Hazza54321 wrote:those stats are so pointless lol, theres never more than 600 usually, and the "unique" accoutns are just smurfs and invite spammer accounts
Not totally pointless, they might be a little skewed but still give a good indication.
Hazza54321 wrote:those stats are so pointless lol, theres never more than 600 usually, and the "unique" accoutns are just smurfs and invite spammer accounts
How many of those thousands would you say were smurf log-ins? One hundred? Two hundred? I'd argue the vast majority of players use a single account on a particular day. Of course there's no way to prove it, but it doesn't seem realistic to me that there would be more smurf log-ins than real logins or something like that.
momuuu wrote: ↑theres no way eaglemut is truly a top player
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also, as I said previously, the players who play offline don't actually help the game since they don't bring activity, I was talking about casual online players, who are still probably more than 1k players.
People who play offline may be more willing to join the community if the community is less hostile
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also, as I said previously, the players who play offline don't actually help the game since they don't bring activity, I was talking about casual online players, who are still probably more than 1k players.
People who play offline may be more willing to join the community if the community is less hostile
Wrong. People who play offline play offline and thus don't know the online community.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also, as I said previously, the players who play offline don't actually help the game since they don't bring activity, I was talking about casual online players, who are still probably more than 1k players.
People who play offline may be more willing to join the community if the community is less hostile
Wrong. People who play offline play offline and thus don't know the online community.
That's absurd... They have internet access, just don't play on ESO. They may find ESOC and find it full of egotistical high level players who deride people for not playing on "the patch"
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Also, as I said previously, the players who play offline don't actually help the game since they don't bring activity, I was talking about casual online players, who are still probably more than 1k players.
People who play offline may be more willing to join the community if the community is less hostile
Wrong. People who play offline play offline and thus don't know the online community.
That's absurd... They have internet access, just don't play on ESO. They may find ESOC and find it full of egotistical high level players who deride people for not playing on "the patch"
That's very unlikely that a guy who doesn't play online happens to find ESOC. Furthermore, if someone finds ESOC he won't find high level players who deride people for not playing on "the patch" because high level players actually don't do that.
Anyway, we're totally off-topic, so if you don't have an opinion on the topic, just don't post.
I honestly can't imagine a "casual" RTS game. Aoe3 is nice because you basically start off in a pipeline where your skills and knowledge progress in a fairly rigid and straightforward way; but you can do it at your own pace, and have fun while doing so. Because of that, I think it's much healthier than other competitive games like DotA 2. It's nice how aoe3 is somewhat casual for a competitive game, but this might not be good for sales. It seems like one of those things where you try to reach the golden middle, but just end up alienating both sides. I think that a game which wants to appeal to both audiences would have to make major innovations in the RTS genre. The tools just don't seem to be there at the moment.
Djigit wrote:I don't think the difficulty is a reasonable reason to say RTS genre is not welcoming. Counter Strike is much more difficult than COD or BF and yet it attracts a substantial amount of (new) players. The RTS genre would be much more successful if it was free-to-play with a micropayment strategy.
Well but that’s also cause Valve kept introducing stuff such as weapon skins, operations or drops at major tournaments to attract and keep casual players. Now the last operation was released about a year ago if i remember correctly and the number of new CS:GO players is going down. Now that might also have to do with the battle royale hype at the moment. Still Valve is being criticised for not doing enough to attract casual players in CS right now.
That's true too. I wish Valve acquired the AoE franchise. I've never played Dota 2 but they really did a fine job, and its workshop is great for the people who want to waste some money.
The difficulty level is relative. Every time a dumber game of the same genre is introduced it steals a good number of players if not the majority. The "free market" in this case doesn't pursue the abstract interest of making people play actually good games, where "good" is not defined just by the immediate fun one has playing it.