| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (10)

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 1:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Shouldn't that be an unusually low ratio of users per server? I.e they have more servers and the same number of users?
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 1:33PM GalileoAce said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No, high ratio of users per server is correct.

Low ratio of server per users would also be correct..but very odd wording..So the first one is correct.
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 1:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I doubt Second Life will even reach twice it's current user base. I took a look at it and all it is is a virtual chat room with game-like features. You'll find 30 somethings looking to cyber or sell you something. Whee!
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 1:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm all confused now. I thought it was odd, then I thought it was ok, now I think it's odd again.

Article says "high ratio of users per server"
~250,000 users on ~2,500 servers is 100 users per server.
EQ2's ~250k users on ~1k servers is 250 users per server.

EQ2 has a higher users per server number. Wouldn't SL's users per server be kind of low? 100:1 is lower than 250:1, right?
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 2:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
you live with a woman long enough you will learn that anything can mean everything, and eveerything can mean everything.

if you take what it sais out of context enough it would be correct :P
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 2:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Right on, more servers and lesser users is more servers per user, not the other way around. Since less is not more, at least not figuratively speaking ;)
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 2:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WOW doesn't scale! They just stick on new realms. Guildwars Scales.
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2006 7:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I find it hard to believe that the user per server ratio is that horrible, only 250 users per server? That leaves a razor thin (if even present) profit margin I would think (dual CPU servers aren't that cheap and you still need to factor in bandwidth, power consumption and a roof overhead).

I would have expected 10,000 to 100,000 users per server as a more sustainable user to server ratio. Coming from a web server background it just seems crazy that you have to dedicate that much hardware for what's going on.

Cheers
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2006 2:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Those folks may have a Second Life account, but they probably need to Get a Life (not the defunct Chris Elliot Fox sitcom.)

Nathan's correct. No fun = no issues with scalability.
Reply

Posted: Jun 10th 2006 12:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I will never understand why people actually care about Second Life. First of all, the entire game is based on user-created content (bad) and real money trade (very, very bad). The problem here is that a new user will have little to do. Look at the popularity of WoW which has lots of quests and things to do, versus Second Life which IMHO sucks.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW