-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What's up with player counts in PC games?
- Thread starter taoofjord
- Start date
hobblygobbly
Member
PC gaming has a lot more genres and games than console so players are spread out among many more games. If you look at FPS games alone there's a wider selection of active multiplayer games than there is on console.
For example ArmA 3 pulls in ~30k a day, CSGO ~600k a day, PUBG ~1.4m a day, H1Z1 KotK ~70k a day, TF2 ~60k a day.
These above games are multiplayer games only on PC, that's before even getting into multiplatform FPS games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, Overwatch, Payday, Rainbow Six etc.
If you go look at older games they're still active, then you also need to consider all the MMOs like WoW, EVE, MOBAs like DotA and LoL, etc on top of that. Even the original Counter-strike from 2000 but the 1.6 version pulls in ~20k a day alone. You can go to older games like Ultima Online where there are still thousands of people playing it spread among official shards and unofficial ones, it's the game's 20th anniversary tomorrow.
For example ArmA 3 pulls in ~30k a day, CSGO ~600k a day, PUBG ~1.4m a day, H1Z1 KotK ~70k a day, TF2 ~60k a day.
These above games are multiplayer games only on PC, that's before even getting into multiplatform FPS games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, Overwatch, Payday, Rainbow Six etc.
If you go look at older games they're still active, then you also need to consider all the MMOs like WoW, EVE, MOBAs like DotA and LoL, etc on top of that. Even the original Counter-strike from 2000 but the 1.6 version pulls in ~20k a day alone. You can go to older games like Ultima Online where there are still thousands of people playing it spread among official shards and unofficial ones, it's the game's 20th anniversary tomorrow.
as huge as PC is now i think people forget it's still only a quarter of the market. and as previously stated, divide that further between the CS:GOs and pubgs ... yeah BF, CoD and the like will have more vacant servers out of the box
i think the problem is a little exaggerated though. sure player count is nowhere as robust on console but its not abysmal either
i think the problem is a little exaggerated though. sure player count is nowhere as robust on console but its not abysmal either
PC game selection is indeed varied, but player distribution seems very clustered and not spread. It looks like a small number of services are taking the majority of the players (such as PUBG, LoL, WoT, etc), see the dropoff from CS:GO to TF2:
Soulblighter31
Banned
I didnt even know Battlegrounds is close to 1.5 million players. It was 1.3 just last week, jesus
StereoVsn
Member
One of these is not like the rest! Good for Divinity OS2 (excellent single-player/co-op PC only RPG).
http://store.steampowered.com/stats/
It is super clear now... PUBG, Dota 2 and CS:GO ate up all the competitive players. See the dropoff from CS:GO to Team Fortress 2. This shows that PC players tend to cluster around a small group of titans.
Maybe we PC gamers have a stronger herd instinct than other platforms?
johancruijff
Banned
i'm still playing Battlefield 2 😉
I thought it would be about game with really low player count. Make no mistake more player is always better ( one of the reason I'm all for cross-platform multiplayer ) but even number like 5k for battlefront feel ridiculously high compared to some of the multiplayer game I play like Atlas reactor ( 352 - 24-hour peak ), Fractured space ( 289 - 24-hour peak ) or even Squad ( 1819 - 24-hour peak ).
Even at those number those games play alright without much down times, thought it obviously lead to a bigger disparity in level with the matchmaking ( when there is one ).
Even at those number those games play alright without much down times, thought it obviously lead to a bigger disparity in level with the matchmaking ( when there is one ).
autoduelist
Member
i think you also have a couple other factors. If you and your friends are happy playing [insert game here], there's very little pressure to -ever- change. TF2 for life, basically.
On consoles, I think there might be more pressure to to shift to the newest game. Trophies/achievements [i realize Steam has these], new console that doesn't play old game, servers shut down, etc. That is, I think there's a lot of various console pressures to, as you say, 'push the platform' and switch to the newest kid on the block, whereas if you're perfectly happy playing TF2 on your ratty old pc, why change?
The Janitor
Member
I don't think this premium pass thing goes down as well with PC gamers. I remember BF3 had a healthy player count even with the premium DLC,
but eventually people sick of paying double so I think that's a big reason for the low numbers in EA games.
but eventually people sick of paying double so I think that's a big reason for the low numbers in EA games.
Simple - there is far greater diversity in PC games because there are far more games around competing in the space, from super small indie efforts to massive productions and all manner of niches. Equally the diversity of tastes on PC is massive and generally a lot less interest in "AAA" as a selling point.
That competition is what's evolving and bringing about different and unique games and superior gameplay that pc players gravitate towards. EA have a losing hand in this since their games simply don't compete well with everything else and serve mostly as graphical showcases than anything competitive to other gameplay. PC players also look at high activity, updates and evolution of the get to keep things interesting, which EA generally fail at in comparison. All the most popular PC shooters for example are super quick at iiterating, balancing, updating and keeping players engaged Vs a more console a oriented slower content deliver and season passes being a mainstay. Then there's the issue that simply not as many people like Origin Vs Blizzard BattleNet / Steam etc. Importantly PC players tend to gravitate around communities, player created content, mods, new ways to play that come from this, events, internet activity around a game etc much of which ends up driving things like PUBG
That competition is what's evolving and bringing about different and unique games and superior gameplay that pc players gravitate towards. EA have a losing hand in this since their games simply don't compete well with everything else and serve mostly as graphical showcases than anything competitive to other gameplay. PC players also look at high activity, updates and evolution of the get to keep things interesting, which EA generally fail at in comparison. All the most popular PC shooters for example are super quick at iiterating, balancing, updating and keeping players engaged Vs a more console a oriented slower content deliver and season passes being a mainstay. Then there's the issue that simply not as many people like Origin Vs Blizzard BattleNet / Steam etc. Importantly PC players tend to gravitate around communities, player created content, mods, new ways to play that come from this, events, internet activity around a game etc much of which ends up driving things like PUBG
P|UBG numbers will go down, like BF. although a lot will still play it in the future, the number will go down. I have like 700 hours in PUBG, but am now playing only once a week. the " amazing" has gone.
Phatosaurus
Member
Battlefield 1 just isn't very good. Even on console, of the people I used to play it with, none of them still do. It got boring fast and the content updates haven't changed up the core gameplay enough to make a difference.
On top of that, I imagine the vast majority of PC players feel they can't run the game well enough to even play the MP at an acceptable frame rate whereas CS:GO runs on toasters.
On top of that, I imagine the vast majority of PC players feel they can't run the game well enough to even play the MP at an acceptable frame rate whereas CS:GO runs on toasters.
You've played for 700 and keep coming back to it regularly. I think that's pretty amazing.
BF3 was one of the last EA games I bought.
The great majority of my games are on Steam, all my friends are on Steam, since Origin is a platform I haven't really used in years, I'm much, much less likely to buy a game on impulse there than on Steam (that is, I'm alot more likely to buy games that I don't consider a must on a platform that I actually use every day).
If I get something on Origin in the future, it'll have to be a game that I really want to play, and an expensive shooter with an expensive season pass ain't it.
The great majority of my games are on Steam, all my friends are on Steam, since Origin is a platform I haven't really used in years, I'm much, much less likely to buy a game on impulse there than on Steam (that is, I'm alot more likely to buy games that I don't consider a must on a platform that I actually use every day).
If I get something on Origin in the future, it'll have to be a game that I really want to play, and an expensive shooter with an expensive season pass ain't it.
PC players have a lot of games available that they can play, so obviously not-so-good ones tend to lose their player base earlier than others. At the same time, older, pretty good games can survive forever on pretty good numbers.
Posting Steam numbers is pretty pointless by the way, considering it's just a small part of PC gaming.
Posting Steam numbers is pretty pointless by the way, considering it's just a small part of PC gaming.
KonradLaw
Member
Too many games, many of which survive for far longer than what's typical on consoles. Plus, consider this, you're using data from Steam. Among like top10 games with biggest audiences on PC like 2-3 are on Steam at all these days.
It also doesn't help new releases that a lot of really old and abandoned games are still being played around with fan servers. They're not huge, but those dozens or hundreds of people for specific game adds up overall.
It also doesn't help new releases that a lot of really old and abandoned games are still being played around with fan servers. They're not huge, but those dozens or hundreds of people for specific game adds up overall.
Evolution of Metal
Member
Even with the 20-30k CCU, BF1 would be in the top 15-20 Steam most played games. It is pointless to use LoL or PUBG numbers for anything, especially if you are using asian (which is an absolute majority) CCU of LoL.
You shouldn't look at the absolute extremes, but rather, averages. For every PUBG or Ark success story you can dig many online game failures the same year.
King Gilga
Member
I am still able to get into populated servers on battlefield 1942. The only battlefield worth mentioning.
Try doing that on consoles.
Also I got battlefront a little while ago and was able to get a full match of any mode I tried fast so that seems fine.
Try doing that on consoles.
Also I got battlefront a little while ago and was able to get a full match of any mode I tried fast so that seems fine.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
this. plus, OP has any idea about the size of PC gaming library? There are people still playing Quake World.
Shai-Tan
Banned
Battlefield 1 is not particularly popular on PC. It's more played than Hardline but still nowhere near as played as BF4 was (there would be nearly 100k online for new maps). If DICE can't do features that set it apart well like vehicles and destruction (weak console CPU partly to blame) they are going to get run over by games that do infantry on large maps better. Nearly every name Battlefield streamer on Twitch is playing PUBG more than anything else.
That doesn't explain total player counts which are likely more divided between games than consoles, including games which don't show up on Steam like WoW, Overwatch, and Hearthstone.
That doesn't explain total player counts which are likely more divided between games than consoles, including games which don't show up on Steam like WoW, Overwatch, and Hearthstone.
Hari Seldon
Member
I'm mostly a PC player and I have a weekly multiplayer night with friends. I cannot convince them to buy any of these AAA console games lol. The constant need to buy DLC topedos any interest, and they feel that these games are fundamentally shallow. It is hard to argue with that. We are about to enter L4D2 season, followed by Sins of a Solar Empire and CoH2 winter lol. Why buy the newest AAA franchises that require constant DLC updates when you can just dip into the huge back catalogue for multiplayer fun?
TheRedSnifit
Member
Battlefield 4 has never had more players on PC than BF1. This is from late 2013:
We have this same discussion with every BF game, lol.
I'm reminded of when Team Fortress 2 came out and the handful of remaining TFC fans ran into every thread and insisted that it was a dead game and everyone was going back to TFC. People basing claims not on what's actually true but what they want to be true.
We have this same discussion with every BF game, lol.
I'm reminded of when Team Fortress 2 came out and the handful of remaining TFC fans ran into every thread and insisted that it was a dead game and everyone was going back to TFC. People basing claims not on what's actually true but what they want to be true.
PC also has tons more games the PC player base could be playing. There are countless old and new games with a couple dozen to a couple hundred congruent players. All of those really add up to be a fuck ton of people.
I wasn't one of those people, but man I wish they were right. I miss the fuck out of TFC and the competitive community we had.
I wasn't one of those people, but man I wish they were right. I miss the fuck out of TFC and the competitive community we had.
BF1 is just fine dude. There are bad maps like every single other FPS game out there. It's an amazing package. People are bored because they have literally been playing games like BF for over ten years every single year.
There is no shame in taking a break from pew pew games. There is more to life than simulated war.
Your idea that because a few of your friends don't play anymore is just your own situation. The numbers for the game are very high day to day.
On PC much less so.
You wouldn't get nearly the map expansions you do now if it were free dude. You would be looking at like 5 free maps over two years.
People say this without realizing it's basically the same vanilla game. They aren't simply going to make free maps for you.
Look at all the free models. They are mostly garbage in terms of free maps over time, and please don't bring up Valve.
The maps are subsidized by the monetisation models. And in the end they result in as many good maps as this terrible Premium model. Without dividing the userbase to boot.
There is no good answer to this, because there is no pattern. If I said PC gamers are unwilling to spend money on that platform, then Overwatch alone would disprove that.
But Overwatch is also Blizzard and Blizzard fans are legion and they eat up everything together with Valve fans, surely.
But then you have games like PUBG crashing in and disproving that.
But Overwatch is also Blizzard and Blizzard fans are legion and they eat up everything together with Valve fans, surely.
But then you have games like PUBG crashing in and disproving that.
I would never trust Dice to release 5 great maps and all of them be free lol. And 5 maps over two years? Hell no. I would rather pay for premium and get the expansions and over 20 maps. It's that simple. Some games the freemium model works. Some it does not.
There is no monetization model that would ever pay for as much content as the premium pass by any stretch of the imagination. Gamers are living in dreamland.
And 5 maps over two years is basically what you would get for not splitting up the community. Why even bother? 5 maps in BF1 is nothing. I still play Vanilla maps a ton anyway.
WW1 is too big of a thing to warrant a free maps system. Gamers are cheap as hell and like to think this would work. But it doesn't for significant expansions. And it won't for this game.
There is no way I want 5 maps over two years for BF1. I'd quit playing. Premium friends works well enough if you ask me.
Also do note that the majority of PC players (that is folks in Asia) plays on potato pc. They just want good game that is fun and can run on their modest rigs. People here on gafs tends to forget that most PC players don't have the budget to build tower rigs that can run The Witcher 3 on 4K ultra.
This is also the reasons why "pushing hardware to the limit" by itself is useless and futile. People might buy games for graphic but the only thing that makes them stay is the gameplay and community. Photorealism can only brought you so far, just look what happened with Crytek for being only known as the graphic dudes.
psn
Member
Strawman ftw. You set up the fact that it would be only 5 maps within 2 years because they can't monetize it and that they would be worse than the maps they release atm. That's just bullshit and you have no evidence for that assumption. All your arguments base on this made up tale from your ass.
Look at other games and how much they make with cosmetic items. And tbh, the content they released isn't even that good. Battlefield 3 - okay. Battlefield 4 - still not bad. Battlefield 1: meh. But that is just my opinion.
dcx4610
Member
PC gamers are pretty fickle and move on quickly OR they find one title and play it for 10+ years.
Games like TF2, Star Wars, etc. don't tend to have a very long shelf life on PC. If all you care about is multiplayer, you're probably still better off on consoles since it's easier for people to jump in unless it's a popular/competitive game on PC.
Games like TF2, Star Wars, etc. don't tend to have a very long shelf life on PC. If all you care about is multiplayer, you're probably still better off on consoles since it's easier for people to jump in unless it's a popular/competitive game on PC.
paperspace
Member
⁣
TimeEffect
Member
Ok there is something wrong with the damn filters.
Because all I see are 3-4, and its frustrating. (On PC Oriign trial)
BitterSidekick
Member
World of tanks usually has 100k + people on EU servers (20k+ on NA) and around 1 million on Russian servers, and that game is not on Steam. So there's that aspect as well...
Being pretty to look at doesn't mean anything in the long run. People are not spending years looking at these games, they're spending years playing them. If the gameplay doesn't hold up hundreds of hours later, people will return to games which do.
Melee.
I'm guessing you were talking about online games though.
Edit: Though now that I think about, Melee netplay is a thing...
grandwizard
Member
PC gamers were vocal about the consolization of originally PC shooters and lacking PC options last generation and were called a bunch of whiners and handwaved that they'd just buy the game anyway. Now look at the state of those games on PC compared to the modern juggernauts that are focused on PC like CSGO and PUBG.
Maybe listen to the audience once in a while.
Maybe listen to the audience once in a while.
KonradLaw
Member
And 1600 in Star Wars: Empire at War and 245 in Jedi AcademyAnd yet people are still playing the original Battlefront II from 2005. 700 people playing right now on Steam.
SeeNoWeevil
Member
The worst thing about this is owning a good PC and a console. You often have to choose between a shit framerate on console or dead playerbase on PC. Absolver, For Honor, Destiny 2 for example. Why publishers even release fighting games on the PC without crossplay is beyond me. They're all dead in a matter of weeks. People on this board were even telling others to get the PC version of Tekken 7 over the PS4 version! Stupid.
fluffydelusions
Member
Do we even know the concurrent numbers for overwatch? Or even how much it sold on PC for that matter? No doubt it sold a lot since it's a Blizzard game but I'm just curious.
that destiny 2 PC playerbase is like nonexistent.
fluffydelusions
Member
Tekken 7 on PC has a ~4k peak in the past 24 hours
http://steamcharts.com/app/389730
So not dead and it's not like we have console numbers to compare it to. Though I imagine PS4 is higher no doubt.
Some others
MvC:I ~2.1k concurrent
http://steamcharts.com/app/493840
SFV ~1.5k concurrent but it has crossplay so doesn't really matter
http://steamcharts.com/app/310950
Always depends on the game tbh. I've been very happy with how Tekken 7 has been holding up.
Thankfully Tekken 7 has a pretty active userbase so it worked out pretty well
Absolver has a very similarly sized population to the console version as well.
CountAntonius
Member
Are For Honor and Absolver doing well on consoles? Destiny 2 isn't out yet but I think it will do well on PC.