Stardock 2009 Customer Survey

There's tons of interesting stuff buried in here

http://bit.ly/4mycwE

It is our rough estimation that for the calendar year 2009, digital distribution will represent approximately 25% of the revenue for a typical PC game publisher on a new title (though this varies significantly based on demographics).
Despite this, only 23% of people who have purchased Demigod have ever even attempted to logon to play Internet multiplayer.
...
Our conclusion is that strategy games that we make and publish in the future will support multiplayer but will not sacrifice the single player experience to do so.
At the time of this writing, approximately 2,000 users did return Demigod to us. Approximately 60% of those users purchased at retail. Nearly 90% of all users who returned Demigod subsequently re-purchased the game once the network issue had been resolved.
The biggest problem I had with WindowBlinds is that 99% of the skins available for WindowBlinds are terrible. While Stardock makes the program WindowBlinds, individual skinners from around the world make the skins with varying degrees of quality.

I find it hilarious they're saying the users of their product are mostly terrible at making skins

Stardock has contracted top skinners to create professional quality skins to give away (these will start to flow out in the coming months).

I find the fact that so few people were playing multiplayer unsurprising, I am really glad that they have data to back that up and will keep that in mind when making games in the future.

Yonder wrote:

I find the fact that so few people were playing multiplayer unsurprising, I am really glad that they have data to back that up and will keep that in mind when making games in the future.

My typical experience with Demigod has been:

"Oh yeah, I need some Demigod!"
Connect to online, try to find a pantheon game
keep waiting
Hit cancel, try to find a random multiplayer game
keep waiting
then 1 of two things almost always happens:
1: I get into a game and half of the players drop out so it's me and 1 or 2 other people. I leave to try and find another game.
2: I sit and wait until I get frustrated and quit.
At this point I play a couple rounds of Single Player, feel like I got my fix and go about my day (probably playing something else).

Yes, this is after all the "multiplayer fixes". I go through this about once a week.

Yonder wrote:

I find the fact that so few people were playing multiplayer unsurprising, I am really glad that they have data to back that up and will keep that in mind when making games in the future.

That's my favorite part of their survey, as well. I don't play games with other people, and it's sad to me that some of the most interesting-sounding strategy games released in the last few years have such anemic single-player components. That's one thing, at least, that Blizzard seems to have gotten right about StarCraft II: it has a single-player campaign that's more than a tutorial for the multiplayer.

Demigod, while a really cool game, suffered from two major problems:

  • The single player campaign was too anemic to build and hold interest on it's own.
  • The multiplayer was broken on release.

Either one of these problems could have been dealt with in isolation. If the single player had been tacked on but multiplayer was solid out of the box, it would have had a chance. If the multiplayer was broken but the single player was robust enough to hold interest while they fixed it, it would have had a chance. But the combination proved difficult to overcome, and that's a shame, because Demigod has a ton of elements that were done really well.

mrwynd wrote:
Yonder wrote:

I find the fact that so few people were playing multiplayer unsurprising, I am really glad that they have data to back that up and will keep that in mind when making games in the future.

My typical experience with Demigod has been:

"Oh yeah, I need some Demigod!"
Connect to online, try to find a pantheon game
keep waiting
Hit cancel, try to find a random multiplayer game
keep waiting
then 1 of two things almost always happens:
1: I get into a game and half of the players drop out so it's me and 1 or 2 other people. I leave to try and find another game.
2: I sit and wait until I get frustrated and quit.
At this point I play a couple rounds of Single Player, feel like I got my fix and go about my day (probably playing something else).

Yes, this is after all the "multiplayer fixes". I go through this about once a week.

Have you given LoL a try? It made forget completely about Demigod. I haven't asked for a refund because I like the guys, but man that game was so broken.

Right about Demigod's broken multiplayer experience but that's not the important part.

PyromanFO wrote:

Despite this, only 23% of people who have purchased Demigod have ever even attempted to logon to play Internet multiplayer.

It's not that it's broken, it's that nobody even tried to play it.

Now maybe the broken news caused that, I don't know. Still interesting.

PyromanFO wrote:

Right about Demigod's broken multiplayer experience but that's not the important part.

PyromanFO wrote:

Despite this, only 23% of people who have purchased Demigod have ever even attempted to logon to play Internet multiplayer.

It's not that it's broken, it's that nobody even tried to play it.

Now maybe the broken news caused that, I don't know. Still interesting.

Speaking as someone who has considered buying Left 4 Dead 2 to play alone, I'm not really surprised by this. While multiplayer gaming is a big component of gaming for a lot of people (in some cases, the most important component), it holds little appeal for some of us. Had I purchased a copy of Demigod, which I would have if it had had a robust single-player component, I would have never bothered with the online multiplayer. I'm glad that Stardock has some data to backup the existence of people like me and is paying attention to that data.

I would like to see the data from people who bought Modern Warfare 2. From what I understand most people bought it specifically to play multiplayer.

Also numbers broken down per-console, per-genre, etc. It's a very interesting statistic I've never thought of before.

PyromanFO wrote:

I would like to see the data from people who bought Modern Warfare 2. From what I understand most people bought it specifically to play multiplayer.

Also numbers broken down per-console, per-genre, etc. It's a very interesting statistic I've never thought of before.

Honestly, I think you'd be surprised by how many people bought Modern Warfare 2 to play single-player. I know that the original was a huge multiplayer hit, but I've known a fair number of people who never played it online (including me, but I think I've beat that anecdote to death by now). I'd expect that number to be in the minority, but I would also expect it to be a fair-sized minority.

I was looking forward to the MW2 story, that's why I'm waiting for the price drop (eta 2011); the Multiplayer hasn't really called me out yet. I only played Cod4 because of single player too.

I think the mp thing is based on demographics. I could be wrong here, but I really think that most older players love the idea of good quality games, but loathe the idea of hopping into random online games with a bunch of douchebags.

MP gaming needs some kind of moderation. I realize there are some organizations for this type thing, but just think about the idea of hopping into a random mp game on Live ... you'll likely be called a {homophobic slur} (<-- forum software changed my word) inside the first 10 mins, and many times per hour after. It goes downhill after that.

That split for multiplayer seems typical of any game. Epic has said only about a quarter to a third of people who bought UT 04 every went online. I would not be surprised if a similar split were present in Left 4 Dead.

KingGorilla wrote:

That split for multiplayer seems typical of any game. Epic has said only about a quarter to a third of people who bought UT 04 every went online. I would not be surprised if a similar split were present in Left 4 Dead.

I am far from a mp gamer, but even I went into L4D. Granted, this was co-op with friends, but I did that a lot. I think L4D might be a different story, because of it's heavy co-op "vs the computer" system, which made it accessible to single-player types who don't like the idea of playing with strangers online.

Jeff-66 wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

That split for multiplayer seems typical of any game. Epic has said only about a quarter to a third of people who bought UT 04 every went online. I would not be surprised if a similar split were present in Left 4 Dead.

I am far from a mp gamer, but even I went into L4D. Granted, this was co-op with friends, but I did that a lot. I think L4D might be a different story, because of it's heavy co-op "vs the computer" system, which made it accessible to single-player types who don't like the idea of playing with strangers online.

Plus single player L4D kind of sucks because the bots are not that smart. It really is meant to be MP, kind of like TF2.

I swear there was already a thread on here about this. Anyway, I like the stat that has 96% of people who responded are male. That's quite a disparate number of men.

I couldn't read past the bit where he reduces the entire Steamworks package to the label "DRM" and then describes Impulse Reactor as "copy protection". So all the developer tools, matchmaking, and voip are nothing but evil DRM, but your copy protection scheme magically avoids being labeled DRM?

Brad: Steamworks is a LOT more than just DRM, and your copy protection is DRM. Seriously, your product has a lot going for it, but as long as you focus more on claiming the moral high ground and less on actually providing customers with a competitive product, few gamers are going to be fooled by your semantic shenanigans. Especially when your "Improving the user experience" section basically says that Impulse needs to provide users what Steamworks provides its users.

I really like impulse. It just isn't as refined and useful to me as Steam is. I'll continue to use it. I find it extremely tedious to read Brad Wardell go on about Impulse's moral superiority. Impulse has been marketed as an alternative to Steam, but without the DRM. In reality, according to this report, it is an alternative to Steam, but one that lacks matchmaking, community, and VOIP; and now it includes it's own flavor of DRM.

If I wasn't able to support GWJ by shopping w/ them, I don't think that I would anymore. Keep making your product better and stop intentionally misleading your customers.

adam.greenbrier wrote:

That's my favorite part of their survey, as well. I don't play games with other people, and it's sad to me that some of the most interesting-sounding strategy games released in the last few years have such anemic single-player components. That's one thing, at least, that Blizzard seems to have gotten right about StarCraft II: it has a single-player campaign that's more than a tutorial for the multiplayer.

I am not alone! Yay!

Kehama wrote:

I am not alone! Yay!

Now you can be alone together.

I (shockingly) agree with Adam, here. Demigod looked interesting when I first heard about it, but once I saw it was predominantly focused on multiplayer I set it aside, and then the rush hit and I completely forgot about it. Multiplayer just presents a particular difficulty to some of us. Get everything running with a reasonable ping, find people who aren't total asshats (GWJ certainly helps here), sync up your schedule with multiple other people, find time where you can sit and play completely uninterrupted, etc. It's just not worth the hassle when there are other games I can just sit down and play.

I did jump into the TF2 community here, but that was pretty much without cost, as I'd already purchased the Orange Box for other reasons, and I figured it must be pretty good since it's by far the longest thread here. Even then, regular TF2ers can attest to my having to jump out suddenly when the baby decides to wake up, or the dogs have to go out, or what have you.

And let's not even mention the pubbies.

If you really have to focus on multiplayer, fine. But know that I (and many others) won't consider your product because of it. Of course, there is local multiplayer...we could use some more of that. There is more to life than Rock Band. Some of the best experiences I've ever had in my entire life were sittings of the N64 Monkey Ball games with a 5th of scotch and 3 good friends.

I'd also be curious to know what percentage of Xbox owners have Gold accounts. Or are even connected to the internet, for that matter. I'd bet it's a similar percentage.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I am not alone! Yay!

Now you can be alone together.

Well, you can try to make yourselves believe you are together, but you're really still very separate. Just you and the computer. No one to help you if the computer decides to try to kill you with the toaster or egg beater.

garion333 wrote:

I swear there was already a thread on here about this. Anyway, I like the stat that has 96% of people who responded are male. That's quite a desparate number of men.

FTFY

Oso wrote:

Brad: Steamworks is a LOT more than just DRM, and your copy protection is DRM. Seriously, your product has a lot going for it, but as long as you focus more on claiming the moral high ground and less on actually providing customers with a competitive product, few gamers are going to be fooled by your semantic shenanigans. Especially when your "Improving the user experience" section basically says that Impulse needs to provide users what Steamworks provides its users.

I really like impulse. It just isn't as refined and useful to me as Steam is. I'll continue to use it. I find it extremely tedious to read Brad Wardell go on about Impulse's moral superiority. Impulse has been marketed as an alternative to Steam, but without the DRM. In reality, according to this report, it is an alternative to Steam, but one that lacks matchmaking, community, and VOIP; and now it includes it's own flavor of DRM..

I have to agree with this. Essentially I'd like to see less big outbursts against your competition and let your product do the talking.

When Stardock first put out the 'gamers bill of rights' I was also chin-stroking a bit because it was at the time when lots of companies were experimenting with the securom limited/online activations, and they conveniently had that to get some headlines. I'd like to believe they are an altruistic company looking out for the gamer, but I'm too cynical to believe that. Again, actions speak louder than words, so it's something to keep an eye on in the time span of years, not a few months.

adam.greenbrier wrote:
PyromanFO wrote:

I would like to see the data from people who bought Modern Warfare 2. From what I understand most people bought it specifically to play multiplayer.

Also numbers broken down per-console, per-genre, etc. It's a very interesting statistic I've never thought of before.

Honestly, I think you'd be surprised by how many people bought Modern Warfare 2 to play single-player. I know that the original was a huge multiplayer hit, but I've known a fair number of people who never played it online (including me, but I think I've beat that anecdote to death by now). I'd expect that number to be in the minority, but I would also expect it to be a fair-sized minority.

Considering about 50% of 360's are not on Live! then i'd bet it's a huge amount. My sister has requested MW2 (i don't even think she played the first!) for her birthday and she certainly won't be playing it online.

Hobbes2099 wrote:

Have you given LoL a try? It made forget completely about Demigod. I haven't asked for a refund because I like the guys, but man that game was so broken.

I downloaded and installed it, tried to play a few online games and got completely owned. I'll have to go back and give it a try again, but with the gaming season here it will probably be a while.