I'm betting these figures are somewhat 'overrated'
Did some checking on the Alexa thing, and it can be manipulated by scripts running in the users browser


CABAL wrote:Hehe. I have some estimates, but for now they're quite premature.
Yeah... But the question is who's going to set up scripts in their browser just to mess up GW's alexa ranking?![]()
Yes, I do agree with you that the figures seem overrated.
NanoBite wrote:Well, not specifically GW, but people who sell domain names, might crank up statistics to make domain names look more appealing then they realy are
Now I am curious though, whom in GW uses Alexa ??
Seeing as Alexa says visitors visit an average of 13 pages ...


CABAL wrote:NanoBite wrote:Well, not specifically GW, but people who sell domain names, might crank up statistics to make domain names look more appealing then they realy are
Now I am curious though, whom in GW uses Alexa ??
Seeing as Alexa says visitors visit an average of 13 pages ...
Definitely someone that doesn't mass much



That quite depends on the USP's of this game.. and frankly, it's less flashy, takes more time and gives less 'braggable' rewards than some crappy Facebook game (CityVille, anyone? *puke*) does.
Juliette wrote::smt081 That quite depends on the USP's of this game.. and frankly, it's less flashy, takes more time and gives less 'braggable' rewards than some crappy Facebook game (CityVille, anyone? *puke*) does.
This game is for people with big imaginations.Not the general audience of such brainless point-and-click games like (again) Facebook games. No strategy, just click. BAH. Glad we have GW.


CABAL wrote:However, those devices are randomly distributed (Assumption; correct me if I'm wrong)
But Alexa toolbars are purely "opt-in". So I wouldn't say they are an accurate representation, of global internet users. The people that are likely to know about Alexa, and those that actually use Alexa, are, say, a lot more likely to be going to a blog about SEO than a blog about sewing.
And isn't that what newspapers and stuff do as well? Ring up a small group of randomly selected people and get their opinion on certain things? Flawed, yes, but it seems to work (More or less)
NanoBite wrote:Yes, they got randomly distributed, but only to certain households which met certain criteria.
And your right though, as much as they are statistics, they're just indications.
The thing Golden brings up is quite interresting, only 9 sites linking in.
ATM a lot of players are going through the suggestions threads for game improvements ... but euhm .. perhaps we could ask admin to give us a little insight into his advertising campaing and see what he does, perhaps we could be of far more assitence there then thinking up game improvements.
The server side should be fine, the connections are able to handle several 100 people massing at the same time ... so enough resources available there.


CABAL wrote:There are three problems I can see with this game getting members.
One being getting the message out there in the first place.
Two being the fact that a lot of members came here in the first place purely because it was stargate-oriented.
Three being the fact that the front page looks corny beyond belief, and compared to other clicky web-based games, looks like it's from a decade back trying to look a decade ahead.
NanoBite wrote:And dont forget, text based games run very smooth on cell phone decives and what not, in contrary to a lot of flashy games
![[117.gif] :smt117](./images/smilies/117.gif)


CABAL wrote:NanoBite wrote:And dont forget, text based games run very smooth on cell phone decives and what not, in contrary to a lot of flashy games
Not this.
Just see how many people have been wrongly banned for banking incorrect amounts of naq, or buying 1mil mercs at once.
