Wow player retention is worst than I thought

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

19 minutes ago, MagPrime said:

I knew it was just a matter of time....

[Fire2box]

1 hour ago, DatDarkOne said:

Because the whole topic is really nothing more than "The Sky is Falling!" type claim.  

If that's really all it was and "The sky is falling" is proclaimed as fiction, why bother contributing to the topic. 

I personally think Warframe is doing fine in terms of player numbers otherwise DE wouldn't be giving away a check for 250,000 dollars just for playing the game. However with the numbers behind the "register losers" comment and any time advertisements are like "20 million already play!" it's abundantly clear active player base across all platforms combined aren't even close to that. 

[MagPrime]

21 minutes ago, (XB1)Thy Divinity said:

I knew it was just a matter of time....

7 pages late, I know but I was camping.

[Gamma745]

[DatDarkOne]

1 hour ago, Fire2box said:

If that's really all it was and "The sky is falling" is proclaimed as fiction, why bother contributing to the topic. 

Simple, because misrepresentation of data to present a false narrative should be shutdown with facts and common sense.  

[OniDax]

5 hours ago, DeathDweller said:

https://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/19/03/a13437282/leyou-technologies-announces-2018-annual-results

https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/2019/0104/ltn201901041564.pdf

Please find me the paragraph that says WF has 3 mil monthly active users on crossplatforms.These 2 links are the only links i was able to find in which Leyou posts results of Warframe.

Edit:Also i didn't say concurrent is the same as active.There will be variables on that and i said that yes, i might be wrong on my first statement about 100+ but it doesn't reach mills and for the conccurent count how you did you counterweight exactly?From what you posted so far you added double of what you claim after A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n's claim, which i say again i can't find any statement that confirms it.

Edit 2:If now you claim 3 mil on all platforms and if we know that pc playerbase is bigger than consoles that should be at least 2:1 so about 2 mil on pc and 1 on consoles which again with your calculations doesn't add up it either goes weigh above or way below.A game with 500k daily concurent has about 2-2.500.000 monthly active players i really can't understand how you get your numbers for real.

Edit 3:Links with top games with the most active monthly playerbase and some on crossplatforms:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_by_monthly_active_player_count

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_games_by_player_count

https://twinfinite.net/gallery/most-played-games-ranked-monthly-players/

https://store.steampowered.com/stats/Steam-Game-and-Player-Statistics?l=t

Edit 4:Take CS:Go for example that has around 500k concurent players at any given time, add that with your calculation system and what we get?120.000.000 monthly players.What it really has?16mil.You don't counterweight and you give a wooping +85% of what it really has.So take Warframe  do your calculations get the 3mil of pc you first stated see how really it is counted remove the 85% and you get the real number.If you just keep denying that your system is way off then idk what else can i present. 

Sry guys but so far you just claim hypothetical numbers without any source 

Ok, so, it's actually somewhere around 4 million by the last counts. Look at these reports in order:

Leyou Interim Financial Report 2017

Leyou Annual Financial Report 2017

Leyou Interim Financial Report 2018

Leyou Annual Financial Report 2018

 

The 2017 reports indicate the monthly active user (MAU) number for that year, around 3 million by the end of the year. The 2018 annual report indicates a jump of 24.9% from the previous year to around 3.9 million.

To break it down further, in the first half of 2017, the monthly active user count was 2.2 million (Interim Report 2017). In the final four months, that jumped 44.7% to 3.1 million (Annual Report 2017). During the first half of 2018, that number jumped 33.7% to approx. 4.26 million (Interim Report 2018). During the second half, that number dropped to 3.9 million (because the MAU was 24.9% compared to 2017, as per Annual Report 2018).

The 3 million number came from the last report that I had seen (Annual Report 2017) and was based on the only report to give actual numbers (Interim Report 2017). It's possible that the 2019 interim report will report 5 million+ MAU, but for the numbers we have, it seems like it's hovering around 4 million. And that's an exceptionally great number. The reports don't give the actual numbers for highest concurrent users, though, so I don't know how that compares to games like CSGO. But I can tell you that they are well below the MAU of CSGO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_by_monthly_active_player_count).

Feel free to look at them yourself. I could have miscalculated something but search for MAU and monthly active user. Again, in the Interim Report 2017, you'll get an actual number for the MAU, but for the rest, it just reports a percentage increase. The Interim Report 2018 and Annual Report 2018 report an increase compared to 2017, so unless I'm mistaken, the MAU percentage increases in those reports have to be compared to the final 2017 numbers (which is the percentage increase in the annual 2017 report from the actual number in the interim 2017 report).

I wish most F2P publishers/developers (including Digital Extremes) would report monthly active user counts and not registered user counts. Registered user counts don't reflect the number of players actually playing your game. Monthly active user counts do, because within a month, that's the amount of players you can count on playing your game, whether they are veterans or new players. And for that number to be steadily increasing speaks to Warframe's popularity overall. I don't personally think DE's earned that kind of success because I think there are a lot of areas of the game that have been neglected that need improving, but Warframe is not dying. Anyone who thinks it is dying is just wrong.

Edited July 22, 2019 by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n

[DeathDweller]

11 minutes ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

Ok, so, it's actually somewhere around 4 million by the last counts. Look at these reports in order:

Leyou Interim Financial Report 2017

Leyou Annual Financial Report 2017

Leyou Interim Financial Report 2018

Leyou Annual Financial Report 2018

 

The 2017 reports indicate the monthly active user (MAU) number for that year, around 3 million by the end of the year. The 2018 annual report indicates a jump of 24.9% from the previous year to around 3.9 million.

To break it down further, in the first half of 2017, the monthly active user count was 2.2 million (Interim Report 2017). In the final four months, that jumped 44.7% to 3.1 million (Annual Report 2017). During the first half of 2018, that number jumped 33.7% to approx. 4.26 million (Interim Report 2018). During the second half, that number dropped to 3.9 million (because the MAU was 24.9% compared to 2017, as per Annual Report 2018).

The 3 million number came from the last report that I had seen (Annual Report 2017) and was based on the only report to give actual numbers (Interim Report 2017). It's possible that the 2019 interim report will report 5 million+ MAU, but for the numbers we have, it seems like it's hovering around 4 million. And that's an exceptionally great number. The reports don't give the actual numbers for highest concurrent users, though, so I don't know how that compares to games like CSGO.

Feel free to look at them yourself. I could have miscalculated something but search for MAU and monthly active user. Again, in the Interim Report 2017, you'll get an actual number for the MAU, but for the rest, it just reports a percentage increase. The Interim Report 2018 and Annual Report 2018 report an increase compared to 2017, so unless I'm mistaken, the MAU percentage increases in those reports have to be compared to the final 2017 numbers (which is the percentage increase in the annual 2017 report from the actual number in the interim 2017 report).

Now this is a legit answer, thanks for bringing some light to all this i ll check them.

[OniDax]

Just now, DeathDweller said:

Now this is a legit answer, thanks for bringing some light to all this i ll check them.

You're most certainly welcome. It's actually very good news for DE, and I wish DE would tout the monthly active user count and not the total registered user count. The latter is completely unreliable imo, but the former is actually pretty good in the gaming industry even for F2P games. It isn't the highest, and when you understand the kind of name recognition Warframe does and doesn't have, and you look at their monthly active user counts compared to others (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_by_monthly_active_player_count), it actually makes sense. It's not surprising. It is consistent with the kind of attention Warframe gets and has gotten over the years.

[IIDMOII]

On 2019-07-20 at 2:20 AM, Vit0Corleone said:

I just came across this site:

https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/2383-warframe

Assuming the data shown there is real, It's impressive how many PS4 players apparently just give up playing so soon.

I mean, reaching rank 30 on a shotgun is considered a "rare trophy" with only 15% (52k) of the players getting that achievement.

Accordingly with the trophy "play for 10 hours", it seems that 70% of the players quit before that, and about half of the players never get to finish off Vor ( "Kill the boss in the Mercury region and get to extraction" - 52% ) ...

This is terrible stats (I think? Haven't compared with other games thou). I do hope DE manages to improve the new player experience besides just doing a cool CGI video.

Looking at some of the trophies that have a" special meaning", as in IMHO it means the player is hooked and enjoys the game, I think completing "The Sacrifice" is a good example, which would put player churn in Warframe at about 85% ( only about 15% completed the Sacrifice ). I wonder what's the % of players that could be considered Experienced/Vets, which trophies would be a good indication of that?

I think it has a lot to do with the content loop. It never changes.

Games like destiny got savaged by games media for having the player repeat the same "click button" "defend" mechanic over and over......warframe is almost worse.

Whether you are MR 1 or MR 30, the basic loop never changes. People see through it early and quit. How many times can you run survival before it gets old?

Part of the problem, for me, is that I'm doing the same crap now that I did at level 1. Just with cooler guns and frames. That's not a big incentive considering the time investment asked of the player.

Edited July 22, 2019 by IIDMOII

[OniDax]

1 minute ago, IIDMOII said:

I think it has a lot to do with the content loop. It never changes.

Games like destiny got savaged by games media for having the player repeat the same "click button" "defend" mechanic over and over......warframe is almost worse.

Whether you are MR 1 or MR 30, the basic loop never changes. People see through it early and quit. How many times can you run survival before it gets Old?

Warframe is almost worse imo as well. What saves Warframe is that it's F2P. People can always freely come and go. I don't believe DE would be seeing the success they've been seeing if they sold Warframe for $60.

[DatDarkOne]

4 minutes ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

Warframe is almost worse imo as well. What saves Warframe is that it's F2P. People can always freely come and go. I don't believe DE would be seeing the success they've been seeing if they sold Warframe for $60.

Which is something that seems to be completely forgotten in a lot of the topics on the forums.  It makes a difference in some of the arguments.  

Edited July 22, 2019 by DatDarkOne

[(XBOX)zThulsaDoomz]

5 minutes ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

Warframe is almost worse imo as well. What saves Warframe is that it's F2P. People can always freely come and go. I don't believe DE would be seeing the success they've been seeing if they sold Warframe for $60.

I believe many players over think this game, but that's just my opinion.

[DeathDweller]

@A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n Checked them and you're right.Also proves that Fortuna  didn't do as good comparing to POE and The Sacrfice.But the numbers for the overall MUA are indeed above from what i thought.Thanks again

[(PSN)Cargan2016]

I didnt get alot of the trophies untill well into my 3rd year on ps 4 I just didnt care for them I played with what i liked and didnt look at challenges

 

[OniDax]

10 minutes ago, DeathDweller said:

@A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n Checked them and you're right. Also proves that Fortuna didn't do as good comparing to POE and The Sacrifice. But the numbers for the overall MUA are indeed above from what i thought.Thanks again

That's what I thought as well. I doubt the number has increased to 5 million+, even though it's possible, because Fortuna didn't seem to capture players' interest like PoE and Sacrifice. I expect that number will jump when Empyrean releases.

[SneakyErvin]

9 hours ago, DeathDweller said:

https://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/19/03/a13437282/leyou-technologies-announces-2018-annual-results

https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/2019/0104/ltn201901041564.pdf

Please find me the paragraph that says WF has 3 mil monthly active users on crossplatforms.These 2 links are the only links i was able to find in which Leyou posts results of Warframe.

Edit:Also i didn't say concurrent is the same as active.There will be variables on that and i said that yes, i might be wrong on my first statement about 100+ but it doesn't reach mills and for the conccurent count how you did you counterweight exactly?From what you posted so far you added double of what you claim after A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n's claim, which i say again i can't find any statement that confirms it.

Edit 2:If now you claim 3 mil on all platforms and if we know that pc playerbase is bigger than consoles that should be at least 2:1 so about 2 mil on pc and 1 on consoles which again with your calculations doesn't add up it either goes weigh above or way below.A game with 500k daily concurent has about 2-2.500.000 monthly active players i really can't understand how you get your numbers for real.

Edit 3:Links with top games with the most active monthly playerbase and some on crossplatforms:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_by_monthly_active_player_count

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_games_by_player_count

https://twinfinite.net/gallery/most-played-games-ranked-monthly-players/

https://store.steampowered.com/stats/Steam-Game-and-Player-Statistics?l=t

Edit 4:Take CS:Go for example that has around 500k concurent players at any given time, add that with your calculation system and what we get?120.000.000 monthly players.What it really has?16mil.You don't counterweight and you give a wooping +85% of what it really has.So take Warframe  do your calculations get the 3mil of pc you first stated see how really it is counted remove the 85% and you get the real number.If you just keep denying that your system is way off then idk what else can i present. 

Sry guys but so far you just claim hypothetical numbers without any source 

Never ever use wikipedia for anything when you want to try and prove something and never ever make up bad math that overshoots so far it is silly when the actual math is actual a good ballpark number.

Your CS:GO example. They have 500k concurrent players, how #*!%ing badly did you fail math in order to apply my method and get 120 million players? You are so damn out of it. My example would land the active number at 12 million i.e 500k multiplied by 24. And oh what was the actual number? 16 mill. See, my guesstimation end up at an actual ballpark number since we ignore the popularity of the game and just stick to pure numbers.

As for counterweighing. You simply dont, the system does that for you since it counts all players equally. You dont use more than two simple numbers, concurrent players and hours of a day. What you are trying to achieve is exact numbers, which it isnt about, it is about ballpark estimations, that is all. I simply told you that your idea was waaaaaay of and you started to blabber about logic, which you have none in this conversation or concept.

How the hell did you even reach the number 120.000.000? I cant even find a single way except you dumping a zero after 24 or 500k.

[DatDarkOne]

4 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Never ever use wikipedia for anything when you want to try and prove somethin

Nothing wrong with using Wikipedia if what you are getting from it has cited links.  It can actually be more accurate and up to date than other sources.  

Colleges and professors just don't like it because it cuts into their sales of books and/or encyclopedia type sources.  

I know this is off topic like a mofo.  I just wanted to give one of the reasons it's validity is IMO often unfairly challenged.  😀 

[DeathDweller]

13 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Never ever use wikipedia for anything when you want to try and prove something and never ever make up bad math that overshoots so far it is silly when the actual math is actual a good ballpark number.

Your CS:GO example. They have 500k concurrent players, how #*!%ing badly did you fail math in order to apply my method and get 120 million players? You are so damn out of it. My example would land the active number at 12 million i.e 500k multiplied by 24. And oh what was the actual number? 16 mill. See, my guesstimation end up at an actual ballpark number since we ignore the popularity of the game and just stick to pure numbers.

As for counterweighing. You simply dont, the system does that for you since it counts all players equally. You dont use more than two simple numbers, concurrent players and hours of a day. What you are trying to achieve is exact numbers, which it isnt about, it is about ballpark estimations, that is all. I simply told you that your idea was waaaaaay of and you started to blabber about logic, which you have none in this conversation or concept.

How the hell did you even reach the number 120.000.000? I cant even find a single way except you dumping a zero after 24 or 500k.

Damn i found the mistake cause while counting i had 12000000 on my screen and misscounted one zero

[SneakyErvin]

3 minutes ago, DeathDweller said:

Damn i found the mistake cause while counting i had 12000000 on my screen and misscounted one zero

Happens. I just hope you realized that what I said wasnt bullS#&$ and that in many cases the simple method of estimating active numbers comes up lower than what they actually are since it comepletely neglects popularity. For less popular games it tends to be much more accurate.

[DeathDweller]

Just now, SneakyErvin said:

Happens. I just hope you realized that what I said wasnt bullS#&$ and that in many cases the simple method of estimating active numbers comes up lower than what they actually are since it comepletely neglects popularity. For less popular games it tends to be much more accurate.

Agree

[SneakyErvin]

16 minutes ago, DatDarkOne said:

Nothing wrong with using Wikipedia if what you are getting from it has cited links.  It can actually be more accurate and up to date than other sources.  

Colleges and professors just don't like it because it cuts into their sales of books and/or encyclopedia type sources.  

I know this is off topic like a mofo.  I just wanted to give one of the reasons it's validity is IMO often unfairly challenged.  😀 

Yeah with cited links it does provide something. It is just the general experience of wiki that tends to drive me nuts because it is filled mith so much missinformation in many cases. Dont get me started on how much S#&$e wiki is when it comes to things like norse mythology etc. Makes me go borderlands 2 goliath mode "I'm so goddamn angry right now!!!".