Quote:
Originally Posted by
NegativeS
Steam might be the most accurate to people actually playing since unlike a lot of games on it you don't need separate Steam accounts to access multiple XIV characters/accounts, but of course that's only an unknowable portion of the playerbase.
Right, but the most important part is the spikes - and actually, the Steam and Lucky Bancho spikes tend to roughly align pretty well. Steam's spikes tend to run out quicker, due to more frequent data and the fact people login for a patch then stop playing, whereas Lucky Bancho's stats cover multiple months so appear to stretch longer. I just wanted something that showed it all together, instead of trying to imagine them together.
Quote:
Without an ability to read Japanese or get an accurate translation of the page, it's impossible for me to know what 'active' means in this context--on for the majority of time, or logged on a single time?
Lucky Bancho's stats are not "logged in time". They are merely a measure of if the lodestone profile changed at some point in the last 2-4 months. The criteria changed over time, but this is what it currently is:- Maximum level is 70 or higher (excluding exactly 70) OR Job is a job that cannot be unlocked in the free trial OR Belongs to an FC *
- HP, level, and experience points have changed since the last survey (8/27).
- The number of minions and mounts held has changed since the last survey.
- New characters not present in the previous survey
- Characters who have public profiles, minions, and mounts on the Lodestone
- Own at least one mount
- Characters using jumping potions in their jobs at the time of data acquisition (main weapons at the time of data acquisition with IL390 and max level 70, IL530 and max level 80, IL660 and max level 90) are excluded.
It's worth noting that Lucky Bancho takes these stats before patches in many cases. So it is trying to catch the lowest amount of people right before patch date, not the actual spike after the patch. So post-patch data is a bit staggered.
Quote:
Additionally, does not account for players with multiple characters, players with multiple accounts, etc
True, and that is why I'm combining multiple data sources. However, this subject has been discussed. Lucky Bancho compared the data to leaked subscriber numbers and found about 15-20% of it was alts, but this was before DC travel which reduces the need for them.
Quote:
the 'Achievements Enabled' link, I can't read, so I have no opinion on it. Too low quality, and in a language I can't understand (that is too low quality to translate).
I recall that blue is new achievement hunters, red is continuing achievement hunters, green is people who recorded their last achievement at that point (ie. they may have quit or taken a break).
It was hard to get exact numbers so I had to do it by pixel (which was hard work), but I was able to reflect it. Achievement hunters are overall a small amount of overall active players, as it shows, so it's hard to see the spikes, but I wanted to convey how it's a small amount of players (the alternative method hid the Steam spikes). It appears that achievement hunters stick around more than everyone else though (obviously) since they are busy getting achievements while everyone else takes a break. But if there was a massive drop off among achievement hunters, it would be an interesting data point.
Quote:
That just leaves the SE stat, which... seems to vary uncomfortably wildly. I'd love to know the exact numbers you used for calculating this.
I went to the corporate website (linked) and read their quarterly reports dating back to 2014. I extracted the Ordinary Income (aka Recurring Income). Obviously, this may contain things other than FF14, such as DQ and FF11, but I have limited data for those. Nevertheless, I tried to subtract the fees I could from it.
Each quarterly report adds onto the last, therefore I had to subtract the previous number to get the one for that quarter only. Then I divided it by 3 months (to get the figure for 1 month). Then I divided it by the average subscription fee across countries. The result of this was some of the figures were extremely low, likely due to how they calculate their quarterly reports, 3-month and 6-month subs and patch lulls, etc.
Despite all this manipulation - accounting for other sub fees and dividing it down to account for only 1 month, the spikes were still way higher than even Lucky Bancho's estimate, which could make sense on the basis that people probably subscribe without actually playing.
I'm sure I could do this better in various ways, perhaps by finding specific months where their only sales were FFXIV, but it's a difficult thing to do without knowing exact numbers. Regardless, you can clearly see yellow spikes at major Blue/Red spikes where they made lots of money from an expansion or patch release.