Forum Discussion

afzSnickelfritz's avatar
afzSnickelfritz
New Vanguard
4 years ago

Steamcharts interpretation...

As we all know, Steamcharts shows the number of players on the servers at any given point in time (concurrent). Awesome. This allows us to choose the most active times to login and compete with Steam players, even if we are not on Steam. But I don't see how this can be used to judge the health of a game franchise that is traditionally based on Origin, and now includes consoles and crossplay.

I've seen numerous references to the 100,000 players that were logged in at the games release. OK, I understand why the ENTIRE Steam playerbase might download and play the game at the same time in that circumstance, but is this truly representative of normal player activity a week later? Should the 100,000 concurrent player count at release have any bearing whatsoever in the analysis of concurrent player counts a week later, when there is no impetus (game release or major update) for the entire playerbase to login to the servers at the same time?

discussion

3 Replies

  • NarrowSpeedo's avatar
    NarrowSpeedo
    4 years ago

    Well you are right when you say that nobody knows the true numbers (except EA/DICE).

    Nonetheless the steam numbers offer a very good indication on what is going on. Despite the fact, that Battlefield is an Origin game Steam is still the biggest gaming platform on PC - so a lot of people have probably also bought it there. When it launched 100.000 players played it via Steam. Now fewer than 10.000 players are left. For a still quite new title this decline is horrid. 

    Also there are other hints indicating that the player numbers are bad. Recently a cheat seller discontinued their support for 2042 because not enough people care any more. And that is not because people are suddenly willing to play fair and legit but rather because there are so few players that there is not enough demand for it. 

    Another indicator for me personally is my friends list. When 2042 launched it was played by like 20-30 people from my friends list on regular basis. In the meantime almost no one plays it any more - most went back to older titles. And those who still play it, reduced their playtime significantly. 

    So despite the unknown total player numbers there is a lot of proof that Battlefield 2042 is doing very bad at player retention. I mean DICE/EA could also be more transparent in those regards but I guess there is some good reason why they are not. If your game succeeded you would be willing to show the world your player numbers. But if it is not you try to hide them. 

  • afzSnickelfritz's avatar
    afzSnickelfritz
    New Vanguard
    4 years ago

    @NarrowSpeedoI have no doubt that the game is doing poorly. But the misinterpretation of the original SteamCharts player count (100,000) is just a gross exaggeration of the true statistical player activity. It is starting feel a bit like a confirmation bias, which does not bode well for the community if they expect to be taken seriously by the publisher and devs.

    I have no information to back this up, but is it possible that the Easy Anti-Cheat is effectively thwarting some of the cheating software, and the publisher of that software is using the tropes regarding BF2042 performance issues as an excuse for their product not working effectively?

    I routinely graph the performance of new games in Afterburner with various settings, and BF2042 is performing more or less like BFV did at launch with the mid-high end hardware that was available at that time. About 8-10ms/frame at 1440p in AOW, which is not bad considering the lack of optimization, 128 players, and early GPU drivers.

  • rainkloud's avatar
    rainkloud
    Seasoned Ace
    4 years ago
    @afzSnickelfritz wrote:

    I have no information to back this up, but is it possible that the Easy Anti-Cheat is effectively thwarting some of the cheating software, and the publisher of that software is using the tropes regarding BF2042 performance issues as an excuse for their product not working effectively?

    A reputable cheat company resorting to deflection and deception to avoid having to take responsibility for their failures? Surely you jest sir!

    If we can't trust cheat makers who can we trust? What a time to be alive!

Featured Places

Recent Discussions