit of concern on the 50,000 accounts to 10,000 concurrent players ratio - how are you going to ensure the first weeks/months of the game are not simply people stuck in queue; and how does this work given the prime time idea for scheduled events?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Atama

Noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

People are not going to go nuts every 3 months and flood the servers for new content. Not gonna happen. They are not going to be releasing enough game-changing content to draw that much attention. It's not like these are major expansions that will bring people in droves. They won't be releasing The Burning Crusade every 3 months.

While true, it is likely that Ashes will end up having to do things more like ESO. There will need to be some fairly major DLC added to the game, because the developers have said they will raise the level cap.

This means new abilities, spells, gear, monsters, dungeons, raids, potentially even a new tier of node progress. That is a fairly major DLC, and I absolutely can see people coming to the game in very large numbers for it.

Sure, but that likely won’t happen that often. We’ll see temporary spikes during those events I’m sure but they wouldn’t last long.

Noaani

Atama wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

People are not going to go nuts every 3 months and flood the servers for new content. Not gonna happen. They are not going to be releasing enough game-changing content to draw that much attention. It's not like these are major expansions that will bring people in droves. They won't be releasing The Burning Crusade every 3 months.

While true, it is likely that Ashes will end up having to do things more like ESO. There will need to be some fairly major DLC added to the game, because the developers have said they will raise the level cap.

This means new abilities, spells, gear, monsters, dungeons, raids, potentially even a new tier of node progress. That is a fairly major DLC, and I absolutely can see people coming to the game in very large numbers for it.

Sure, but that likely won’t happen that often. We’ll see temporary spikes during those events I’m sure but they wouldn’t last long.

Indeed, we'll see fairly large DLC - and thus player spikes - yearly imo, and smaller DLC - and thus smaller player spikes - quarterly.

Thing is, if those quarterly smaller DLC happen to fall at a time when other MMO's aren't really doing much, the spikes they cause have the potential to be unpredictably large. This is why I think having a system built in to teh game to deal with these spikes when they happen would be a very good idea for this game.

daveywavey

Noaani wrote: »

What I'd like to see for the games initial launch is for them to only offer 6 month subscriptions for the first 3 months, then add the three month subscription, then the 1 month subscription.

At least that way you are pricing the tourists out of clogging up the initial launch of the game. As long as it is clear at the games launch exactly what is happening, I think you would find more people ok with the idea than against it.

Why would they want to price out any of their customers?

Noaani

daveywavey wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

What I'd like to see for the games initial launch is for them to only offer 6 month subscriptions for the first 3 months, then add the three month subscription, then the 1 month subscription.

At least that way you are pricing the tourists out of clogging up the initial launch of the game. As long as it is clear at the games launch exactly what is happening, I think you would find more people ok with the idea than against it.

Why would they want to price out any of their customers?

It would lower the queues on release day.

The theory would be that people want to try out the game, but may not be willing to spend more than one months subscription to do so. Rather than them doing that in the first month when they would be clogging up the servers, causing queues that will turn people away from the game (even if only for a few months), you instead get these people to try out the game a little bit later on.

The key to it would be to communicate well exactly when each subscription type would be available well in advance - it would need to be announced at the same time as the games official launch date is announced.

maouw

You know, you might be on to something Noaani, raising the launch price to stagger the incoming population.

It's risky though - could backfire hard.

McMackMuck

I think we need to be clear that if the subscription is for a month minimum then the launch queues, to whatever extent, will drop off in steps every month as players try to make the most of what they have paid for.
This will be different than any existing statistics for box fee or F2P games.
F2P you can quit day one.
Box fee you have no time/money constraint, just your own personal drive to give it a go when it suits you. Expansions are optional extras.
.
P2P monthly subscription is about commitment, if you're enjoying the experience you can go for a longer subscription period to save some money.

Noaani

maouw wrote: »

You know, you might be on to something Noaani, raising the launch price to stagger the incoming population.

It's risky though - could backfire hard.

I fully agree, it could.

To me, the key is in communication. Announce what subscriptions will be available on what date, and stick to it no matter what happens.

There may need to be something done in regards to accounts with supporter pack subscriptions, but that is the only real "issue" I can see.

maouw

@Noaani
I can see two more issues:

this is an MMO, so it isn't healthy to split the community on launch day (everyone feels awkward about people who get head starts) whereas for single player games I'm comfortable to wait a bit after release.
people who paid big bucks for essentially VIP access will also have VIP expectations - and I'd guess even these people will hit a queue (albeit a shorter one)

Noaani

maouw wrote: »

Noaani
I can see two more issues:
this is an MMO, so it isn't healthy to split the community on launch day (everyone feels awkward about people who get head starts) whereas for single player games I'm comfortable to wait a bit after release.

people who paid big bucks for essentially VIP access will also have VIP expectations - and I'd guess even these people will hit a queue (albeit a shorter one)

I did think about these.

To the first point, my thoughts are that if a player isn't starting the game on launch say, that is their choice. They cant blame anyone for that other than themselves.

Obviously they will try, but with some luck there will be people such as myself pointing out to then that it is their decision, and no one else's.

To the second point, people who pay (conjecture) $75 for 6 months access should expect nothing more than 6 months access. The closest thing to "VIP" treatment they should get is a slight discount on their subscription in comparison to what they would pay if they paid monthly.

Dargron

vmangman wrote: »

Launch will be crazy and many people will be stuck in a queue for a long time. That is to be expected with MMOs as hyped as AoC. There is really nothing the developers can do about it since layering or phasing would not really work in AoC (due to the node system).

There might still be possibilities available to the developers.

They have already implemented one - giving a number of players a 2 day head start. After two solid days of playing, many of the head-start crew will be looking for a break and more than happy to use their advantage to avoid the chaos of the first several hours of official launch.

Additionally, while it's true that the nature of the Ashes node system should prevent layering or phasing over the majority of the map, the developers might however have the option to implement such mechanics within the starting zones.

Looking at the Vera map, there are 4 initial gateways, each of which split into 2 paths that presumably lead to a starting hub for each of the 8 races. I would speculate that the gates, starting hubs, and most of the land between will form a zone for new players to learn the game, that is independent from the node system. It might be possible for the developers to implement layering or phasing in these specific critical mass areas, without impacting on the development of the rest of Vera.

unknownsystemerror

Everyone forgets the Tulnar. There are 5 initial spawn points for new characters.
Tulnar starting area

Points of interest will exist that represent Tulnar npc structures. In the similar fashion that the starting areas around divine gateways will include expeditionary npc settlements not tied to the node structures but serve as initial quest origination points.[22] – Steven Sharif

Tulnar have a starting area that does not involve a divine gateway.[23]

Points of interest exist that represent Tulnar NPC structures in a similar fashion to the starting areas around divine gateways.[22]
Tulnar have the same option of starting at any of the divine gateways as other races.[24]
Tulnar have the same option of starting at any of the divine gateways. Their civilization, though within the underrealm, has also begun to explore the surface.[24] – Steven Sharif

Unlike the other races, the Tulnar won’t be returning to Verra, instead they will be returning to the surface from the Underrealm for the first time in generations.[5]

The Underrealm itself does not have a divine gateway.[25]

Child Item