Forum Discussion

Adamonic's avatar
Adamonic
Legend
3 years ago
Solved

Season 2 a huge success (or not) compared to S1

I am surprised this is not getting much attention, but Season 2 beat Season 1's launch! Now that we are through the first week of Season 2, we can use Steam Charts to get an idea of how many additio...
discussion
  • Spinner1981's avatar
    Spinner1981
    3 years ago
    @CyberDyme if they got rid of specialists (i know they wont) and brought back classes with restricted weapons and gadgets, hurried and released the rest of the renewed launch maps sooner rather than later, and added more destruction across all launch and new maps, it could be so much more (but obvs still not on par with say BF 4).

    But alas, for some crazy reason the above won't happen. Which is a shame. With the above mentioned, this alone would make 2042 sooo much better and most likely bring back more players.
Adamonic's avatar
Adamonic
Legend
3 years ago
@CyberDyme I agree on all of your points. However, SteamCharts already gives anyone a good measuring stick, based on a big enough sample size of the population, to deduce what the player count is. So I don't know if a Server Browser would give out that much additional info.

I think the assumption was Season 1 would get a bump, but the player count would drop to pre-S1 levels before S2, and then the cycle would repeat every season.

If any additional players were added AND stayed, that would be a success. Since the player base is smaller, even something like 600-800 players (on SteamCharts) is 10% of the 6-8K daily average.

When we are assuming Steam is only roughly 10% of the active player count, that 6-8K is actually 60-80K. So if the trend continues over every season, there is a chance that 100K are playing the game starting in Season 4.

So maybe not a huge success, but probably more than expected with the expectations so low. Shoot for the ground and you may hit the target.

Prof3ss0r_M1k3's avatar
Prof3ss0r_M1k3
3 years ago
@Adamonic wrote:
@CyberDymeI agree on all of your points. However, SteamCharts already gives anyone a good measuring stick, based on a big enough sample size of the population, to deduce what the player count is. So I don't know if a Server Browser would give out that much additional info.

I think the assumption was Season 1 would get a bump, but the player count would drop to pre-S1 levels before S2, and then the cycle would repeat every season.

If any additional players were added AND stayed, that would be a success. Since the player base is smaller, even something like 600-800 players (on SteamCharts) is 10% of the 6-8K daily average.

When we are assuming Steam is only roughly 10% of the active player count, that 6-8K is actually 60-80K. So if the trend continues over every season, there is a chance that 100K are playing the game starting in Season 4.

So maybe not a huge success, but probably more than expected with the expectations so low. Shoot for the ground and you may hit the target.

look at what games are coming out during season 3.  i don't see this game trending up unless everything that is released is trash and dice hits it out of the park with season 3 (unlikely due to little content alone)

  • Adamonic's avatar
    Adamonic
    Legend
    3 years ago

    I haven't been playing this season that much. Just enough to do the weeklies. To me it is a lot worse than Season 1. Exposure for me was 10x than Stranded. Charlie is ok, but the random passive ability seems out of place for a guy with a mini-gun. It feels like they changed his passive to be Support. Square peg, round hole.

    It also looks like the shine has worn off and others are like me, just not having fun playing Season 2.

    For days 9, 10, and 11 for each season, Season 2 now has 3-4K less active peak players on SteamCharts. That is terrible, less than two weeks since launch and we have daily max active player counts below 9K? The last two days have been 9329 and 8829 compared to 13314 and 13740 from last season. 


    Not only is Season 2 looking like a total failure, it looks to be turning new players away and old players are not coming back. OUCH!

  • Tank2042Man's avatar
    Tank2042Man
    3 years ago

    I wonder if removing Exodus Conquest 64 hurt the launch of S2?

    The general consensus I saw around the positive S1 vibe was a map rotation that showed how good 2042 could be when playing on tried and tested fan favourite maps.

    Then S2 came along and it was Stranded or 2042 map playlists only I presume. Playing in Australia I have to assume because all we could play was stranded. When I selected the conquest mode that wasn't stranded no one was in the MM queue.

    I hear it's back now but removing it in the first place was another misstep by Dice.

  • CyberDyme's avatar
    CyberDyme
    3 years ago
    @Adamonic wrote:

    I haven't been playing this season that much. Just enough to do the weeklies. To me it is a lot worse than Season 1. Exposure for me was 10x than Stranded. Charlie is ok, but the random passive ability seems out of place for a guy with a mini-gun. It feels like they changed his passive to be Support. Square peg, round hole.

    It also looks like the shine has worn off and others are like me, just not having fun playing Season 2.

    For days 9, 10, and 11 for each season, Season 2 now has 3-4K less active peak players on SteamCharts. That is terrible, less than two weeks since launch and we have daily max active player counts below 9K? The last two days have been 9329 and 8829 compared to 13314 and 13740 from last season. 


    Not only is Season 2 looking like a total failure, it looks to be turning new players away and old players are not coming back. OUCH!

    Waow @Adamonic ,

    Did you just do a 180-turn of opinion and view here, (changed the title of the thread and then posting this now, and no longer thinking Season2 is a huge success compared to S1?)

    (assume we only have one Adamonic on the forum here?)

  • Adamonic's avatar
    Adamonic
    Legend
    3 years ago
    @CyberDyme with the original data, things were looking promising, but holy cow did this game take nosedive a few days later. We are hitting the same player levels for Week 8 and 9 and we just started Week 3.

    Those offputting videos really soured everyone's taste. The new Specialist is boring and Stranded is already old. We now have to wait for the next patch to see the new vehicle, but without any new maps, not much is going to move the needle.

    We need more classic maps in AOW, Exodus should be permanent for both CQ and BT, then rotate the others.

    If the other game is close to the hype, there may not be an available instance for 4 or 5 of the regions come next month.
  • Adamonic's avatar
    Adamonic
    Legend
    3 years ago

    We just hit a new low of 3200 players on SteamCharts yesterday, the first day of Week 3. That is unbelievably sad. Why is that?

    For one, they keep removing popular game modes. This has to be deliberate. Everyone loves Exodus Conquest > removed. Everyone loves Stranded or Exposure 24/7 BT > removed. This can't be a coincidence. 

    Secondly, being a smaller map, Stranded got old really quick. Charlie is way more boring than Lis was, so S2 is flopping hard after an optimistic start. 

    Third, the Server Browser announcement was the last straw for a lot of players. A lot of players were holding out for a Server Browser, and by them announcing one is probably not coming turned them away for good.

    Lastly, the PVE switcharoo also burnt a lot of players the wrong way. XP was supposed to be possible via that method but was turned off and has never been addressed to date. Now with the need for XP with the BattlePass, they have turned off even more players who can only play PVE. 

    This also is not even accounting for the game bugs, netcode, TTK/TDD inconsistencies, and crossplay issues. To me, the game is going into a nosedive and they seem perfectly content with that.

  • Tank2042Man's avatar
    Tank2042Man
    3 years ago
    @Adamonic wrote:

    I haven't been playing this season that much. Just enough to do the weeklies. To me it is a lot worse than Season 1. Exposure for me was 10x than Stranded. Charlie is ok, but the random passive ability seems out of place for a guy with a mini-gun. It feels like they changed his passive to be Support. Square peg, round hole.

    It also looks like the shine has worn off and others are like me, just not having fun playing Season 2.

    For days 9, 10, and 11 for each season, Season 2 now has 3-4K less active peak players on SteamCharts. That is terrible, less than two weeks since launch and we have daily max active player counts below 9K? The last two days have been 9329 and 8829 compared to 13314 and 13740 from last season. 


    Not only is Season 2 looking like a total failure, it looks to be turning new players away and old players are not coming back. OUCH!

    Need to see what the peak is during the final month of season 2.

    That's how I will read the impact of season 2 on the playerbase.

    I don't pay attention to average, it's peak that counts.

  • CyberDyme's avatar
    CyberDyme
    3 years ago
    @Adamonic wrote:
    @CyberDymewith the original data, things were looking promising, but holy cow did this game take nosedive a few days later. We are hitting the same player levels for Week 8 and 9 and we just started Week 3.

    Those offputting videos really soured everyone's taste. The new Specialist is boring and Stranded is already old. We now have to wait for the next patch to see the new vehicle, but without any new maps, not much is going to move the needle.

    We need more classic maps in AOW, Exodus should be permanent for both CQ and BT, then rotate the others.

    If the other game is close to the hype, there may not be an available instance for 4 or 5 of the regions come next month.

    Yeah @Adamonic ,

    The player volume and their attention span is fickle at best.  Some may come back after a new season launch just to check it out, but if they do not immediately see that what they wanted of improvements or expected to have been fixed, then they are gone again pretty quick.  And many of them never to return again.  That is why the very first season launch after initial game launch is the most crucial, as after each subsequent season, the player population will typically continue to dwindle even further.

    It would have been something entirely different if EA/DICE would have digged deep and released a major overhaul to the entire game package and not just small little add-ons as the seasonal packages just are, what we get here these days from them.

    Most essential is that we have no long-lasting 'stickiness' in this game and most is unlocked/tried out in just a matter of hours.

    E.g.:

    Too few weapons and accessories to unlock and play around with and not much distinct variety between them...

    Too few air/ground/water vehicles and distinct weapon loadouts for them...

    Too few maps and game modes available at choice...

    Too bare-bones maps and not sufficient contents/substance on them to enable diverse strategic gameplays on them.

    No proper sandbox experience in BF2042 which otherwise is what has made this franchise famous.

    Too limited team/squad/clan features to enable a BF community and team work for having long lasting fun together.

    Essentially, there is not proper cared for contents to ensure any longevity of this game.

    It doesn't really matter what other FPS games are coming out on the market.  If EA/DICE had gotten the BF essentials right, the millions of BF players out there would still have been on the game today.

  • Adamonic's avatar
    Adamonic
    Legend
    3 years ago
    @CyberDyme yeah, you are spot on. It is wild to me that we will only have 11 BF2042 original maps after all the content is released (after S4). 11 maps with most fairly boring and some just unplayable. How can we go through an entire "live service" life cycle for a game like this and only get 11 maps? Then you look at the lack of weapons, vehicles, drones (still only have 1) and it is shocking that they somehow internally thought this game was a success, but that it just didn't hit the right cord.

    I know there have been other game flops before, but not in such a storied franchise that had such a huge following. Just like CoD, every release is a layup. They probably had the easiest launch window possible with COD going to Vanguard. A modern combat shooter in modern times after 2 back to back WW1/2 era games. How could you stray this far from the proven formula?
  • ATFGunr's avatar
    ATFGunr
    Legend
    3 years ago
    @Adamonic So far S2 has been boring AF. The new map is awful, unless you like to get up on a ship and snipe. Breakthough mode is particularly bad for defenders, it’s zero percent fun. How they can give the attackers the high ground perch over B and make it inaccessible to defenders is just another bad design choice. Chuck was interesting for 5 minutes, with return fire of rockets destroying the mini gun being the usual and rapid response. Dropping popular modes is having an effect as well. I will say I’ve noticed a lot of new players, including one last night who got top kills in a conquest with 40, and was level 9. Level 9 which takes almost no time to do and the player was obviously amazing…. And not in a stealth. It does seem to have gained some popularity with hackers so that’s a good sign right?
  • Adamonic's avatar
    Adamonic
    Legend
    3 years ago

    The last update seemed to bring some new players back.


    Per SteamCharts, September will be the highest player count month since January, which is pretty shocking that more players are slowly trickling back in. 800 average more players than June (S1 launch) and now 700 players from passing January for the 3rd highest month since launch (NOV and DEC 2021 were the two highest - obviously). 

    Maybe everyone is waiting on the Liquidators?

  • Echo6Echo's avatar
    Echo6Echo
    3 years ago
    @Adamonic wrote:

    The last update seemed to bring some new players back.


    Per SteamCharts, September will be the highest player count month since January, which is pretty shocking that more players are slowly trickling back in. 800 average more players than June (S1 launch) and now 700 players from passing January for the 3rd highest month since launch (NOV and DEC 2021 were the two highest - obviously). 

    Maybe everyone is waiting on the Liquidators?

    800 whole players? Man that's so depressing. That should read "8000" or even "80,000" new players with a great update on a playable game....

  • Tank2042Man's avatar
    Tank2042Man
    3 years ago
    @Echo6Echo wrote:
    @Adamonic wrote:

    The last update seemed to bring some new players back.


    Per SteamCharts, September will be the highest player count month since January, which is pretty shocking that more players are slowly trickling back in. 800 average more players than June (S1 launch) and now 700 players from passing January for the 3rd highest month since launch (NOV and DEC 2021 were the two highest - obviously). 

    Maybe everyone is waiting on the Liquidators?

    800 whole players? Man that's so depressing. That should read "8000" or even "80,000" new players with a great update on a playable game....

    It's steam which everyone was using to bash 2042 with.

    Steam peak after each release settles down from the initial 1st week spike.

    3k pre season 1

    6k season 1

    10k season 2 (so far, still 2 months to go so may drop)

    That's a big percentage increase.

    PC makes up about 15 to 30% of the playerbase if we look at past stats pre V.

    2042 is an EA game so it's likely at least half of PC players connect through Origin.

    So let's go with 20k peak on PC, though probably more.

    That leaves console with 70 to 85% of the playerbase.

    So we can guess that the playerbase is peaking between 70k and 130k depending on 2042's PC playerbase.

    What that means in micro transactions I don't know but I'd say the playerbase right now isn't the disaster people claim it is.

  • Echo6Echo's avatar
    Echo6Echo
    3 years ago
    @Tank2042Man wrote:
    @Echo6Echo wrote:

    800 whole players? Man that's so depressing. That should read "8000" or even "80,000" new players with a great update on a playable game....

    So we can guess that the playerbase is peaking between 70k and 130k depending on 2042's PC playerbase.

    Meanwhile, a mostly working game, with good updates and mostly functioning correctly (not going to say the name but if you look at the uppermost point you'll know what I mean) have 981,000+ online right now at 9am Eastern.  Like I said, 800 players is sad...it should 80K players. 

  • CyberDyme's avatar
    CyberDyme
    3 years ago
    @Tank2042Man wrote:
    @Echo6Echo wrote:
    @Adamonic wrote:

    The last update seemed to bring some new players back.


    Per SteamCharts, September will be the highest player count month since January, which is pretty shocking that more players are slowly trickling back in. 800 average more players than June (S1 launch) and now 700 players from passing January for the 3rd highest month since launch (NOV and DEC 2021 were the two highest - obviously). 

    Maybe everyone is waiting on the Liquidators?

    800 whole players? Man that's so depressing. That should read "8000" or even "80,000" new players with a great update on a playable game....

    It's steam which everyone was using to bash 2042 with.

    Steam peak after each release settles down from the initial 1st week spike.

    3k pre season 1

    6k season 1

    10k season 2 (so far, still 2 months to go so may drop)

    That's a big percentage increase.

    PC makes up about 15 to 30% of the playerbase if we look at past stats pre V.

    2042 is an EA game so it's likely at least half of PC players connect through Origin.

    So let's go with 20k peak on PC, though probably more.

    That leaves console with 70 to 85% of the playerbase.

    So we can guess that the playerbase is peaking between 70k and 130k depending on 2042's PC playerbase.

    What that means in micro transactions I don't know but I'd say the playerbase right now isn't the disaster people claim it is.

    @Tank2042Man  if you truly had 70k players then match making would not be a problem to fill up servers nonstop across all regions.

    Obviously your far fetched numbers do not add up to reality.

    The Steam numbers are also revealing and it's challenging to interpret them as positive as you want to them to be:

    Both BF1 and BFV have more active players on than BF2042.

    So yes, BF2042 is a disaster in so many ways. 

About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion

Discuss the latest news and game information around Battlefield 2042 in the community forums.15,988 PostsLatest Activity: 2 days ago