heheh LordArt... You really are my favorite person round here

Hmm...been an interesting read, the vitriol excluded. Ok...I think we can safely say, that at or just after launch, the game had sold what? Around 2.5 million copies, retail and DD included? Given figures being bandied around, that can't be too far off the mark no? So, around a month after launch, according to EA, they had 1.7 million subs. Give or take a few copies that were wrapped for xmas, and people still using in game time...(probably not 'that' many...though it's conjecture on my part)...we can safely say, in 30 days, around 700k people did not think the game was worth paying for monthly. Now if I was a suit at EA, that would scare the living bejesus out of me. And since then, it's lost more than a million people who 'did' think the game was worth paying monthly for. In less than 12 months. That is seriously worrying. And people ask why sub numbers matter? Are you really that dim? Now some 'facts'! Right now, on Proginator, there are 6 people on Alderaan (myself included naturally). If I do a general search of who's online, it shows me 'the first 100 people' (as the who's online tool is utterly useless at times). So who knows the 'real' number. There are 19 people on the fleet right now. 2am GMT. Hardly buzzing is it? Let me also tell you one very simple fact to keep in mind. If EA said (months ago now bear in mind) that they have 'over' 500k subs....you can bet your house (if you own one) it is barely above that number. That is business/sales/marketing/exec talk speel. If it was anywhere close to 600k, John would have said, we have close to 600k. He didn't. He said over 500k. 1 over 500k, is 'over 500k. Lets talk more exec speak shall we? 551k is closer to 600 than 500. Again, he would have said, close to 600k. He didn't. You can bet at 'that time', it was barely above the figure he quoted. From close to what...maybe 3 million total retail and DD sales. From 1.7 million subs a month after launch? And sub numbers are 'apparently' irrelevant? That is people are curious (no point in asking as you will never be told, especially if they are bad shareholder wise). But no harm in wondering, wanting to know, how healthy the current player base is. After all, no player base, equals no game.

One cannot please all of the people all of the time Tim as they say, and if one tries, one ends up pleasing no one.

He likes inferring Ura Ok Penguin. I 'will' make assumptions now....you're either up past your bedtime, or old enough to be putting your own kids to bed and think it's cool to use 10 year old internet language... Neither are terribly good. If you're going to debate with me, at least have the decency to use the Queen's English please. Secondly, you strike me as a hardcore end gamer. That's fine. That is your prerogative, but a lot of us are not. It's a niche area, made 'popular' by WoW (there was nothing wrong with what I wrote, you just like to interpret it how you like). And WoW did popularise it more than anything before it. And as you have already been corrected regarding EQ, I won't mention it again As for the spending more time at 'cap' I agree....but not at 'end game', as end game has no interest for me, being surrounded by people who think having all the latest gear and being the 'best of the best' actually means anything, and impresses people. Because, it doesn't. Leveling, enjoying the progression, is far more important. End game is for the competitive type. And while I am competitive, I'm not in a computer game. Will I spend most of my time at cap? Well, my character may, while it's not logged in I guess. end game last for what...a few months usually? Then when there is new content, you are no longer at end game are you? So the journey there is more important. As end game consists of..well, very little currently yes? There is never a 'destination' to really get too...as there will always (hopefully, maybe, perhaps) be new content to reach.

Interesting indeed Artmeis yes... I used the Tetris argument though as I would imagine a lot of those chess players are playing on a real board, as opposed to across a computer screen...though I could be gravely outdated with that guess.

The use of kthx also says a lot about you too And I never said WoW was the first. 'WOW'....so many people in these forums with a reading problem. Also, why can't it be compared? Without them, there would be no MMO's...and other than the way you interact, they are no different.

Fifthed(?) lol.. Also from pre Baldur's Gate days And for those others, don't forget the Enhanced Edition is out Nov 30th (14 years from original release date) from Beamdog games

Exactly the point. Shows a lot of people's ages (in my opinion) when they think MMO's MUST have end game raids...pvp etc etc etc... Did they never play MUD's 20 years ago? Pen and paper D&D and the like (the pre-curser to pc MMO's) ? Why must an MMO have this content? Because WoW did? Must everything conform to the rules WoW wrote?

Care to back that up? Would not have been what I'd have said. Neither I bet most people here in this thread either.

And end game content is for the die hard MMO player... The ones who can not support a game on their own....hence game designers now design MMO's to be inrcredibly solo friendly... Ala...ahhh whats the point....same ole thing I said 3 days ago now it feels like... Also, Lotro is more solo friendly btw, the group stuff is 'optional' (just like here), not needed to play the game and just gives you extra 'gear' perks that are really also not needed. And as for this particular game, the end game is really rocking by all accounts I hear.... we can argue about the definition of an MMO all day long if you wish, but the reality is, from day one, this was designed as a single player RPG where you could group up with people if you chose too. The 'end game' you keep referring to, along with raids, pvp etc, is there purely for the hardcore crowd as it's a historically istaple MMO feature.

@Ura... #399...yes..agree pretty much 100%, was sure I said that, must have forgot to post it...my age @Galba... Lmao...umm..thanks...I think hehe

@Ura.. Ahh thanks...must have missed that bit if info...guess I should stop speed reading things and skipping bits ...already have a 20 on opposing faction so guess that makes life easier if I ever get around to doing it. Thank you very much

@Galba...again..Lotro gives you the WHOLE game for free. You're really not grasping that are you? Well said... @Coldin & LordArtemis.. lol..well said. I also fit into this bracket *shamed* hehe @urael... Most of things I buy in stores are 'not' freely available in grind, or as LordArtemis said, require untold grind to obtain. I for one would rather just pay a fiver for my time. and there are more people like that than you realise. Again, the sub cost is most likely not the issue. It's the content for that cost that has driven people away. @Galba... That kind of attitude will kill the game. I will be free to play, if the game is worth it, and interesting things in the store, I can bet I will spend more cash on this game than you...but please...lose the 'I'm an elitist sub attitude'....doesn't help anyone. @tim...well said.

Jaing.. Is all psychology. The 'ability' to do everything for free, earning CC in game is a huge draw and will keep people playing. It will also cause a lot of people to sub, when they realsie, hell, it's just easier. As for cosmetic fluff, I really don't think EA (surprisingly) realise how much of a pulling power/money maker that side of the game is...

I am still quite new...am I missing something with that statement? There an advantage to getting an opposing faction character to level 10? @Krewel Exactly the type of post that is unhelpful. @Penguins... And you're still selectively reading what I write. I'll say it again so it sinks in eh? PvP content, hardcore group instances, end game raid gear blah blah blah...never complained about them. Normal content, should not be mandatory forced content. Because as I tried to explain, MMO's of the past, where you had to group for 'everything', are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Single player MMO's with a lot of 'group interaction with other people' are what we have in the modern MMO market. And you know, and I find this funny that you don't see this, there is actually a marketing reason behind that... @Andryah Thank you. well said.