Almost 4k people in game

[Spyro]

It's normally around 2.3k isn't it? Almost 2k extra, wonder why

[M4tt]

Because the majority of warhammer related titles are on sale.

[Spyro]

Originally posted by M4tt:

Because the majority of warhammer related titles are on sale.

Oh yeah lol

[ᚷᛖᚱᛗᚨᚾᚹᛟᛚᚠ]

sales exist for a reason, they are rather used to revive dead games than giving the big cash for the developer. and V2 is really cheap right now.

[Crystal meth enthusiast]

75% sale. We can enjoy some boost at least few weeks. Untill it drops to "normal low".

[DukeoftheAges]

sale and it's the weekend.

[Humility]

Back down to 2.2k just a couple hours later.

[M4tt]

Originally posted by Humili†y:

Back down to 2.2k just a couple hours later.

Which makes quite alot of sense considering its well past midnight in europe and other parts of the world by now.

[mobsky]

there has been a lot of "topics" about viewer count which makes me wonder, do you guys play video games depending on what that number is ? Or is this just the continuous of hate and dancing all over the forums after the WOM patch? It's kinda pathetic to come back and forth just to look at that number at a specific day and time and make a topic about it, but the reasons are very clear.

[Kaelus Von Sestiaf]

Originally posted by mobsky:

there has been a lot of "topics" about viewer count which makes me wonder, do you guys play video games depending on what that number is ? Or is this just the continuous of hate and dancing all over the forums after the WOM patch? It's kinda pathetic to come back and forth just to look at that number at a specific day and time and make a topic about it, but the reasons are very clear.

You're looking at it the wrong way.
It's important for a game to have a high playercount not just because it affects your matchmaking or whatever, but because a healthy playerbase means the developers are doing good and have a reason to pump out content. If interest in the game peters out until it's just gone, then support will end and the game will die for good.

A sudden dip in playercount means a mistake in development, a bad PR move, a content drought that makes players lose interest, anything. It means something's gone wrong.
A surge in playercount means renewed interest and new players due to good new content, a patch, a sale, something. Means something went right.

Even if people have been really, really whiny about WoM, playercount is one of the most important statistics to keep in mind, and it's an objective, non-biased one, too. Because regardless of how vocal a minority can be or how whiny players can get, what matters is how many players are interested in the game to keep it alive.

[Ghoul Hunter]

Originally posted by Kaelus Von Sestiaf:

You're looking at it the wrong way.
It's important for a game to have a high playercount not just because it affects your matchmaking or whatever, but because a healthy playerbase means the developers are doing good and have a reason to pump out content. If interest in the game peters out until it's just gone, then support will end and the game will die for good.

Not quite.

Fatshark makes their money on sales, and maybe a few other business sources. The actual player-count doesn't really affect them, as far as we know. Considering 2m people bought V2, and only 2k are playing on a regular basis, it's safe to say they aren't watching player-count that much. Sales are the biz.

There are quite a few people that play with bots or friends, so matchmaking is not as important as PVP games. This is halfway a single-player game.

[ᚷᛖᚱᛗᚨᚾᚹᛟᛚᚠ]

Originally posted by Bathrobe Rat:

Originally posted by Kaelus Von Sestiaf:

You're looking at it the wrong way.
It's important for a game to have a high playercount not just because it affects your matchmaking or whatever, but because a healthy playerbase means the developers are doing good and have a reason to pump out content. If interest in the game peters out until it's just gone, then support will end and the game will die for good.

Not quite.

Fatshark makes their money on sales, and maybe a few other business sources. The actual player-count doesn't really affect them, as far as we know. Considering 2m people bought V2, and only 2k are playing on a regular basis, it's safe to say they aren't watching player-count that much. Sales are the biz.

There are quite a few people that play with bots or friends, so matchmaking is not as important as PVP games. This is halfway a single-player game.

And Why do we/I play woth bots? On legendary I find rarely green ping games in Central Europe so I have the decision play with the few people that play legends (but s*ck) or play with bots.

More players = all game modes have more players and personally I have more fun playing with humans, just not with complete no hands.

[Kaelus Von Sestiaf]

Originally posted by Bathrobe Rat:

Originally posted by Kaelus Von Sestiaf:

You're looking at it the wrong way.
It's important for a game to have a high playercount not just because it affects your matchmaking or whatever, but because a healthy playerbase means the developers are doing good and have a reason to pump out content. If interest in the game peters out until it's just gone, then support will end and the game will die for good.

Not quite.

Fatshark makes their money on sales, and maybe a few other business sources. The actual player-count doesn't really affect them, as far as we know. Considering 2m people bought V2, and only 2k are playing on a regular basis, it's safe to say they aren't watching player-count that much. Sales are the biz.

There are quite a few people that play with bots or friends, so matchmaking is not as important as PVP games. This is halfway a single-player game.

Player count matters to them because even if they hit 2mil sales at launch, only the players that are still around will pay for their DLC, and it's the DLC that is going to keep them afloat.
Thus, player retention is important, and new player influx is important. And the higher your playerbase and player count, the more dlc you sell. And the more people, the more exposure your game gets, etc etc sales and game theory.

[endrsgm]

i think you made up "sales theory" because a google search pulled up tons of stuff for salesmen but not so much for the theory behind "sales".

game theory -> rational players will use intelligent self interest to maximize their winnings or benefits in game.
id posit that there arent so many rational vt2 players, at least judging by the constant moaning, bandwagon effect, and the constant battle between those who want a more difficult tactical game and those who prefer a running hack and slash and both sides are prepared to kill the game in order to ensure the others dont "win" the battle..

dlc is NOT going to keep fatshark afloat. thats so untrue on a multiple of levels. fatshark could walk away from vt2 now and come out of it pretty well off financially. as you said ...2 million + copies sold.

in fact it could very well be argued that continued work on dlc at this point might just well be what DOES bankrupt the company. a huge investment towards dlc, a smallish user base, and a large enough % of that base deciding its the sunken cost fallacy to continue buying it = dangerous for the company. especially with the investment costs to make and market the dlc and a relatively small market.

but other than fatshark over-extending itself with dlc production and low sales bankrupting fatshark, the dlc will NOT keep fatshark afloat. game sales are profit and a return on costs for producing the base game. dlc pays for extended or continued work AFTER release and is modifications, changes, or expansions to the original game +profit.

as i said, if fatshark walked away right now they would come out of this ok, its only if they also decide to continue work with dlc that they run any risks at all with the gamble that they can maximize some profits as an incentive.

but people keep citing the 2 million copies of the game sold and then comparing that to steam usage charts. which is apples and oranges.

the 2 million copies is total copies and that includes xbox1 and ps4. that number of players is NOT represented in steam usage numbers. so we dont actually know how many players are still around at all. we only know the steam data.

so im not sure how relevant sales or game theory is to this thread. well, except for the developers of fatshark being the subjects in the game theory test. in which case is it better for them to continue work on the game with some risks or walk away now having done pretty well for themselves financially? since we do NOT know the ps4 or xbox1 numbers or even the recent sales figures of the main game or even the dlc then we have no clue. its all a WAG (wild a$$ guess).

[ᚷᛖᚱᛗᚨᚾᚹᛟᛚᚠ]

Originally posted by endrsgm:

i think you made up "sales theory" because a google search pulled up tons of stuff for salesmen but not so much for the theory behind "sales".

game theory -> rational players will use intelligent self interest to maximize their winnings or benefits in game.
id posit that there arent so many rational vt2 players, at least judging by the constant moaning, bandwagon effect, and the constant battle between those who want a more difficult tactical game and those who prefer a running hack and slash and both sides are prepared to kill the game in order to ensure the others dont "win" the battle..

dlc is NOT going to keep fatshark afloat. thats so untrue on a multiple of levels. fatshark could walk away from vt2 now and come out of it pretty well off financially. as you said ...2 million + copies sold. in fact it could very well be argued that continued work on dlc at this point might just well be DOES bankrupt the company. a huge investment towards dlc and a large enough % of the base deciding its the sunken cost fallacy to continue buying it and ... that can be dangerous for the company. especially with the user numbers being relatively "low" in terms of being the market for the dlc vs the size of the investment costs from fatshark to produce said dlc.

but other than fatshark over-extending itself with dlc production and low sale the dlc will NOT keep fatshark afloat. game sales are profit and a return on costs for producing the base game. dlc pays for extended or continued work AFTER release and is modifications, changes, or expansions to the original game +profit.

but people keep citing the 2 million copies of the game sold and then comparing that to steam usage charts. which is apples and oranges.

the 2 million copies is total copies and that includes xbox1 and ps4. that number of players is NOT represented in steam usage numbers. so we dont actually know how many players are still around at all. we only know the steam data.

so im not sure how relevant sales or game theory is to this thread.

Not long ago it was shown that both consoles combined have 5~ of the pc player base, and as a former V1 console player I can tell you this game is dead on console the day it releases. The first month of V1 there were never any full parties you only found 1-2 players each party.

FS only wastes our money on the console version no way that they get a profit with such low sells.