• 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.

Four Months Later, Star Wars Battlefront PC is Dead

GavinUK86

Member
Consoles are a heck of a lot more populated right now.

RjZdqJC.png


http://swbstats.com/
 
That's been the general percentage breakdown for BF4 and Hardline as well. I fear for even mainline "Battle-" games on PC at this point.
 

Optimus Lime

(L3) + (R3) | Spartan rage activated
Now I know PC multiplayer games always have a much smaller playerbase than the equivalent communities on console

I know that games like Battlefront, Rainbow Six Siege,etc will be dead on PC after a few months.

I don't understand comments like these. I'm a PC/PS4/XB1 player, but I don't understand where people are coming from with this thinking. We don't have Steamspy-style data for PSN/XBL engagement, do we? Outside of the Origin FPS stable, there's no hard data on PS4/XB1 player numbers - and, in my experience, console games die off just as quickly (if not more quickly) than their PC counterparts.

Not trying to start a flame war. I just see this kind of stuff said quite a bit, and my experience is completely different. Outside of the core console stables (CoD, Fifa, Battlefield), playerbases seem just as transient as on the PC - if not more so.

Am I missing something?
 

Lazaro

Member
Battlefront PC would benefit from Xbox cross-play, but how would you block players using emulated gamepads on PC?
 

OsirisBlack

Banned
Just a quick glance and it looks to be the same for nearly every multiplayer game in the fps genre. Battlefield 4, Blops3, SWBF all at a glance have much higher player bases on console. Cant find any stats for the division or evolve at the moment.
 
Not necessarily superior taste, but they have a lot more choice, which leads to them moving on more quickly from shallow games.

I don't know about choice in games but choice in platforms? Yes that is very relevant.

If nothing else, this shows the "fuck using Origin" stance is probably still the popular one. Along the same lines, if I ever felt the urge to buy a Ubisoft game? I'd buy it on console to avoid their own brand of bullshit.

Sometimes you don't need to look too deeply into these things.

I'm sure EA don't really care though. They have got their money from the game and they'll have a lot less people complaining when they shut down the servers.
 

stuminus3

Member
This was always going to happen as soon as popular multiplatform games started having expensive map packs. Compare Call of Duty or Battlefront to the top played multiplayer games on Steam and spot the difference.
 
If you don't cater to the PC community and have little content, this is not exactly surprising. It's all the devs' and publisher's fault.

You might as well go back to Battlefront 2, just need to use gameranger since EA servers are dead. You can still get 64/64 matches there.
 

TheYanger

Member
~content~

The constant obsession with content in mutliplayer games around these parts is bizarre. All the content in the world won't save games in the long run if their core gameplay isn't sufficiently enjoyable compared to comparable games. YMMV, but shooting people in Battlefront just wasn't very fun.

Can't it be both? Battlefront was fun enough, not AMAZING fun, but fun. That said, there are lots of games that are fun, and lots of them that have a lot more of what PC gamers are looking for. That's the same deal with Titanfall: I LOOOOOVE Titanfall. It's my go to pick up and play FPS. Your average pc community doesn't want that kind of FPS though, they want server browsers, custom maps, etc. You have to nail both content and gameplay at least to a certain degree if you want PC players to stick wtih it. I would say Battlefront was super light on content, and 'ok' in gameplay. I'd rank Titanfall much higher in gameplay, but also EXTREMELY light on content at launch. Ultimately you need less 'pick up and play' support on PC - pc communities are entrenched and have easy access to voice chat, forums, everything at their fingertips. Hell I can browse Neogaf WHILE I play a shooter when I'm dead or between rounds or whatever. That's very different from a console, so fostering the community aspect is big.

I don't know about choice in games but choice in platforms? Yes that is very relevant.

If nothing else, this shows the "fuck using Origin" stance is probably still the popular one. Along the same lines, if I ever felt the urge to buy a Ubisoft game? I'd buy it on console to avoid their own brand of bullshit.

Sometimes you don't need to look too deeply into these things.

I'm sure EA don't really care though. They have got their money from the game and they'll have a lot less people complaining when they shut down the servers.

It's not that. Plenty of people bought the game by all accounts, and plenty of people buy other Ubi or EA games. Hell, the Division is huge right now on PC and that's Uplay.
 
I've noticed this is a problem with nearly every pc game tho which is why i buy multiplayer games on my ps4 instead. This game was just trashy btw so its not really surprising that it died so quickly either.
 

antonz

Member
Just a quick glance and it looks to be the same for nearly every multiplayer game in the fps genre. Battlefield 4, Blops3, SWBF all at a glance have much higher player bases on console. Cant find any stats for the division or evolve at the moment.

BF4 till has over 13,000 people playing right now versus the 2500 or so for Battlefront. Battlefield 3 has 2200 for comparison
 
I really, genuinely think that if this were a Steam release, we'd have more players. Maybe not a healthy, vibrant community, but more players. Same as I've said for Titanfall.
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
PC communities have been more fluid and transient for the entire last decade. The only games that stick with huge communities are games that are actually good. See: TF2, WoW, Battlefield, CS:Go, League, Dota, etc.

There are tons of persistent PC communities. ARK has had 20k+ players a day pretty much every day for the last year. Warframe. Payday 2 (even after the dev changed monetization strategies and tanked the community, it's still strong). Left 4 Dead 2 still has a big community. Rocket League. Rust. Garry's Mod. DayZ.

It's weird that EA hasn't managed to foster a successful community on any of their endless number of Origin games though, even when those games are all successful on consoles.

It's not that. Plenty of people bought the game by all accounts, and plenty of people buy other Ubi or EA games. Hell, the Division is huge right now on PC and that's Uplay.

Requires Uplay but is sold on Steam.
 

Renekton

Member
PC gamers might strictly stick with select few stalwarts like CS:GO for a very long time.

New MP shooters will find it very tough to break in.
 

impact

Banned
PC gamers might strictly stick with select few stalwarts like CS:GO for a very long time.

New MP shooters will find it very tough to break in.

well when CS:GO's shooting mechanics are just so much better than all the other shooters it's hard to wanna play another game

Battlefront is a very unrewarding game. Mechanical skill almost plays no factor in who does the best. Or at least that's the feeling my group got from the open beta on PC.
 

Aselith

Member
There are tons of persistent PC communities. ARK has had 20k+ players a day pretty much every day for the last year. Warframe. Payday 2 (even after the dev changed monetization strategies and tanked the community, it's still strong). Left 4 Dead 2 still has a big community. Rocket League. Rust. Garry's Mod. DayZ.

It's weird that EA hasn't managed to foster a successful community on any of their endless number of Origin games though, even when those games are all successful on consoles.



Requires Uplay but is sold on Steam.

BF4 still has 12000 players

http://bf4stats.com/
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
PC gamers might strictly stick with select few stalwarts like CS:GO for a very long time.

New MP shooters will find it very tough to break in.

I'm counting around 20 MP shooters on Steam with larger 24h numbers than Battlefront PC, including stuff made by single people, indie teams, and big AAA stuff, from new brands and only brands, newer and older than Battlefront. Some of these games aren't even any good, and they still do well.
 
People try to focus on hardline as if battlefield flopped. Well bf4 is still going strong and they only just recently announced that new content would stop for it. Bf4 is so ridiculously good. And it does better on PC than consoles.

It doesnt do better on pc. Ps4 is consistently far ahead.
 

Optimus Lime

(L3) + (R3) | Spartan rage activated
It doesnt do better on pc. Ps4 is consistently far ahead.

The PS4, a system with a handful of online MP FPS titles to choose from, gets around 10,000 more than the PC - a system with an insane number of online MP FPS titles to choose from.

The lead is there - but it's hardly anything to write home about.
 

MiguelItUp

Member
DICE has already stated multiple times that those sites aren't completely accurate. Also, I think saying it's "dead" is a bit much. If you're having a hard time finding a match at all, then I guess saying it's dead is technically accurate. However for the past week I've played several hours a day with multiple modes on PC and had no issues. 40 player matches, 12 player matches, etc. Honestly I've had more trouble finding games in Garden Warfare 2 on PC than Battlefront.
 
The PS4, a system with a handful of online MP FPS titles to choose from, gets around 10,000 more than the PC - a system with an insane number of online MP FPS titles to choose from.

The lead is there - but it's hardly anything to write home about.

Its not 10k more, its usually double or close to it
 

Abounder

Banned
No server list feature + being on Origin did it no favors, not to mention the content criticisms. But after changing my settings to 'US East' I had better luck with finding 40 player matches quickly. Does feel like a dying Warcraft server at times lol
 

JJD

Member
This is what happens with no dedicated servers on PC. But this seems to be precisely what Activision and EA wants. They do not want longevity from these games as it will mess with there yearly cycle of new releases. I can sign on to MW1 and still find dozens and dozens of servers.

Pretty much this. If they beat their sales expectations on a certain platform they don't care if people keep playing or not.

Development cost of the DLC gets diluted between all the platforms they support anyway, so if you stop playing the game after one month, it's OK even if you don't buy season passes or DLC, other people will, usually enough to turn a profit.

The only thing that matters is that you're there day 1, and that you will be back when they release the next one. And as crazy as it sounds a lot of people will be.

People try to focus on hardline as if battlefield flopped. Well bf4 is still going strong and they only just recently announced that new content would stop for it. Bf4 is so ridiculously good. And it does better on PC than consoles.

Source?

I was always under the impression that ever since the Bad Company series the consoles were BF biggest audience. If you're comparing single platforms Xbox and PC trade places a lot, but usually on the second and third place. PS4 is almost always at the first place at the number of concurrent players.

If you group the consoles together then it's even worse.
 

Aselith

Member
DICE has already stated multiple times that those sites aren't completely accurate. Also, I think saying it's "dead" is a bit much. If you're having a hard time finding a match at all, then I guess saying it's dead is technically accurate. However for the past week I've played several hours a day with multiple modes on PC and had no issues. 40 player matches, 12 player matches, etc. Honestly I've had more trouble finding games in Garden Warfare 2 on PC than Battlefront.

Perhaps not but they don't have to be completely accurate for use to understand relative population do we?
 
There is an issue with matchmaking (unless patched but doubtful, where you have to quit and restart the game or otherwise it will keep putting you and a few others in empty lobbies.

That being said, it's still bad even at peak on weekends, and moreso with the smaller gamemodes. It's a shame as the core of the game is good, just limited. With dropping server browsers and no modding on top of it, it's not hard to understand why the community is in the state it is.

Maybe I'll get a PS4 copy down the line, but right now I can't justify going back in and getting the season pass. IMO, it might be best if EA goes the route they did with Titanfall and release DLC for free later.
 

patapuf

Member
If you don't offer server browser ect. for your large scale shooter on PC it'll be dead. Doubly so if the mechanics are just average.

BF 3 and 4 stuck around for a long time (bf 4 is still popular). Hardline and Battlefront completely cratered.
 

JJD

Member
If it forced them to use a controller for cross-console play that'd make it work.

If they forced controllers a lot of PC players wouldn't play it.

Considering MS change of attitude hopefully BF5 will have multi platform play between PS4 and Xbox.
 

Demise

Member
People don't want to play console ports on PC. Games like titanfall / Battlefront are fun on consoles but theres just so many better options available on PC.

You have to say it fast. There's a lot of goofy tf2 clone and military stuff ala csgo on pc, but if you want to play something fun and different there's only console games on pc like titanfall. There's no exclusivity like titanfall or halo 5 on pc.
 
Top Bottom