Ironclads new game is going to be a F2P MOBA game like LOL, comparisons would be zero.

As difficult as it may be to accept, we might have to face the fact that the game just doesn't have much staying power for 99% or 99.5% of the people who purchase it.  It may not be an ICO issue.  It's possible that the game is great, but that there aren't enough gamers out there with the interest or mental acuity needed to like it and/or that the game itself really just isn't that compelling compared to other offerings.

This is a multiplayer game and its boring playing single player. However , as we can see, ICO is horrible in terms of latency or interface or features.

We are in 2013 now....and a multiplayer online game still do not have a proper match up feature...thats disappointing.

If ICO is similar to battlenet...i'm very sure we have lots more players.

If so many of those 700+ were noobs yes occasionally they got lost and they walked into skilled game and got kicked from it or if they managed to play it they got creamed but there were plenty of noobs only games hosted during that time.

I do not believe chasm between skilled and noobs is reason why crowds did not stay.  

They needed a matchup feature for them to play against similarly skilled players. A noob going against a pro is never fun for the noob or the pro.....at least in my opinion.

And a noob do not need to play with pros to learn. Guess what? I watched like couple of replays , played a few single player games before I came online to play. I have only bought this game like 5weeks. This game isn't hard to learn to play decently if you do it the right way.

Ranking systems are easy.  Basically everyone starts at some base rating and then gain/lose points based on the respective ratings of their opponents.  Playing AI would recieve no points, and I think you would have to factor in your allies ratings into the equation so noobs dont get silly rating boosts because they are teamed with Auqia, as an example. 

There is also the issue that only a minority of people actually ever attempts to play online. Many people are quite happy with SP only.

Is it? I would claim that a large majority of people who bought it are more SP focused - like in most games. They may not frequent this forums as often as the MP people do, but they probably are the silent majority.

As for ICQ being horrible.... I strongly disagree!

The people who bitch about ICQ have NEVER seen a truelly bad online system.... Seriously you have no idea what kind of shit other companies - with 10 times the budget - delivered in the past.

And while ICQ certainly could use a few fancy features, lets not forget what the first and foremost duty of any online service is.

To connect players successfully to others. Without problems and  illogical connectivity issues that drive everyone nuts because you can never be sure if a game will work out.

There are games that have terrible connectivity issues.... so if players A B C D E F G want to play they hav to join A D C F G E in the hope it might work today Or maybe today the game demands that they connect A D C E G F today... expect random issues like this to plague you. So have fun for half an hour trying to get everyone connected. 

Compared to such things..... ICO is holy.I dont remember having any trouble joining any game I want to ever.

ICQ may not be fancy and spectacular but

it gets the job done! Connecting you to other players without issues.

That doesnt mean it has no room for improvement, but to claim it is horrible is ridicolous and uncalled for. 

If ICQ would be like battlenet I do not think there would be any reasonable larger ammount of players online. The large majority of people who dont play online choose to do so because of lack of interest.

And if you are not interested in online MP, not the best online system of the world, is going to change that.

No match up feature is going to help you if there are not enough players online. If there are 3 noobs and 3 pros online you can match make all day.... you wont get a - balanced 3v3, if you understand my point.

Yes, when there is high activity on ICQ, a few more features would be nice. But they are not imperative, because you will survive searching a fitting game for 2 minutes.

Minidumps seem to be a game problem with certain system configurations. They are not necessarly related to multiplayer.

As for Lag:

ICQ uses P2P matchmaking.

That means, the server (=ICO) does very little once the game is started. So any lag you may have in MP comes from

• other players having a slow connection
• on or more player CPUs being stressed to the limit due to the scale of the game.

Both of which Ironclad cant really do much about, as the first one is beyond their control and the second one does require a full engine rewrite from scratch. (Multi core support, 64 bit support)

Now, I am certain that if you send Frogboy 30 million € in cash, they could do the necessary engine rewrite.... so you could enjoy your lag in 64 Bit because the other guy is downloading porn in the background!

Most probably loss of interest. They might try a few MP games and then - aside from being steamrolled - find out that the pace of the game does not fit their way of playing.

The games played tab is a rough indicator.

I could imagine that an display of that number in the lobby without having to click the player would be an easy to implement feature that would help the MP crowd, because balancing teams gets a little bit easier and faster.

We, as the MP crowd should be very grateful to the developers for supporting their game in such a awesome manner. Support like shown here is highly unusual nowadays, especially for the minority of players that focus on MP.

Looking at my steam friends list, most of my steam friends who own this game have less than 60 hours, and all of them were predominantly SP...

Yes, numerically more people play SP than MP....but on a time basis, it's the MP people who are more likely to keep coming back and playing this game again and again...

Have you heard of the game starcraft 2? Check it before you say ranking system is impossible or too complicated. Starcraft 2 is so successful for a good reason.

Of course a ranking system is possible but it wouldn't be very accurate or useful in Sins. An elo system like SC2 (and others) uses is most accurate for 1v1 - then it is a good measure of skill. With 5v5 being the main MP mode in Sins and factors like planet layout/feed further diluting the connection between w/l (or elo) and skill, it just wouldn't be worth implementing. It might be better than nothing but there are so few players really that everyone already knows rough skill level without it. Maybe for a Sins2...

No, there is definitely something about Multiplayer that causes it to crash more often.

Starcraft 2 had the insignificant advantages of having a brand name worth millions and a huge and wealthy developer that could afford  to sink a few million € into development.

Considering that Bl$$ard removed LAN play and the - expectable result - that several larger pro tuniers lagged like hell and a few similar nasty things towards the players their success is somewhat undeserved and if SC 2 will really one day reach the level of greatness of SC 1.... we will see.

In any case, I dont know any other game but starcraft that sold good because of its Multiplayer. And even for SC 1, that long after it outsold all SP expectations by far.

Bottom line.... just because Starcraft can live with MP buyers... dont expect that other games can.

It is a steam game.... no refund, no rights and no selling. Period.