Rift 4.1 - Forged In Flame

[Deleted]

Steam charts don't accurately show the amount of players in a game. Only the ones who installed it from steam.

They are not even worth looking at.

??????? Steam charts shows people in the game, not who installed it.

[Eleccybubb]

??????? Steam charts shows people in the game, not who installed it.

If I recall there is another site that shows installs/download numbers but I cannot remember it's name.

Update. It's Steamspy I think. That one is not worth bothering with since it includes downloads and installs. Steam Charts is a decent metric.

[Deleted]

If I recall there is another site that shows installs/download numbers but I cannot remember it's name.

Update. It's Steamspy I think. That one is not worth bothering with since it includes downloads and installs. Steam Charts is a decent metric.

Correct. Steamcharts will show realtime players as soon as they enter the game. Aslong as the .exe is listed the primary game and not the launcher, like some MMO's fuck up when they initially launch on Steam.

[Eleccybubb]

Correct. Steamcharts will show realtime players as soon as they enter the game. Aslong as the .exe is listed the primary game and not the launcher, like some MMO's fuck up when they initially launch on Steam.

Funny thing is there are literally like 2 people I know of who defend Trion and Rift. That's it. A lot of the long time players I know of have quit because they have nothing to do ingame. Especially raiders. At this point Trion should stop trying to salvage Rift and focus their efforts on Trove. Because that has the potential to be an amazing game right now.

In terms of discussion this is really the only place we can discuss Trion and Rift properly. Official forums are poorly moderated with any critique even constructive shut down and Reddit well barely anything goes on there and the moderation is just as poor.

[Deleted]

Funny thing is there are literally like 2 people I know of who defend Trion and Rift. That's it. A lot of the long time players I know of have quit because they have nothing to do ingame. Especially raiders. At this point Trion should stop trying to salvage Rift and focus their efforts on Trove. Because that has the potential to be an amazing game right now.

All their games are major cashgrabs at the moment. Atlas reactor went live with a buy 2 play aspect just so Trion can try and salvage the costs, then shortly afterwards they go free to play to salvage even further.

[Eleccybubb]

All their games are major cashgrabs at the moment. Atlas reactor went live with a buy 2 play aspect just so Trion can try and salvage the costs, then shortly afterwards they go free to play to salvage even further.

If I recall it did have limited F2P but it was meh. But yeah they changed it to B2P for a quick cash grab of course. Trove though is decent for a F2P game. As long as they don't get cash grabby with it then it has potential.

In terms of 4.1 as I said I'm going to log in to check it out. Not really expecting anything special. The brand new raid is made for LFR which if it's anything like Hexathel will be piss easy whereas the progression raid is just Rise of the Phoenix upscaled to 70.

[Deleted]

??????? Steam charts shows people in the game, not who installed it.

Only the players who are playing it through the steam client.
It doesn't count players like me who don't.

[Eleccybubb]

Only the players who are playing it through the steam client.
It doesn't count players like me who don't.

And do you really think it's any higher? Good guesstimate would be 5k. 7k tops. Considering the amount of people I've seen quit in Starfall due to lack of quality and nothing to do I extremely doubt the numbers are anything amazing. A lot of people who have quit are long time raiders.

4.1 may bring a few people back but considering their recent raid release I doubt there will be any polish. I imagine people wanting to raid will log in, see the raid then log back out. Especially considering the progression one is something they have done before just tuned up.

I mean when one screenshot posted by the "community ambassador" shows 154 people in EU participating in the fresh new open world event that says a lot to me. Yes open world events are not for everyone but 154? That's dismal especially considering the sharding tech meant it was bringing in people from other EU servers. I remember way more turning up for stuff like Volan and Nightmare Tide stuff.

[Deleted]

Only the players who are playing it through the steam client.
It doesn't count players like me who don't.

And it didn't launch through steam yesterday. But okay, i will be loose and say that the number is skewed by 50%. Does that improve it? No

[StrawberryZebra]

Only the players who are playing it through the steam client.
It doesn't count players like me who don't.

Steamcharts might not be entirely representative, however they are a good basis for a rough comparison between other MMO's also on Steam. Like Tera which has 1501 people playing through Steam as of this post. ESO has 6774 at time of posting and FF 14 has 4788.

Like Rift, all of these have their own individual launchers and can be played through Steam. Going with the assumption that an equal percentage of the playerbase for each of them play through Steam, we can get a rough estimate of the relative population for each game. In very rough terms, that means that Tera has 5 times as many players as Rift, FF 14 has 15 times as many and ESO has a staggering 20 times as many players. Not entirely accurate of course, since all those are also availible on console, where as Rift is a PC exclusive.

Right now, even Wildstar has more players on Steam than Rift. That is how much of a bind Rift is in at the moment.

[Lathais]

??????? Steam charts shows people in the game, not who installed it.

No, steam charts only show people who launched the game from Steam. Even if you installed the game with steam, but launch it separately and do not have steam running in the background, you will not show up in Steam charts at all. Steam gets it's information from their client installed on your machine. They do not get that kind of data from the game servers or company and have no way to.

- - - Updated - - -

Correct. Steamcharts will show realtime players as soon as they enter the game. Aslong as the .exe is listed the primary game and not the launcher, like some MMO's fuck up when they initially launch on Steam.

But ONLY people who installed it and launched it through Steam. If they did not buy the game through Steam and launch it from Steam and do not have Steam installed, Steam has no way of knowing that you are playing the game and can not report you on the Steam charts. It's not a good metric at all.

- - - Updated - - -

And it didn't launch through steam yesterday. But okay, i will be loose and say that the number is skewed by 50%. Does that improve it? No

I would say that 50% is being pretty generous. Not that many people buy through Steam and then continue to launch through Steam. I'd be surprised if Steam represented 25% of a games population, but it's probably not as low as the 10% I would give it credit for. Even still, if say that only 10% of the people playing the game are playing through Steam, it's still a dismal number.

[Slipmat]

I must be reading this Steamspy thing you all swear by wrong, it tells me over 19,000 players during the past 2 weeks, maybe it's the same 500.....

[Eleccybubb]

I must be reading this Steamspy thing you all swear by wrong, it tells me over 19,000 players during the past 2 weeks, maybe it's the same 500.....

Are you kidding? Steamspy shows who has it installed. Just stop now you are literally just grasping at straws here.

http://steamcharts.com/app/39120 This is what we were using as a metric.

Less than 500 in a 24 hour peak. And with the screenshot you posted of only 150 people doing Fortress Siege in EU I extremely doubt the game has over 10k active players at the moment. I doubt EU has even 1k active. That 500 peak has been going on for months. Steam charts tallies who actually has the game open right now.

https://steamspy.com/app/39120

PEAK CONCURRENT PLAYERS YESTERDAY: 495

Yeah it sure does have 19k active Steam players if it peaked at less than 500 yesterday on Steamspy right and has been doing for quite some time? Oh wait.......

[Lathais]

I must be reading this Steamspy thing you all swear by wrong, it tells me over 19,000 players during the past 2 weeks, maybe it's the same 500.....

All players that played over the past 2 weeks is not the same thing as the most logged in at any one time. So yeah, you are reading it wrong. But most people do. Just because Steam says only 500 people are currently playing does not mean that only 500 people are currently playing, just that of the people currently playing only 500 launched through steam. Even if there were only 500, over the course of 2 weeks, it's a different 500 people logged in at any given time, adding up to 19000 over the course of 2 weeks.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you kidding? Steamspy shows who has it installed. Just stop now you are literally just grasping at straws here.

http://steamcharts.com/app/39120 This is what we were using as a metric.

Less than 500 in a 24 hour peak. And with the screenshot you posted of only 150 people doing Fortress Siege in EU I extremely doubt the game has over 10k active players at the moment. I doubt EU has even 1k active. That 500 peak has been going on for months. Steam charts tallies who actually has the game open right now.

https://steamspy.com/app/39120

PEAK CONCURRENT PLAYERS YESTERDAY: 495

Yeah it sure does have 19k active Steam players if it peaked at less than 500 yesterday on Steamspy right and has been doing for quite some time? Oh wait.......

Only if they launched the game through Steam. It does not show people who do not have Steam Installed or people who do have Steam Installed but did not launch through Steam. It is also quite possible that of the Steam players, if it's a different 500 every hours or 2, that 19,000 did in fact log in and play during the past 2 weeks. What he linked was not how many people had it installed, but how many people played over the past 2 weeks. This could include people who re-installed, logged in for 5 minutes, remembered why they quit playing and logged right back out.


This is why these Steam charts are just shit metrics. How many people that play the game actually launch it through Steam? Only Trion knows. Trion won't tell.

[Eleccybubb]

All players that played over the past 2 weeks is not the same thing as the most logged in at any one time. So yeah, you are reading it wrong. But most people do. Just because Steam says only 500 people are currently playing does not mean that only 500 people are currently playing, just that of the people currently playing only 500 launched through steam. Even if there were only 500, over the course of 2 weeks, it's a different 500 people logged in at any given time, adding up to 19000 over the course of 2 weeks.

- - - Updated - - -



Only if they launched the game through Steam. It does not show people who do not have Steam Installed or people who do have Steam Installed but did not launch through Steam. It is also quite possible that of the Steam players, if it's a different 500 every hours or 2, that 19,000 did in fact log in and play during the past 2 weeks. What he linked was not how many people had it installed, but how many people played over the past 2 weeks. This could include people who re-installed, logged in for 5 minutes, remembered why they quit playing and logged right back out.


This is why these Steam charts are just shit metrics. How many people that play the game actually launch it through Steam? Only Trion knows. Trion won't tell.

They might not be the best metric but it's a damn sight better than Steamspy.

[StrawberryZebra]

This is why these Steam charts are just shit metrics. How many people that play the game actually launch it through Steam? Only Trion knows. Trion won't tell.

Trion not telling is why people are using Steam Charts. While Steam Charts, Steamspy etc might not be the most accurate way to get a number, they can be used as a rough yardstick to compare games of a similiar genre if you assume that the same percentage of players use Steam for both games. I don't think thats an entirely unreasonable assumption, but you're free to disagree if you wish.

Steamcharts are however a fairly accurate reflection of the playerbase of a game as a whole. You can see when games are patched due to a huge uptick in players, and see it slowly settle back down once the excitement is over. If you look at the population graphs they do line up well with overall game populations at any given point. In this respect, Steamcharts is very representative of player trends. The number of players isn't going to be anything like accurate of course but that doesn't make the data useless if you're willing to look beyond raw numerical data.

[Lathais]

Trion not telling is why people are using Steam Charts. While Steam Charts, Steamspy etc might not be the most accurate way to get a number, they can be used as a rough yardstick to compare games of a similiar genre if you assume that the same percentage of players use Steam for both games. I don't think thats an entirely unreasonable assumption, but you're free to disagree if you wish.

Steamcharts are however a fairly accurate reflection of the playerbase of a game as a whole. You can see when games are patched due to a huge uptick in players, and see it slowly settle back down once the excitement is over. If you look at the population graphs they do line up well with overall game populations at any given point. In this respect, Steamcharts is very representative of player trends. The number of players isn't going to be anything like accurate of course but that doesn't make the data useless if you're willing to look beyond raw numerical data.

Yeah, I don't think that's a fair assumption at all. Let's just say that whatever month FFXIV is insanely popular on Steam, other Steam users see that and therefore buy and install FFXIV through Steam and launch through Steam. If Wildstar was not that popular on Steam, but ran an ad campaign somewhere else that drew more people in than FFXIV did on Steam, FFXIV will look better on Steam when Wildstar actually drew in more players. It's not a good assumption at all.

You can see then patches happened? That's your argument? Shit, you can do that on any number of fan sites or the official site, and not only see that there was a patch, but what that patch includes!! marvel of marvels!!

Also, take STO for example. A while back, they offered freebies in game if you used their new launcher. What do you think that did to the Steam statistics for that game? You would see that and think it's a trend that people stopped playing that game when in fact, their player base increased.

Steam charts and steam Spy suck and you can not draw conclusions from the data they give. Sorry.

[StrawberryZebra]

You can see then patches happened? That's your argument? Shit, you can do that on any number of fan sites or the official site, and not only see that there was a patch, but what that patch includes!! marvel of marvels!!

The point was that the population over time graphs correlate with the overall population of a game. Not perfectly, of course, but enough to show you the trends in player habits. If a games population is up on Steamcharts then it's an almost certainty that the population is up overall. Similarly, if the graph is showing a steady decline, as we're seeing with Rift, then it's indicative of the population shrinking both on Steam and through Trions own client.

I only brought up patches because they're the easiest example. The cyclical nature of MMO's, where people return for content patches and then slowly leave until another one hits, has been well known for years now. You can very clearly see that trend for all MMO's on Steam, Rift included.

[Lathais]

The point was that the population over time graphs correlate with the overall population of a game. Not perfectly, of course, but enough to show you the trends in player habits. If a games population is up on Steamcharts then it's an almost certainty that the population is up overall. Similarly, if the graph is showing a steady decline, as we're seeing with Rift, then it's indicative of the population shrinking both on Steam and through Trions own client.

I only brought up patches because they're the easiest example. The cyclical nature of MMO's, where people return for content patches and then slowly leave until another one hits, has been well known for years now. You can very clearly see that trend for all MMO's on Steam, Rift included.

Yes, but STO also showed a steady decline after they released their own launcher and gave freebies for doing it. Meanwhile, their internal metrics showed that the game was actually growing. So what the Steam Charts indicated was the exact opposite of what was happening.

All a rise or decline on the Steam charts shows is a rise or decline in popularity among steam users. That's all. Nothing about it can be used to extrapolate data about the entire population of a game or the popularity of a game compared to another game. If Steam shows a rise, that could just mean there was a Steam Sale on that game. Maybe another game did a sale somewhere else at the same time and also saw growth, but that growth will never show on Steam. If you want to keep using it, whatever, but it's very very flawed and not an accurate representation of anything other than what Steam users are doing.

[Slipmat]

Yeah it sure does have 19k active Steam players if it peaked at less than 500 yesterday on Steamspy right and has been doing for quite some time?

So Steam has it wrong and over 19,000 players didn't log onto Rift during the past 2 weeks?