1 server 1 person. seems to be the norm

If people are playing in single player mode, how would you know?

I'm running a server because there are 3 of us are playing RW, although there are zero on at the moment (since I just logged off), and reports of only one are not the same person playing. Although it's not even visible to the public, since we're connecting via internal IP.

Another PC in my house is running three Ark servers, although there's only one person playing on them routinely, who is not in our household, although at one time there were 8 of us playing. We will shut those servers down once that player stops logging in.

I've advised the others of the RW server, and I'll open it up to external IP if any of our gaming friends outside of my house expresses an interest, but none has so far.

This is not unusual in these types of games, so I don't understand your point? If it was just me playing, why would I run a server?

I like that you're trying different things angriff and encourage you to stick to your vision!

"If you build it, they will come"

Quote from angriff

I know because they tell me they are playing single player when the visit for 2 minutes to blueprint the stuff they built on a public server. Then they tell me they have there own server now. It is ok.
Two reasons to run a server

• You like others to see your art and efforts.
• You enjoy deciding your own destiny or the god syndrome.
• <I know I said two but this is what I like so I did not really intend to list it and it is not for the many so is not a wide reason> I enjoy the open aspect of the game and learning java to program game environment plugins.

there is another reason. For company . it can get boring playing by yourself. Conversation can be enjoyable

Well playing this game keeps you from doing something useful while online but that is besides the point

You have to consider, it's summer time. All servers in all games have less players during the summer. People are on vaca, trying to enjoy time outside before school starts and while it is warm out. When the days get shorter and the weather colder, and new updates released, expect an influx of additional MP players.

Keep doing what you are doing, they will come. The few who are playing, gravitate toward more populated servers if they are not hosting themselves.

Also, I've had a few of my players leave to start their own servers. Most don;t last for a month, after they realize it's not actually easy and requires work. I even encourage some to go to other PVE focused servers, because I tire from bad attitudes that develop by some who literally freak when they get raided. I say 'maybe PVE is better suited for you', no sense in poisoning chat with hate when pvp is not your thing.

things to consider

Quote from Juggernaut

it's not actually easy and requires work.

Would really like to see the work part being done to Wild Frontiers.

Landmark had a fair amount of servers that you could choose from but it was a finite number, so the result was that there were always others around.
The problem was that there was always a rush for the best spots. Those who got them had joy. Those who didnt had grief.

I think where RW might succeed where Landmark didnt is that is that not only are the servers procedurally generated but that after a while you realize that areas repeat (layout-wise), so if you found a spot that spoke to you and was occupied you could just wander a bit and you would eventually find it somewhere else.

Instead of allowing single servers for everyone they could instead have a set number of servers to choose from with pre-set rules. PvP, PvE, Animals dont attack, etc. That way people could still choose what best works for them while forcing people into the same server.
Even if the term "forcing people" doesnt sit well with someone, consider that the world is endless and its technically? possible to never see another person.

True. The premise being that as more features are added, more people will come. There`s a large niche for sandbox games now and I think that will continue to grow.

I havent looked at the price since I bought into the early access but it was darn cheap for what`s already there. Running an actual game is beyond my experience but I would think that raising the price as it moves forward would IMO be quite justified and provide an expanding revenue stream(?).

I still don't understand why this is a problem. To me, it's a feature that I can play however, with whomever, and where ever I want. And using the term "server" when the context seems to suggest "single player mode" is confusing, since they are vastly different in my mind. If I wanted to play alone, why would I create a server? I'm running a server only because there are other people playing with me.

@Fizbit - I ended up here because I'm another Landmark orphan. In my book, it failed because they literally boxed us in. Although I don't think that's what they intended when Landmark was built, but rather we were testing what the engine could do for Everquest Next. Voxels really can't compete with the likes of Horizon Zero Dawn which Sony later published, and which is what MMO's in the future need to compete with in order to draw us out of single player games. I love that game, but here I am looking for a game where I can build rather than kill.

@angriff -Voxels are for those of us who want more resolution than Minecraft, which Rising World does an excellent job of fulfilling, and should provide all the freedom that Minecraft allows, because that's the market that Rising World competes with. Without the restrictions that doomed Landmark, although I don't think it's what SOE intended out of it. Landmark was an app, not a game.

So I don't get at all why you want to force us into playing with you, when we are quite happy as we are.