Cal has the numbers. Cal reads the forum.UO has never really released subscription numbers. I doubt they'll change that policy now.
The only time they gave a tight approximate that I recall would be right when AoS came out.UO has never really released subscription numbers. I doubt they'll change that policy now.
/thisHeres the offical numbers....
Its gone up...then gone down...gone up again..then gone down..after each Publish it goes up then goes down....as it stands now..its on a downward spiral..BUT its slowly back to up with new old players coming back..who will play for awhile and make it go up..then it will go down again
/and thisWander your Shard and look at all the houses.
You may not see that many active players, but over 29 shards, it's got to add up to a lot of paid accounts.
ITS OVER 9000!!!!!Simple question, can we get a definitive answer?
47000ITS OVER 9000!!!!!
The actual number of individual players isn't really all that important. What matters is how many subscriptions there are. That is what is going to keep our little world alive. So counting houses isn't a bad idea...many peeps have 2 or more acc so counting homes would not be the best guesstimate
Cal reads the forums ... Cal does not normally answer these questions.Cal has the numbers. Cal reads the forum.
*covers a beaming smile with his hands as he slips away* ... That is a great idea!/this
/and this
But I'll say this. They need to advertise. UO is a very marketable product, and worth investing advertising on.
*covers a beaming smile with his hands as he slips away* ... That is a great idea!
hehehehe ...
OK, what about percentage of language preference? LikeAs a rule we don't give out subscriber numbers.
I'm a big fan of repeating myself...*covers a beaming smile with his hands as he slips away* ... That is a great idea!
hehehehe ...
Can't comment in our classic shard thread though can you.Cal reads the forums ... Cal does not normally answer these questions.
Cal rarely refers to himself in the first person.
Cal will now stop writing in the third person.
As a rule we don't give out subscriber numbers.
fortunately for Rodney his answer was correct."4?"
-Rodney Dangerfield
Ummm, be fair, he did quite some time ago. More than once I think, in the first thread.Can't comment in our classic shard thread though can you.Cal reads the forums ... Cal does not normally answer these questions.
Cal rarely refers to himself in the first person.
Cal will now stop writing in the third person.
As a rule we don't give out subscriber numbers.
Told you SO!!! Its a RULE.Cal reads the forums ... Cal does not normally answer these questions.
Cal rarely refers to himself in the first person.
Cal will now stop writing in the third person.
As a rule we don't give out subscriber numbers.
He commented once with his carrot and stick in hand, not said a word since.Ummm, be fair, he did quite some time ago. More than once I think, in the first thread.
Well if you read your post you would think he had never said anything on the subject. Not only did he comment in the thread, but there have been at least two other specific comments on the subject from developers, including one which indicated there would be no further comment for some time. I'd expect something before the end of the year, but who knows.He commented once with his carrot and stick in hand, not said a word since.
I'd expect that if he has time to comment in a thread about UO subscriptions where he provided no information except to gloat a little then he can atleast have the respect to comment on the classic shard thread. People on that thread have game up stacks of time and debated more on that thread than any other I see on stratics but good old Cal does not have the courtesy to even make a purposeful comment.Well if you read your post you would think he had never said anything on the subject. Not only did he comment in the thread, but there have been at least two other specific comments on the subject from developers, including one which indicated there would be no further comment for some time. I'd expect something before the end of the year, but who knows.
And I'm afraid an awful lot of the posts are tail chasing sprinkled liberally with trolls and flame wars, with the same things being said over and over again. There have been some good things in those threads, but I'm thinking that just about everything that can be said on the subject has been said, and it's probably time now to have a little patience and do some waiting...There has been an unbelievable amount of posts in that thread since his last comment which didn't give much away anyhows.
What?! 9000?! There's no way that can be right!ITS OVER 9000!!!!!
If you dare say "Its by word of mouth and you're our best advertisement!" like the Samurai Empire Producer, I will have to slap you.... seriously*covers a beaming smile with his hands as he slips away* ... That is a great idea!
hehehehe ...
Ehn, with all the F2P games anymore I'd put in the following:I too know players who own 2 to 5 accounts an are active. Also I have friends who pay to keep their accounts open so if they want to come back they can. So on the real track when I said its about time UO open up the house per shard per account no one yelled cause the amount of open ground is so vast even if we all went hog wild there still would be acres of emptyness. We really do need to open it back up for the 1 house per shard, just to give the place the look as if we are not hemoraging players leaving game. Cal I am being deadly serious we need to put out the word UO is here. Put a free cd in the other games with a 30 day trial free(you can make it so these accounts cant place a house, as wow does with its trial accounts excepting stuff in game) And if they do pay for 3month s up front you give keycode to unlock their trial account to let them place a house. Its worth a try....
Trapped on Haven Island until you pay to upgrade .Ehn, with all the F2P games anymore I'd put in the following:
* Unlimited 'trial time'
* Cannot place houses
* relegated to Trammel
* bank set at, say, 20-30 items
* skills and stats cannot be modified by scrolls
* no use of things like artifacts, soulstones, etc.
I'm sure there are many other limitations we could impose; I do know it would likely bring back some old players, and may perhaps get them intrigued to start paying again for the perks.
You know, with thinking of this list I realized that UO lost a prime opportunity to sell more copies of SA by not making 'imbued' items only wearable/ equipable by SA active accounts.Trapped on Haven Island until you pay to upgrade .
One of the biggest problems we have attracting new players is hinted at by the fact that a popular, well-liked, and prominent member of the community (yourself) uses a column about new players to push the Trammel-Felucca argument.It just so happens I wrote a column about the whole new player issue. Or rather the "lack of new player issue". Feel free to read about what I consider to be the root of the problems and what I think should be done to solve them:
Column: Fighting the Lack of New Players