Is someone that just chats in game a real player?

"how do dck?
What am i supposed to do?
what is this game about?"

The graph should only show players that have LEFT the training sector :p

There is a difference imo between VO and other rpg games (at least the ones that I've played, Vendetta being the only one I've spent more than 6 months playing) in that there is nothing in place outside the training sector that limits the mobility of players nor have safe guards either prohibiting pvp combat or providing equal opportunity access to equipment. VO seems to me like it is somewhere in between a linear game (early on) and a Halo style shooter. There is no continuous story line that rationalizes the players work towards higher levels. Within a week or two of actual work a new player can reach sufficient levels (and credits) that the whole mission system becomes a novelty.

If I were an abusive person towards my wife or hypothetical children, and charges or restraining orders were filed, or maybe I had a conviction as a drug dealer (better wages working for McDonald's or so I hear) I would not have been able to waltz my happy butt into Cabella's over the last weekend to pick up my shiny new Chiappa Rhino (that my wife decided was hers). IMO, standing should only have 2 affects for players. 1) preferred customer / vendor and 2) I trust this guy with guns. I don't think it should have any influence on imposing penalties for violent crime in VO. So I don't think standing is necessarily an arbitrary thing. Of course, I also don't like the way trade is the primary means of acquiring standing in the game. Traders are really a dime a dozen. There is no reason they should get preferential treatment.

Again. New players are given beginner level equipment and left to swim or sink in the sea of players who have greater visibility in game (plugins), greater familiarity with the mechanics (ability to manipulate a situation), and substantially better ships and equipment. Then add the difference in experience / skill of piloting into the mix and you have every new player marked as an easy kill.

10,000 new users sounds great, and really is impressive. What is the retention rate? How long are new players trying the game before deciding it's not for them? Just a 1% retention would give us 100 new players per month which over time should result in a much larger active player base. I do believe the active player base is larger than it was a few years ago, but not by much.

For myself, if I'm playing some hack and slash game, I don't mind a linear progression as the monsters I'm facing gradually increase in difficulty as my levels increase. I see Vendetta as more of a fps game with a partial economy. And as such, I maintain that if I can afford an XC, my lack of mining 4 should not prohibit me from buying one, while my neutral standing with Serco means that I cannot buy the SVG because I would expect a nation or faction to require a certain level of trust before allowing the sale of weapons and combat ships.

In Vendetta meeting a hostile player for someone new is equivalent to being thrown into a boss fight while the new player is sitting on the toilet with their pants around their ankles taking a crap. I don't think a new player should have any reason to expect that they can win against a more experienced player. I do think that they should have the same visibility and access to equipment that isn't going to give them no chance at all.

First off:
"If I were an abusive person towards my wife or hypothetical children, and charges or restraining orders were filed, or maybe I had a conviction as a drug dealer (better wages working for McDonald's or so I hear) I would not have been able to waltz my happy butt into Cabella's over the last weekend to pick up my shiny new Chiappa Rhino (that my wife decided was hers)."

What the F did I just read? How does this relate at all to the topic at hand.

Secondly, why do we suddenly feel entitled to know the inner workings/valuable information for a private business? Why does the retention rate matter to you? The fact that Inc is kind enough to release numbers of any variety is special and should be appreciated. 10,000 new players regardless of the retention rate is great for a game of this caliber.

1) a real life example of how standing isn't arbitrary. My reputation or lack there of allowed me to purchase a tool that I desired that is heavily regulated.

2) The retention rate matters to me in that it is the whole point of the comments I have made in this thread. It is my opinion that the license system is part of the reason that the retention rate is not higher. I do not expect Incarnate to respond in any way to my question, nor am I actually curious for the details. The questioned merely serves as a springboard to general observations that can be made by having actively played the game.

I am challenging the assumption of what kind of experience new players are looking for when they choose to try this game. I may be completely incorrect in my beliefs and assumptions and that is perfectly ok. What is not ok imo is to accept the status quo unquestioningly.

I'm really not interested in springboarding into a discussion of what's wrong with the game. A lot of stuff is wrong with the game. Like I wrote the other day:

As always, we have a great deal of work to do, and not enough time/labor to do it.

We don't lack for awareness of what's wrong. We also have graphs and metrics to show us where/when we're losing people.

I was just answering someone's question about the size of the player base. And yes, our online counts are much higher than they've been in years, and consistently higher than they've ever been. I expect to start breaking our own records in general and not have to qualify these statements in the near future.

So, yes, a lot is flawed. Yes, we're getting some new people. Yes, people are playing. Yes, there are more people in the galaxy than you think and/or believe. Yes, we would do a lot better "if only" we fixed everything that was wrong.

And on that note, I'm going to go back to trying to my stupid, mission-critical project.

things will be a lot better for it when we're done, but if we do it all right.. no one will be able to tell we did anything

A more apt description of 80% of VO's progress in the last decade has ne'er been written.

Way to troll there, captain positivity.

Anyway, yes, ironically.. the majority of work on this type of game is not visible to the end user. But that's hardly unique to us. It's pretty common in games in general, and especially complex online titles.

When forced to choose between the work that makes neat features, and the work that makes everything not go offline, which one would you pick?

Anyway, I'm locking this thread as it is becoming decreasingly awesome.