Guild Wars 2

critickitten.1498:

If we’re to trust their released numbers from the betas, concurrency figures account for ~40% of their playerbase.

Uh, you apparently did not read the article you quote.

It certainly says 400k concurrent users, but it doesn’t say anything about how many users were active during that time. It says over one million pre-orders not counting the one-day pre-orders. All you can logically deduce from that is that there were less than 40% of the players online at the time. Since I know a bunch of people who purchased one-day pre-orders, I would speculate this number is decently below 40%

Furthermore, when ANet sent out the press release saying they hit 2 million users, they were still reporting 400k peak concurrent users. This tells us current peak concurrent user count is somewhere under 20%.

Personally, I invite ANet to look at the numbers. Look at how many people missed the event. Look at how much those people have spent on the game since launch and decide if they really want to put that income at risk by designing more content that excludes that population. It’s their game and their decision, but I bet there is a pretty compelling business argument there for not repeating this mistake.

Electro.4173:

They time the event based on the time when the highest number of players are online. Thats straight from the mouth of the developers on at least 2 occassions that I’ve seen. They look at the data of when the highest number of players is commonly active, and thats the time they set for the events.

Its not favoritism, its a simple issue of catering to a majority

It saddens me hearing people equate “largest number of users online at one time” to “majority of players”. They are NOT the same. ArenaNet has reported peak concurrent users at around 400,000. The player base is over 2 million. When did 20% become a majority of players?

It is pure numbers, but not as you suggest. ANet should look at the data. How many users did not participate. How much money do those users spend on the game after initial purchase. That identifies the income that is potentially at risk designing events that don’t reach those people.

Personally, I have no interest in subsidizing other people’s need to be part of the “special” or “elite” who get to participate in events that are designed to exclude a majority of players. Let’s be honest, that’s also part of what this is about for some of the people who want to keep the events exclusive.

coffeeisyum.5297:

This about sums up the mentality of the people kittening and moaning. They want the game a certain way and because it’s not that way all hell will break lose letting everyone know how they think it should be.

Not at all. People are complaining that ANet should make better design decisions.

What if ANet only let people whose account names beginning in S, E, and M participate in one-time events? Those letters cover a large number of accounts for starting letters. It would just be selfish of the other account holders to complain about not being included. They chose their own account names and besides, the events are optional so there would be no sense in complaining, right?

If you don’t want to do this, similar to mini-games, map completions, vistas, jumping puzzles, etc., then you don’t have to.

People DO want to do the events and can’t because of ANet’s design decisions.

MatthewMedina.5419:

We know that this is a topic that’s going to be heavily discussed, and we definitely want as much of your feedback as possible, both positive and negative (so long as it remains constructive and within the guidelines of the rules of conduct).

So now that the event is over, I am sure ArenaNet has the numbers. What percentage of players actually experienced the final one-time event, specifically the Ancient Karka battle?