• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

I was bored.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
5thSSDW.KGW~CO

5thSSDW.KGW~CO

Grizzled Veteran
Sep 19, 2011
256
346
#1
I did some sums as I was interested in seeing some stats/figures for this game.

Approx 559 servers online right now. If we take three main types at 16, 32 and 64 slots and divide their sum by the three we get the average of 37 slots per server. 559 servers x 37 slots equals an average of 20,869 available slots. If we say the average cost of a slot for commercial servers is $0.50 (and pretend all servers are provided by GSPs :D ) and x 20,869 = $10,434, then take the number of players online right now at 2002 x $0.50 = $1001 and minus that from $10,434 we get $9433 going down the crapper. :D

Just in fun. Though part of that wasted moolah is mine. :( I'm assuming we can ignore those playing the beta, as that'll be a relative handful.

Personally I feel/think 2000 players is plenty for a sustainable and varied online gaming experience. Damn, if only DH had those kinds of numbers I'd still be playing that. I'd be all over it in fact. Alongside RO2 I think because DH's infantry doesn't rate too well in my opinion, at least not after playing RO2's, irrespective of its bugs and whatnot.

So yeah, 2000 players...RO2 is still hanging in there as a viable online game in my opinion, and I still think it can make a comeback to higher numbers if the devs get a handle on all its issues without too much more time slipping by.

I guess I'll still be cancelling my server though. I'm reasonably optimistic but I'm not stupid. And it can always be re-hired at a later date. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wodin and Zaltehook
#3
Don't forget a lot of people are just holding it off for a few months till the bugs are fixed and all runs well.

For example all the people with crossfire who wait till it's reasonably supported. Also the people with eyefinity which is not yet fully supported.

Not that I am saying that it will rise in the future, but they're factors needed to be included in a drawn conclusion;)
 
Upvote 0
#5
Yeah, I'm one of those peope who aren't playing due to performance issues.

I'd love to come back to experience the game, but I have a sinking feeling by the time they actually get the game playable it will be too late and we'll just have another dead online shooter like Brink, Breach, Homefront etc.

"Niche" game is fine and all, but I prefer to have more than a playerbase of 250 ppl to play with.

Some of you guys are way too optimistic, IMO. I've never seen player numbers get this low so quick after a release. I hope I'm wrong though. I'd like to see Tripwire pull this out of the fire.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#10
Tet5uo said:
another dead online shooter like Brink, Breach, Homefront etc.
Click to expand...

Brink drop there price to 20 dollars and it didn't even break into the top sellers. Cant release a full price game with only a handful of maps, which makes me wonder what did they do all that time and money.

Massively off topic there anyways, Well hopefully this game can improve and with a well dedicated small group of modders can turn the game around and drive player numbers.
 
Upvote 0
#11
In all honesty, I've been reinstalling my old Total War games while mostly playing Civ V. Lately more than anything, it's having several enemy waiting there to be shot (think initial spawn of Red Oct Factory as a German), G41 ads'd, torso shots leveled at 2 or 3 from 20m in succession, and ... being headshot, tabbing and seeing 0 kills, killed by one of the guys who should be on my hit list. The poor hit recog is just getting beyond my patience level ... :(
 
Upvote 0
#14
FWIW, let me say what concerns me the most: the short-range hit detection (point blank to 29m) is absolutely broken; scoring a "registered" hit on a perfectly-sighted target within that range is sheer LUCK, with the odds increasing in your favor as the distance gets longer, yet I have seen or heard NOTHING from TWI acknowledging this problem, let along assuring us that it will be corrected as a matter of priority. I am tired of being killed by zombies whom I went so far as to pump 5 rifle rounds into in order to "ensure" their death. It's simply a matter of which player is lucky enough to have a shot register first. It is extremely frustrating, and in my opinion, is absolutely unacceptable. Especially when you're using a rifle, and the guy with an automatic weapon has far greater "odds" in scoring "hits."

Another example. With a G41, in the corner ruins of Pavlov yesterday, I got tired of being killed by people I clearly treated to sucking chestwounds seconds earlier, so I took an Mkb and hit the stairs, with a clear view of the flight below me, and the lower fight to my left. Three straight times, as I laid rounds into a player as he ran up TWO flights of stairs, while I DID kill him, he got nearly into my face before one of at least 15 rounds that were properly sighted on him actually REGISTERED and took him down. That happened three times in about 45 seconds. If I had had a rifle, the very first one would have likely mele-killed me after I had put 1 or 2 rounds into his head or chest.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#16
Stahlhelmii said:
FWIW, let me say what concerns me the most: the short-range hit detection (point blank to 29m) is absolutely broken; scoring a "registered" hit on a perfectly-sighted target within that range is sheer LUCK, with the odds increasing in your favor as the distance gets longer, yet I have seen or heard NOTHING from TWI acknowledging this problem, let along assuring us that it will be corrected as a matter of priority. I am tired of being killed by zombies whom I went so far as to pump 5 rifle rounds into in order to "ensure" their death. It's simply a matter of which player is lucky enough to have a shot register first. It is extremely frustrating, and in my opinion, is absolutely unacceptable. Especially when you're using a rifle, and the guy with an automatic weapon has far greater "odds" in scoring "hits."

Another example. With a G41, in the corner ruins of Pavlov yesterday, I got tired of being killed by people I clearly treated to sucking chestwounds seconds earlier, so I took an Mkb and hit the stairs, with a clear view of the flight below me, and the lower fight to my left. Three straight times, as I laid rounds into a player as he ran up TWO flights of stairs, while I DID kill him, he got nearly into my face before one of at least 15 rounds that were properly sighted on him actually REGISTERED and took him down. That happened three times in about 45 seconds. If I had had a rifle, the very first one would have likely mele-killed me after I had put 1 or 2 rounds into his head or chest.
Click to expand...

It's a major bug that would already have been fixed probably if it weren't for the catastrophic failure of major core components like sound and stats. We'll just have to hang in here and hope TWI don't claim it's a non-existant issue.
 
Upvote 0
#19
Go take look at how many plausible games there are on -100 ping servers late on a Saturday (US) morning right now. Not a single game with more than 16 non-bot players. I actually WANTED to play this morning, and couldn't. Everything about this cluster-flook of a game sucks. I'm sorry, but it's how I feel.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu