Forums » Suggestions
Provide accurate player counts
Pretty self-explanatory, Until Feb 2006 should work.
Nothing about this is self-explanatory. I assume you mean like.. on the Active Players graph, or something, and not "in a sector" or some other use case.
- Player counts were removed from Players Online at request of the community. Feel free to dredge up the old Suggestions post. We did get a lot of negativity about our online counts, from newer people, so I don't see why it would be restored.
- "Until Feb 2006" Wat? You want our counts before 2006? Or since 2006? Or "like we did in 2006"?
Anyway, based on my interpretation of your four-word "suggestion": No.
- Player counts were removed from Players Online at request of the community. Feel free to dredge up the old Suggestions post. We did get a lot of negativity about our online counts, from newer people, so I don't see why it would be restored.
- "Until Feb 2006" Wat? You want our counts before 2006? Or since 2006? Or "like we did in 2006"?
Anyway, based on my interpretation of your four-word "suggestion": No.
it would be nice to get a bit more info on the active players section, such as specific numbers. Its slightly hard to read the graph because all three nationalities are merged together...
I would like this, mainly as a representative of how well the game is doing and when the best times to log in are.
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/active
Feb 2006-Today(Which is as far back as the payment history goes up until today)
New people don't know much, the purpose would be to provide accurate data points for future use in suggestions.
That way we don't have to take your word for everything and we can see it for ourselves.
Feb 2006-Today(Which is as far back as the payment history goes up until today)
New people don't know much, the purpose would be to provide accurate data points for future use in suggestions.
That way we don't have to take your word for everything and we can see it for ourselves.
I have reviewed a couple threads (though not all) and the community consensus only seemed to involve removing the ability to see which specific players were online. I think that concern was valid.
However, you, incarnate, said specifically in one of the threads that the removal of the APL had very little to do with "hiding shrinking activity blah blah". Yet in only displaying relative numbers of the three nations with a masked scale you give the distinct impression that you are concerned about people finding out what the actual active player counts are.
The graph also appears to adjust it's scaling periodically. Honestly I can't see the point of doing this unless you were specifically trying to hide the times when online activity is at it's lowest. And many of us see it that way.
Knowing the total, online population is helpful because it serves as a guide for people to log in when player interaction is at its highest potential. I think most people who play an MMORPG would agree that they would prefer to play when this potential at its highest.
Instead, all we have now is this relative graph of nations at an unknown scale, to which people compare the ever growing emptiness of the universe. So people might log in when the graph appears to peak, only to find nobody online to interact with -- and then draw the conclusion that even at its peak VO has a super low population -- when in reality the peak they see might not be an actual peak because of a recent rescaling. Now it's entirely possible VO DOES have a super low population even at it's peak, but you can see how people can draw an inaccurate conclusion from the data you present us with.
I think the takeaway that being a little more transparent of active players would be more helpful.
Is there any good argument, other than "hiding shrinking player counts", to hide the graphs scale, and to rescale when numbers get very low (or very high)???
However, you, incarnate, said specifically in one of the threads that the removal of the APL had very little to do with "hiding shrinking activity blah blah". Yet in only displaying relative numbers of the three nations with a masked scale you give the distinct impression that you are concerned about people finding out what the actual active player counts are.
The graph also appears to adjust it's scaling periodically. Honestly I can't see the point of doing this unless you were specifically trying to hide the times when online activity is at it's lowest. And many of us see it that way.
Knowing the total, online population is helpful because it serves as a guide for people to log in when player interaction is at its highest potential. I think most people who play an MMORPG would agree that they would prefer to play when this potential at its highest.
Instead, all we have now is this relative graph of nations at an unknown scale, to which people compare the ever growing emptiness of the universe. So people might log in when the graph appears to peak, only to find nobody online to interact with -- and then draw the conclusion that even at its peak VO has a super low population -- when in reality the peak they see might not be an actual peak because of a recent rescaling. Now it's entirely possible VO DOES have a super low population even at it's peak, but you can see how people can draw an inaccurate conclusion from the data you present us with.
I think the takeaway that being a little more transparent of active players would be more helpful.
Is there any good argument, other than "hiding shrinking player counts", to hide the graphs scale, and to rescale when numbers get very low (or very high)???
based off anonymous information, VO gets a top payercount of about 500 people, a solid 100 are alts, potentially 50 are bots, and 50 more are drop outs.
Walrus2Human Translator 9000: <NarWalrusWarrior> I have absolutely no idea what I am talking about.
Greenwall:
1) Yes, removing the numbers had nothing to do with shrinking activity levels.
2) Removing it did have something to do with the player Suggestion request, that the disparity between our population and that of other major MMOs created a negative impression on new players. People would roll in, and see our numbers, and then leave without even playing. Again, this was a player-submitted idea, which I remember being well received by the community at the time, and I supported it. You can dig up the Suggestions thread if you want.
3) We fire the data into Graphite and tell it to remove the count. Otherwise, everything else about the graph is just what's output by Graphite. I'm not "auto-scaling" anything intentionally, it just does that.. to make the graph look pretty? I don't know.
Who cares, the point is just to show times of player density. Which already shows "what the best times to log in are".
4) I do provide both short (daily) and longer-term (weekly) graphs, which show the peaks on weekends versus weekdays, etc.
--
Here's the thing though.. whether I post numbers or not, people are going to believe or justify whatever they want. If I tell people we're peaking at some reasonably decent number of players, angsty pessimists will just claim I'm lying, or that they're all bots anyway and there's no people, or whatever the hell they want to.
We definitely have a lot more quiet, solo players, Android changed that. But if you actually want to do something to help, then perhaps host an Event? Those are pretty good at pulling people together. I've gotten better at pushing those out through various community channels.
I'm not returning the numbers to the graph at this time. I think the original Player suggestion reasoning still has merits. Until such a time as we're seeing a concurrency of a thousand or more, it isn't worth my posting numbers out there for the gaming press and every newbie to make comparisons. We don't need yet another reason for the Gaming Press or whomever to decide that we're irrelevant and unworthy of coverage.
That does not mean our activity is any worse than "it used to be, in the Goode Olde Dayse". But I do acknowledge that play-styles have shifted. Again.. doing what I can there to change some game mechanics to compensate, but it's a big project.
1) Yes, removing the numbers had nothing to do with shrinking activity levels.
2) Removing it did have something to do with the player Suggestion request, that the disparity between our population and that of other major MMOs created a negative impression on new players. People would roll in, and see our numbers, and then leave without even playing. Again, this was a player-submitted idea, which I remember being well received by the community at the time, and I supported it. You can dig up the Suggestions thread if you want.
3) We fire the data into Graphite and tell it to remove the count. Otherwise, everything else about the graph is just what's output by Graphite. I'm not "auto-scaling" anything intentionally, it just does that.. to make the graph look pretty? I don't know.
Who cares, the point is just to show times of player density. Which already shows "what the best times to log in are".
4) I do provide both short (daily) and longer-term (weekly) graphs, which show the peaks on weekends versus weekdays, etc.
--
Here's the thing though.. whether I post numbers or not, people are going to believe or justify whatever they want. If I tell people we're peaking at some reasonably decent number of players, angsty pessimists will just claim I'm lying, or that they're all bots anyway and there's no people, or whatever the hell they want to.
We definitely have a lot more quiet, solo players, Android changed that. But if you actually want to do something to help, then perhaps host an Event? Those are pretty good at pulling people together. I've gotten better at pushing those out through various community channels.
I'm not returning the numbers to the graph at this time. I think the original Player suggestion reasoning still has merits. Until such a time as we're seeing a concurrency of a thousand or more, it isn't worth my posting numbers out there for the gaming press and every newbie to make comparisons. We don't need yet another reason for the Gaming Press or whomever to decide that we're irrelevant and unworthy of coverage.
That does not mean our activity is any worse than "it used to be, in the Goode Olde Dayse". But I do acknowledge that play-styles have shifted. Again.. doing what I can there to change some game mechanics to compensate, but it's a big project.
OK, asked and answered.
Oops, I removed a post that Inc answered:
Mi5 wrote:
That is a fatal flaw, comparing yourself to others. The only person you should compete with is yourself, being better than you were yesterday.
The point is that you are NOT "telling us", we're looking for ourselves. The problem you describe in #2 makes it hard to believe #1
10,000 empty registrations a month do not help the game, perhaps they pad an achievement for you somewhere but that's about it. The problem you describe in #2 was not solved by the update regardless of the echochamber that existed in the past.
I've seen tens of thousands of players register, poke around for 5mins-8hrs, and leave, and that is NOT an exaggeration for the very reason of there being nobody to interact with. I've also seen large chunks of the established community leave(many are not coming back) for the same reason.
I'm not saying that a player-count will solve that issue, but it will for-sure help shine some light on the core issues and move forward to solve them.
I've played long enough, and my buddylists are big enough for me to see pretty clearly on this topic I think.
There WAS a play-style shift, and it had NOTHING to do with platform. The community has gone into a transformation that started sometime between 2009-2012 where individuals began superseding groups as a result of the many MANY political, military, and economic ventures taken on by guilds and other organizations of pilots.
I get the sneaking feeling you rather we were all non-english mobile players so you don't have to deal with the reality of human nature haha
Oops, I removed a post that Inc answered:
Mi5 wrote:
That is a fatal flaw, comparing yourself to others. The only person you should compete with is yourself, being better than you were yesterday.
The point is that you are NOT "telling us", we're looking for ourselves. The problem you describe in #2 makes it hard to believe #1
10,000 empty registrations a month do not help the game, perhaps they pad an achievement for you somewhere but that's about it. The problem you describe in #2 was not solved by the update regardless of the echochamber that existed in the past.
I've seen tens of thousands of players register, poke around for 5mins-8hrs, and leave, and that is NOT an exaggeration for the very reason of there being nobody to interact with. I've also seen large chunks of the established community leave(many are not coming back) for the same reason.
I'm not saying that a player-count will solve that issue, but it will for-sure help shine some light on the core issues and move forward to solve them.
I've played long enough, and my buddylists are big enough for me to see pretty clearly on this topic I think.
There WAS a play-style shift, and it had NOTHING to do with platform. The community has gone into a transformation that started sometime between 2009-2012 where individuals began superseding groups as a result of the many MANY political, military, and economic ventures taken on by guilds and other organizations of pilots.
I get the sneaking feeling you rather we were all non-english mobile players so you don't have to deal with the reality of human nature haha
(Response to MI5's now.. deleted message).
The problem you describe in #2 makes it hard to believe #1
See, this shit is exactly why I am not putting the numbers back. You'll believe whatever you want, regardless of the data provided. If you can't comprehend the disparity between "we still have around the same peak count we always did" and "being compared to WoW server populations is unhelpful", then I don't know what other words I can possible write.
Whether *I* compare myself to others is irrelevant. EVERYONE ELSE DOES. The gaming press makes assessments of who they'll cover based on that (assuming it also isn't influenced by who advertises on their site). Have you factored coverage into the potential of a Steam release, or anything else?
I'm not saying that a player-count will solve that issue, but it will for-sure help shine some light on the core issues and move forward to solve them.
It will demonstrably, and specifically, HARM THE GAME. You're just too new to remember. This does not HELP, and it only HURTS.
There WAS a play-style shift, and it had NOTHING to do with platform.
This is totally a facepalm, head-desk freaking dumb statement. Good thing you have such a high opinion of your perspective. Because you have no actual data to support it, and you're arguing with the only person who does; and when they disagree, you claim they're lying.
So, great talk.. NO, I'M NOT ADDING NUMBERS TO THE GRAPH. You can either wrap your brain around why, or you can't. This thread has outlived its usefulness.
The problem you describe in #2 makes it hard to believe #1
See, this shit is exactly why I am not putting the numbers back. You'll believe whatever you want, regardless of the data provided. If you can't comprehend the disparity between "we still have around the same peak count we always did" and "being compared to WoW server populations is unhelpful", then I don't know what other words I can possible write.
Whether *I* compare myself to others is irrelevant. EVERYONE ELSE DOES. The gaming press makes assessments of who they'll cover based on that (assuming it also isn't influenced by who advertises on their site). Have you factored coverage into the potential of a Steam release, or anything else?
I'm not saying that a player-count will solve that issue, but it will for-sure help shine some light on the core issues and move forward to solve them.
It will demonstrably, and specifically, HARM THE GAME. You're just too new to remember. This does not HELP, and it only HURTS.
There WAS a play-style shift, and it had NOTHING to do with platform.
This is totally a facepalm, head-desk freaking dumb statement. Good thing you have such a high opinion of your perspective. Because you have no actual data to support it, and you're arguing with the only person who does; and when they disagree, you claim they're lying.
So, great talk.. NO, I'M NOT ADDING NUMBERS TO THE GRAPH. You can either wrap your brain around why, or you can't. This thread has outlived its usefulness.