below 50k = DEAD for me. 50K = 27-28 healthy servers.
8 for US region.
3 for SA East
4 for AP SouthEast
12 for EU Central.
That is still good.
But below 50k, mostly 30-35K = DEAD. And probably we will see below 50k in 2.5 - 3 months.
I’ve posted this previously in a different thread.
You only need enough so that any active player who logs in has a full, active server.
That could literally be 5K - 10K active players, and one single server.
That’s all you need.
The 80% loss is a fact, while real number of actual active players can be debateable, because we don’t have real data.
All we know for sure is that at launch it was 950k concurrent players during peak times, now they are 150k. In reality the real number is much higher, because that’s only a snapshot of peak time, it doesn’t account for people who plays on other times of the day.
I am perfectly aware of that.
But that’s not the point.
As I told you before, for a big corporation like Amazon, customer retention is the number one priority, because their focus is not just on current sales but future sales.
And losing 80% of potential customers is a big issue, because it means they have lost 80% of future sales.
Of course they will take into account the fact that MMORPGs lose roughly 50% of their initial player base within few months.
Yet NW managed to lose much more than than in just over a month and the curve is still heading downwards with no sign of reverting its trend .
Not a good sign.
That’s not true, though, not without a subscription model - you have to pay the salaries of your development team, and the burden around creating content for the game does not change much based on player count.
1 Like
yes without sub model, even i dont know 40-50k can save this game. cuz maybe %3-4 of people buy costumes(and people wont buy costumes for each month, maybe they will buy one and keep using it for 3-4 months) that wont make much money for operating the whole game, creating more content.
So why are people over and over making the claim that te game have lost 80% of the players?
I agree. But is that normal? I don’t know. How many concurrent players does MMORPG games usually have at launch and 2 month after launch? Do you know? Do you have any data to compare with?
Amazon’s whole business model have been since start to go into markets and become big with low prices and good customer service. Making a profit short term have never been their business model.
YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT.
OMG dude, here you go again. You do not have any data of how many players have stopped logging in to their account to play New World. Can you stop making this claim?
Look here what YOU said:
And then in the same god damn post you say:
Do you see the problem here?
Where do you find this data?
How many players have New World lost since launch? Do you have ANY DATA what so evewr on active playerbase?
COMPARED TO WHAT? What are you comparing with?
They need a big player base. This game is run off of cash shop sales. It’s just a math problem for them. How many whales is more important than how many players. If the servers are full it may seem like it’s alive with one or two available but without the cash shop sales how do they keep the lights on? They need a lot of players who have confidence the game will still be around in a few months.
Comparable to Microsoft’s approach with Flight Simulator to be fair. The product receives major patches at high interval, basically functions as a live service as well with the massive bandwidth that is being used for the live telemetry data. In terms of concurrent players New World is still well over 10x as high. Nonetheless, updates keep on being pushed out. Which as a flight simmer myself, I’m happy with. But let’s be honest, it’s existence is only really possible in current form as a showcase product.
And I can definitely see New World living a similar premise. That’s why myself I’m also not too afraid about its future. AGS shows clear intent thus far to keep working on the product as well. And as long as I’m having fun myself, I’ll just keep playing and also have no objection to spend some money in the cosmetic store for example.
If the day comes on which I’d no longer be having fun, I’d just move on. Often to check back again a year or two down the line to see if the feeling changed.
1 Like
The 80% loss is a fact, because is calculated on a like for like basis, which means taking the numbers from peak time and comparing it with numbers of peak time of previous weeks.
If a business lose 80% of it’s players on peak time, it is reasonable to think they lose the same amount across the board, meaning during other times of the day.
I might not be an Amazon manager, but I am a manager for a big corporation and I know how business read the numbers.
I also understand what numbers are important for a business, and raw sales are not the top priority, potential future sales is what matter the most.
If a product has no potential for future sales, they will just kill the product regardless if it is profitable or not.
When a company have many products they only keep the ones with more potential.
Your argument works only for small businesses where every sale count.
There are a couple of assumptions that aren’t necessarily true…
- That making a single-player game would have been cheaper.
Not necessarily. Some of the most expensive games of all time have been single-player. The New World team isn’t enormous; as far as I understand it, with my limited knowledge, I don’t see a reason to believe that the budget exceeded 100m, given the team size and years of development.
- That a drop in 80% of daily players means a commensurate drop in future sales.
The very high number of unit sales so far are all potential future customers, far more so than if they’d not bought the game. They are all potential cosmetics customers because they’ve already bought into the project. If the game had only sold 400k or so copies, even if there had been fewer bugs, the pool of potential future customers for cosmetics would be smaller.
I agree that projected sales are what a share price is based on, which is the prime concern for a lot of multinationals, but don’t think it automatically follows that they’d consider New World a failure. Those 900k+ accounts are all ready to log in and spend in future, as new updates happen and the game improves.
If their initial forecasts for player numbers had been correct, and they’d only sold enough units to fill the servers they initially had, they would have sold something like 500k units. If they planned for a 50% drop within a few months, as others have said is normal, that would bring us to 250k - not a million miles from where we are today.
But the assumption is how business work, they call it sales projections and are made on guesses through current available numbers.
No one has the crystal ball so, the best they can do is guessing on Informed guesses.
1 Like
The question was “How many players NW ‘needs’”.
The answer is exactly what I had said - roughly 5K-10K active players and one server.
That’s it, it’s the bare minimum that is necessary.
The rest - development team, expansions, subscriptions, patches, events, websites - are all gravy and are entirely dependent on how successful the game is.
With 5K-10K players, there would no other operational overhead than running a server, and having a team of three or four developers to maintain the system.
As long as we can merge and balance servers as needed to create a healthy in-game environment and economy the game should do fine in the long run.
Servers that are loosing too many players will probably end up with crashing economic circumstances.
So a dead game that’s not being updated or expanded on.
NW will be dead by new year
But enough to satisfy the role of an MMO, with sufficient players to keep a person entertained for a period of time.
Any MMO is ok even with 10k reccurent
It’s not that 130,000 concurrent players is too low.
It’s the rate at which players are dropping off.
we have 180k peak every day for the last 2 weeks?
where do you see player dropping off?
We are looking at this backwards. How much does the cash shop have to do each month. That’s the real question. We already bought the game and there is no sub. So their future revenue is based off of cash shop sales. Once you guess how much they need each month to warrant updates then we can just ask what % of players buy things each month.
If you love the game in its current state, prove it with your wallet not here on the forums. Good reviews on steam are nice but they live by cash shop purchases. A sub is 15 a month so that’s the minimum average they have to be expecting.
That said, not every player who is happy will spend money and not every player is happy. If 80% are happy and 1/4 will buy things in the cash shop then they really need players to lean in and buy. Buy buy buy.
I’m sure the box sales can carry the game for a few months but in the end all of this conversation is pointless if the lovers of the game don’t buy things. They should have had a sub and a cash shop in my opinion.
1 Like