For those interested:
https://forums.stardock.com/307025/page/6
"The number of people online represents the number of people in the chat forum (or were recently in the chat forum). It does not represent the # of people currently playing games online by a long shot."
Though it's a moot point since the issues affect any multiplayer game, not just ICO games. Remember, these games are peer-to-peer, it's not as if the ICO servers are buggy or something, there ARE NO ICO servers to speak of (at least for the purpose of hosting games). And there's no reason you can't have a 'casual' game on ICO.
My subjective impression is that the single-player advocates are right : very few of the people who bought the game ever spent any significant time on Ico.
I don't think anyone disagrees with this point. Very few people that bought Half-life/2 play multiplayer as well. But the 'few' that do are a fairly large number despite being small relative to the total sales.
In any case, there is a multiplayer-specific dev team so there's no reason for people to BLATANTLY ATTACK the idea of fixing multiplayer issues (not directed at Sorceresss). As I've said probably 100 times on this board, those who play multiplayer and single-player ARE NOT ENEMIES. We both play the same game. I mean, imagine the utter hate someone would get if they went around saying 'no way you can't work on the single player game, stop coding the AI, WE WANT X IN MULTIPLAYER' - now is that unreasonable state of mind any less ridiculous when used from the 'other' side?
LMAO. Once your King has tumbled over, it's generally a good idea to just shake hands and say "good game"
"I'm too lazy to respond to your post intelligently, so I'll just make a worthless snide remark using a tired, inappropriate analogy."
