GamerDNA and Massively look back at the MMO year in review
Filed under: Culture, MMO industry, Massively meta, Academic
Continuing on from GamerDNA's year in review (pt. 1) Massively and everybody's favorite gaming social service have come together to feature some great MMO numbers for 2008. Written by the highly talented Sanya Weathers, these stats will run down the winners and not-so-much winners for the last six months of MMO gaming. This kicks off a series of article collaborations between Massively and GamerDNA - we hope you enjoy them!
What a freaking year. The weather outside is frightful for newcomers to the MMO genre, with a Blizzard that's been going on for so long that no one remembers what swimsuit weather is like. WAR broke out. Expansion packs rained down like meteors, but left no craters in the marketplace. And yet, good news abounds if you know how to read the signs. Come along with us as we look over half of 2008
Today's column features data from July through December. GamerDNA being a startup, our data collection in the first half of the year was not consistent enough to use for anything but wild guessing and drinking games.
Listen, a start up tech company can make ANYTHING into a drinking game.
We're using Xfire, and the pool consists of GamerDNA members who have created a profile. This sample pool has grown steadily since the summer – you can take a look at Part 1 for comparison. We are only looking at the top 100 titles in terms of logins, which means some titles dropped off the chart – for example, Pirates of the Burning Sea has found a core of dedicated players, but while their logins remained relatively stable, other titles grew to the point of knocking PotBS off the chart.
The top 100 chart was remarkably stable for the last six months of 2008. Some big launches made a splash – Spore, Fallout 3 – but overall the big players stayed the same. Four titles were in our top ten "most logged in" the entire time: WoW, Call of Duty 4, Counter-Strike: Source, and Guild Wars. Two other titles were up there four out of six months: Lord of the Rings Online and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne.
December numbers are projections, since December is not yet over. The projections are based on the time played in December up to the point where we pulled the data, and typical player behavior trends during the winter holidays. (Next week, we'll be doing a feature on player behavior over the holiday. What titles were hot gifts? What games were good enough for the day after Christmas, but not good enough to last until the New Year? Be sure to tune in!)
I have two "outliers" in there to give you all some points of comparison. Call of Duty 4 was, according to Xfire data, the most played non-MMO on the PC in the second half of 2008. And Shaiya has, at least among GamerDNA members, been one of the more popular Asian Free To Play MMOs this year. Having those data points gives you an idea as to the bigger picture outside the MMO ghetto.
Finally, what today's data is reflecting is the number of playing sessions each game enjoyed with GamerDNA members. It's not a perfect yardstick – if you logged in at all, it counts. That means the guy logging in to check his auctions is counted the same as the freak who raided for 24 straight hours, you know who you are, and dude, that's not healthy. What our data does NOT reflect is subscription rates, number of players, or anything like that. You might say these charts reflect interest and motivation, not financial figures.
On to the charts! First, let's look at trends in log ins. Starting from a baseline set in June, we looked at the percentage changes in log ins from month to month. Raw numbers are important – we'll get to them in a bit – but here we can compare growth a little more fairly. Tabula Rasa adding 200 users is a big deal. WoW adding 200 users is slightly less exciting than watching CSPAN, in that it may be exciting to wonky dorks with calculator watches, but the rest of us have games to play.
All right, that's a little hard to read. I just like seeing all the lines together. Let me break it down a little for you:
So, how did the launch of a triple-A title affect the log-in patterns of other big MMOs?
The launch of WAR had a devastating effect on Age of Conan. Guild Wars is a little inflated with GamerDNA, in that more GamerDNA members play it than would appear in a true random sample. That community was an early partner with us. Arena.net's game and LotRO stagnated during WAR's launch, but both began growing again the following month. A slight dip happened for Tabula Rasa, but that title immediately rebounded. Anarchy Online, Star Wars Galaxies, and EVE grew during WAR's launch. The growth rate in the number of played hours for WoW was utterly unimpeded by the launch of WAR.
In other words, the launch of WAR, a highly anticipated title, had no lasting negative effect on any title besides one that was already trending downwards, *and* occupying the exact same playstyle niche. As we saw in other Market Trends columns this year, the only thing WAR seemed to do was to remind people who had stopped playing MMOs how much fun it was. It didn't eat into other games (besides the one in the same ecological niche), but although players didn't necessarily stick with WAR, the other PVP games in the genre showed improvement in the weeks following the launch of WAR, particularly Guild Wars and EVE.
What a freaking year. The weather outside is frightful for newcomers to the MMO genre, with a Blizzard that's been going on for so long that no one remembers what swimsuit weather is like. WAR broke out. Expansion packs rained down like meteors, but left no craters in the marketplace. And yet, good news abounds if you know how to read the signs. Come along with us as we look over half of 2008
Today's column features data from July through December. GamerDNA being a startup, our data collection in the first half of the year was not consistent enough to use for anything but wild guessing and drinking games.
Listen, a start up tech company can make ANYTHING into a drinking game.
"The growth rate in the number of played hours for WoW was utterly unimpeded by the launch of WAR." |
The top 100 chart was remarkably stable for the last six months of 2008. Some big launches made a splash – Spore, Fallout 3 – but overall the big players stayed the same. Four titles were in our top ten "most logged in" the entire time: WoW, Call of Duty 4, Counter-Strike: Source, and Guild Wars. Two other titles were up there four out of six months: Lord of the Rings Online and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne.
December numbers are projections, since December is not yet over. The projections are based on the time played in December up to the point where we pulled the data, and typical player behavior trends during the winter holidays. (Next week, we'll be doing a feature on player behavior over the holiday. What titles were hot gifts? What games were good enough for the day after Christmas, but not good enough to last until the New Year? Be sure to tune in!)
"The launch of WAR, a highly anticipated title, had no lasting negative effect on any title besides one that was already trending downwards, *and* occupying the exact same playstyle niche." |
Finally, what today's data is reflecting is the number of playing sessions each game enjoyed with GamerDNA members. It's not a perfect yardstick – if you logged in at all, it counts. That means the guy logging in to check his auctions is counted the same as the freak who raided for 24 straight hours, you know who you are, and dude, that's not healthy. What our data does NOT reflect is subscription rates, number of players, or anything like that. You might say these charts reflect interest and motivation, not financial figures.
On to the charts! First, let's look at trends in log ins. Starting from a baseline set in June, we looked at the percentage changes in log ins from month to month. Raw numbers are important – we'll get to them in a bit – but here we can compare growth a little more fairly. Tabula Rasa adding 200 users is a big deal. WoW adding 200 users is slightly less exciting than watching CSPAN, in that it may be exciting to wonky dorks with calculator watches, but the rest of us have games to play.
All right, that's a little hard to read. I just like seeing all the lines together. Let me break it down a little for you:
So, how did the launch of a triple-A title affect the log-in patterns of other big MMOs?
The launch of WAR had a devastating effect on Age of Conan. Guild Wars is a little inflated with GamerDNA, in that more GamerDNA members play it than would appear in a true random sample. That community was an early partner with us. Arena.net's game and LotRO stagnated during WAR's launch, but both began growing again the following month. A slight dip happened for Tabula Rasa, but that title immediately rebounded. Anarchy Online, Star Wars Galaxies, and EVE grew during WAR's launch. The growth rate in the number of played hours for WoW was utterly unimpeded by the launch of WAR.
In other words, the launch of WAR, a highly anticipated title, had no lasting negative effect on any title besides one that was already trending downwards, *and* occupying the exact same playstyle niche. As we saw in other Market Trends columns this year, the only thing WAR seemed to do was to remind people who had stopped playing MMOs how much fun it was. It didn't eat into other games (besides the one in the same ecological niche), but although players didn't necessarily stick with WAR, the other PVP games in the genre showed improvement in the weeks following the launch of WAR, particularly Guild Wars and EVE.










Get a WordPress.com Blog











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Angel said on 2:34PM 12-29-2008
So, what about the other 200+ games out there? these 11 are not a sufficient sample (i tend to ignore WoW numbers anyway. That game really deserves to be separated out of such analysis because it throws off the representations of other MMOs much like McDonald's does for the food industry and, imo, represents the same level of quality).
Where is the rest of the Sony stable? What about CoX? What about the rest of the NCSoft stable?
graphs are pretty and all but these, in the broadest sense, are useless...
Reply
Sam QforQ Houston said on 3:43PM 12-30-2008
Since gamerDNA is a startup and still growing, like Sanya mentions, we're limited to the data we have available to us (which means, we can only show data based on the gamers that are on gamerDNA and have entered in Xfire usernames to our site).
That said, we don't believe this data is conclusive or that they reflect game sales/subscription numbers. The data in this article is more of an indicator of what is going on, what people are actually playing, and we hope it invites more analysis and discussions.
Alanarion said on 4:35PM 12-29-2008
Cumulative statistics make for a very false image of a situation and since you start recording at a random date a game that has a steady slow growth looks TONS better than a big like AoC or AO that had a big hit at the launch (for understandable reasons) and are now on a very good path.
Thanks to your ridicolous useage of graphic statistics you make all games that had a bad start and are now getting better look horrrrribly bad.
Reply
Darkdust said on 12:58PM 12-30-2008
As somebody with a degree in Stats, I feel uncomfortably confused and misled by the "cumulative" graphs, particularly the utter lack of explanation of them.
But I'm glad to see SWG included in the analysis. :)
Reply
Sam QforQ Houston said on 3:56PM 12-30-2008
Thanks for the feedback DarkDust! We'll be sure to provide some better explanation in future articles :)
Thanks,
Sam Houston
gamerDNA Community Manager
Havohej said on 1:34PM 12-30-2008
What's GamerDNA and why do I care about it?
Reply
man what said on 10:35AM 12-31-2008
GamerDNA is irrelevant. The fact that it's being included as a reference for statistical analysis blows my freaking mind...
Frello said on 12:43PM 12-31-2008
At first I was interested in this article as it made it into slashdot which is typically a decent sign that something is fairly well put together.
I think you guys have a long way to go to be considered anything remotely approaching a service which even approximates the real trends out there. Posting this article in and of itself gives people the impression your analysis is realistic... which it is not.
For this to be taken even moderately serious, you have to provide more information for those of us who know about statistics. For all we know you've got an account base of 200 folks.
I think you said it best in the comment section yourself:
"That said, we don't believe this data is conclusive or that they reflect game sales/subscription numbers. The data in this article is more of an indicator of what is going on, what people are actually playing, and we hope it invites more analysis and discussions."
When you start tossing around numbers, especially numbers which are supposed to show trends in the real world, you have to back it up... well, or you end up looking like you're just making it all up. Finally, you're basing these numbers off of folks using Xfire. While certainly a way to obtain data, your pool is already tainted because your sampling consists of people who want to use and have a use for Xfire.
While it's a somewhat interesting excursion, you need to frontload this article with information about who your gamers are (I didn't even know what Xfire was... I thought you were refering to ATIs crossfire at first) and how that pool breaks down by demographics. Other than a brief mention you don't give us any real info on where you're getting your numbers from nor what kind of players these folks are.
Good luck!
Reply
Michael said on 1:00AM 1-10-2009
Instead of using Xfire data through GamerDNA, why not use their complete aggregated data:
www.xfire.com/games
www.xfire.com/xstatics
You still have any Xfire bias, but you have a larger sample size.
Reply