Support NeoGAF

[taoofjord]

I've pretty much never paid attention to the size of a multiplayer game's active user base. But recently I upgraded my PC, which led me to download some of the best looking, recent AAA shooters like Battlefield 1, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Titanfall 2 (all games I own and still play on PS4). To my surprise, it seemed like barely anyone playing. I was forced to play the most popular mode or not play at all unless I got lucky.

Then, PUBG's concurrent user count was all over the news, making me very curious to see how other games were doing.

First off, Battlefield 1's numbers on PC are pretty disappointing. A new expansion just hit (In the Name of the Tsar) and tonight there were only 6 populated servers running Conquest, 1 running Domination, and 5 running Team Deathmatch (in NA). That seems insane to me. This is during a Premium Trial period and the game is also available on Origin Access. Even still, it's averaging somewhere between 20-30k CCU in the last 30 days. Meanwhile on PS4 it's around 85K in the last 30 days.

How about Star Wars: Battlefront? A 24 hour peak of 5k. Titanfall 2 seems to be around 3K.

Say what you want about Battlefront's quality, but Titanfall 2 and Battlefield 1 are quality games. Two of the best, in my opinion. What's going on here? Why are PC player counts so low? How does PUBG end up with such a disparate number (currently ~1,460,000)?

Are there too many games coming out now for a game to maintain its playerbase, even with content updates, for more than a couple months? Do these three EA game play too much like "console" games for them to get anywhere near the same numbers on competing platforms? Have the majority of PC gamers moved on to F2P/games-as-a-service? Or mostly just player whatever genre is hot at the moment (moba, survival, etc.)?

 

[Renekton]

Now I am wondering how Destiny 2 PC will fare.

PC players tend to gravitate to single particular games with long legs instead of annual AAA releases.

TF2 is nearly 10 years old by now, but it still manages 60k CCU despite lack of substantial updates.

BF1 and TF2 aren't annual I think

The problem is you're trying to play games who's primary fanbase lies on consoles. Those games are also "console-ized" in many ways, which is seen as a bad thing in the PC gaming community. This is both good and bad imo.

They will never have the playerbase that PC focused games like CS or PUBG will get because of that.

What about Overwatch then?

 

[Wolf Akela]

PC players tend to gravitate to single particular games with long legs instead of annual AAA releases.

TF2 is nearly 10 years old by now, but it still manages 60k CCU despite lack of substantial updates.

 

[xRaizen]

The problem is you're trying to play games who's primary fanbase lies on consoles. Those games are also "console-ized" in many ways, which is seen as a bad thing in the PC gaming community. This is both good and bad imo.

They will never have the playerbase that PC focused games like CS or PUBG will get because of that.

 

[The Dear Leader]

Everybody's playing PUBG.

 

[sotojuan]

PC players tend to gravitate to single particular games with long legs instead of annual AAA releases.

TF2 is nearly 10 years old by now, but it still manages 60k CCU despite lack of substantial updates.

This. I have friends who, for the past five years, dedicate 90% of their game time to CS:GO.

 

[soxinthebox]

PC players tend to gravitate to single particular games with long legs instead of annual AAA releases.

TF2 is nearly 10 years old by now, but it still manages 60k CCU despite lack of substantial updates.

Titanfall 2 is 10 years old?

 

[MUnited83]

You're looking at very console-centric AAA franchises. People on PC don't go for those much.

 

[CountAntonius]

Everyone is playing LoL.

In reality few games maintain over 50k concurrent users on PC and it tends to be franchises that continue development for years on end and grow a large community.

LoL
WoW
Overwatch
DoTa
Pubg
CSGO
Team Fortress 2

Then you have stuff that average around 50k or less but still has a fairly large audience.
Rocket League
GTA V
Warframe
H1Z1
Paladins

 

[RichiRamjag]

Titanfall 2 is 10 years old?

Team Fortress 2, ya wiseguy!

 

[arts&crafts]

Titanfall 2 is 10 years old?

I imagine Team Fortress 2..the original TF2

 

[Altered Juice]

Console focused games results in PC gamers pulling a drive-by for a week before going back to old ass relics that are barely getting any updates

 

[Maxinas]

PC "gamers" don't play games. They buy them on sales for trading cards.

Spoiler

On a serious note, there is a reason why you never buy fighting games on PC.

 

[shanafan]

As long there is enough population to do a popular match, I am perfectly fine with that. I wish more PC players had the Infinite Warfare DLC, but it's fine.

I do think Overwatch may have more players on PC than console, but I could be mistaken.

 

[gngf123]

Console focused AAA games nearly always have lower player counts on PC.

You want to be checking Steam's concurrent numbers to figure out what games have healthy communities.

 

[taoofjord]

The problem is you're trying to play games who's primary fanbase lies on consoles. Those games are also "console-ized" in many ways, which is seen as a bad thing in the PC gaming community. This is both good and bad imo.

They will never have the playerbase that PC focused games like CS or PUBG will get because of that.

No doubt that's part of the problem. But isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful games end up dwindling away when these often can push the platform the hardest?

 

[Black_Red]

Yeah, PC players usually focus on games with long term support, like Leauge of Legends, I've been playing for 7 years and the servers always have enough people to play (seconds to find a match).

No doubt that's part of the problem. But isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful games end up dwindling away when these often can push the platform the hardest?

I dont think it's strange, If people are gonna spend a lot of time in a multiplayer game, they usually choose it because of the gameplay, and not on how beautiful it is.

 

[family_guy]

The problem is you're trying to play games who's primary fanbase lies on consoles. Those games are also "console-ized" in many ways, which is seen as a bad thing in the PC gaming community. This is both good and bad imo.

They will never have the playerbase that PC focused games like CS or PUBG will get because of that.

Battlefield started on PC didn't it?

 

[CountAntonius]

No doubt that's part of the problem. But isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful games end up dwindling away when these often can push the platform the hardest?

Big games tend to do very well at launch but rarely maintain a playerbase cause people end up going back to old favorites.

 

[Sygma]

I've pretty much never paid attention to the size of a multiplayer game's active user base. But recently I upgraded my PC, which led me to download some of the best looking, recent AAA shooters like Battlefield 1, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Titanfall 2 (all games I own and still play on PS4). To my surprise, it seemed like barely anyone playing. I was forced to play the most popular mode or not play at all unless I got lucky.

Then, PUBG's concurrent user count was all over the news, making me very curious to see how other games were doing.

First off, Battlefield 1's numbers on PC are pretty disappointing. A new expansion just hit (In the Name of the Tsar) and tonight there were only 6 populated servers running Conquest, 1 running Domination, and 5 running Team Deathmatch (in NA). That seems insane to me. This is during a Premium Trial period and the game is also available on Origin Access. Even still, it's averaging somewhere between 20-30k CCU in the last 30 days. Meanwhile on PS4 it's around 85K in the last 30 days.

How about Star Wars: Battlefront? A 24 hour peak of 5k. Titanfall 2 seems to be around 3K.

Say what you want about Battlefront's quality, but Titanfall 2 and Battlefield 1 are quality games. Two of the best, in my opinion. What's going on here? Why are PC player counts so low? How does PUBG end up with such a disparate number (currently ~1,460,000)?

Are there too many games coming out now for a game to maintain its playerbase, even with content updates, for more than a couple months? Do these three EA game play too much like "console" games for them to get anywhere near the same numbers on competing platforms? Have the majority of PC gamers moved on to F2P/games-as-a-service? Or mostly just player whatever genre is hot at the moment (moba, survival, etc.)?

Release of Titanfall 2 was unfortunate and never quite broke through but even with such a low playerbase you'll always get in matches fairly quickly

Battlefront tanked after the first month, for not being "pc battlefront" enough. Like, somehow being an arcade star wars shooter was insulting to those who played the previous iteration

As for BF 1, there always were more players on console than on PC since BF 3 so it's nothing new

You'll find majority of the largest active concurrent playerbase on MMOS (FF XIV - WOW) - FPS without dlcs and whatnot (cs go / tf 2 / overwatch) - and most importantly MOBAS.

Also PUBG. Some f2p are also quite decent, and they re for the most part in the online rpg category (Warframe / Path of Exile etc)


I expect Destiny 2 to sell well but 2 dlcs + expansion being on the horizon will put off most of the potential buyers on pc. Like, its literally 100€ to just keep up

 

[Unai]

Battlefield started on PC didn't it?

Yes, but it's clearly a console game since last generation.

 

[Renekton]

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?

 

[family_guy]

Seems like PC needs cross play more than consoles do.

 

[Bluth54]

Titanfall 2 is 10 years old?

Team Fortress 2 has been TF2 for years before the Titanfall franchise even existed.

 

[galv]

Garbage, dumbed down, incomplete games with blatant moneygrabbing schemes aren't going to attract customers who have a library of games stretching back over two decades. Battlefield 1 and Titanfall 2 really didn't try to appeal to PC gamers, and plus, they're on Origin which immediately lowers their visibility. With that being said, BF1 has over 30K players at any given time. I fail to see how that's a dead game. Perhaps they shouldn't push for $90 games, with awful DLC practices that split the community? (PUBG is $30, and infinitely more affordable.) Titanfall 2 on the other hand was sent to die, on all systems, not just PC.

On the other hand, server browsers make it always possible to find games, even in some incredibly old/obscure titles. I still have no issues finding games on Halo:CE MP, Unreal Tournament 04, CoD:MW2, CS1.6 and so on.

Furthermore, games like League of Legends, DOTA2, CS:GO, PUBG, Overwatch, World of Warcraft, Team Fortress 2 are massive games on PC, that don't exist (minus Overwatch) on consoles. And then on top of that, you have a million different MMORPGs (played mostly in Asian regions), a tonne of singleplayer sandbox games with massive modding communities (Skyrim/Fallout 4/New Vegas being the most popular ones), the ridiculous amount of survival games (especially Minecraft with mods), games like GTA:V, Rocket League, ARMA 3 and the like which really don't get the same amount of players on consoles. Strategy games like Civ, Europa Universalis, Stellaris, Total War also get a decent chunk of players. Building games like Cities Skylines, Prison Architect, and Planet Coaster are also popular. Euro Truck Simulator and racing sims also get a fairly consistent community.

When it honestly comes down to it, there's really not that many games on console, as opposed to PC.

Thanks to games always being playable, loyal communities and mods to keep them alive, even the small communities feel awesome, even though the numbers fragments the overall community a lot. PUBG is simply an outlier in terms of player count - it's blown up far beyond anyone's predictions.

 

[Durante]

No doubt that's part of the problem. But isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful games end up dwindling away when these often can push the platform the hardest?

On GAF, there's this common misconception that PC as a gaming platform is primarily a console with better performance that you don't need to pay an online fee for.

While it can be that for some people, the most popular PC games are very different from the most popular console games. When you look at the absolutely massive MOBAs, the long-running FPS titles like CS:GO and TF2, the recent survival games, things like the various Civilization games pulling >50k combined daily numbers consistently over years, or even the ~70k people playing Divinity:OS2 daily currently, what you notice is that being outstandingly graphically appealing and "pushing the platform" has very little impact on long-term popularity.

 

[Nirolak]

It's pretty common for traditional AAA games to average 2-2.5x player concurrency on PS4 vs PC.

Like I went to look at Titanfall 2 concurrency stats and saw similar results to Battlefield: https://www.reddit.com/r/titanfall/wiki/playerbase/

PC Playerbase:
Weekend: 4385 Players online at Sunday(September 10, 2017) 8:00 PM CEST
Weekday: 3375 Players online at Thursday (September 07, 2017) 8:00 PM CEST

PS4 Playerbase:
Weekend: 8,786 Saturday (June 17, 2017) 9:00 PM EST.
Weekday: 5,718 Players online at Tuesday (May 23, 2017) 8PM EST

Xbox One Playerbase:
Weekend: 9,321 Saturday (June 17, 2017) 9:00 PM EST
Weekday: 8,851 Players online at Tuesday (May 23, 2017) 8 PM EST

The consoles numbers are from months earlier, so should be more favorable too.

I mean there frankly are just more people in this audience on consoles.

As for why these are lower in general across all platforms - for example, Battlefield 1's three peak concurrencies from today only hit (let's ignore phasing to be super generous: 33K PC + 55K XB1 +79K PS4) 167K, a lot of that is driven by the season pass and update model. Overwatch gets at least one free update for everyone every month, and has compelling events every other month. Battlefield 1 goes long periods of time without significant updates, you have to pay $50 to even get access to the updates, and people don't care about the events, so it bleeds off players to more active games. This is why games like Battlefront 2 switched to new free content centric post launch support models.

 

[Mephala]

What about Overwatch then?

Overwatch is probably an exception however from my limited time with the game it still felt like a PC first and console 2nd game.

 

[Renekton]

Garbage, dumbed down, incomplete games with blatant moneygrabbing schemes aren't going to attract customers who have a library of games stretching back over two decades. Battlefield 1 and Titanfall 2 really didn't try to appeal to PC gamers, and plus, they're on Origin which immediately lowers their visibility. With that being said, BF1 has over 30K players at any given time. I fail to see how that's a dead game.

Hey we play a lot of unfinished garbage too (ie why is ARK up there?) and PUBG's upcoming lootbox scheme looks shady af.

 

[taoofjord]

All this is pretty distressing, to be honest. Battlefront 2 is coming out soon, and I'd love to play it at 1440p, 144hz, but what's the point if the playerbase drops off a cliff after a couple months?

I hope EA figures out some way to maintain their player base this time. Aside from hopefully being a better game, I believe all the maps are going to be free this time (unless I'm mistaken). Hopefully that ensures a longer tail.

 

[vilmer_]

On GAF, there's this common misconception that PC as a gaming platform is primarily a console with better performance that you don't need to pay an online fee for.

While it can be that for some people, the most popular PC games are very different from the most popular console games. When you look at the absolutely massive MOBAs, the long-running FPS titles like CS:GO and TF2, the recent survival games, things like the various Civilization games pulling >50k combined daily numbers consistently over years, or even the ~70k people playing Divinity:OS2 daily currently, what you notice is that being outstandingly graphically appealing and "pushing the platform" has very little impact on long-term popularity.

Don't forget, there are spreadsheets for all of this.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

PC "gamers" don't play games. They buy them on sales for trading cards.

Spoiler

On a serious note, there is a reason why you never buy fighting games on PC.

Spoiler

Except for SF V

Or if there's a 70% discount

 

[Mooreberg]

It is hard to figure if those games are less popular because they are on Origin, or if in the case of BF1, the map/server bullshit would cause the same problems on Steam. It is very, very, very obvious at this point that the high population shooters on PC do not fragment the player base. They also tend to be a given developer's focus for more than a year.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

No doubt that's part of the problem. But isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful games end up dwindling away when these often can push the platform the hardest?

You’ll find the whole platform in general tends not to sell based on graphics. I suspect that’s because while the PC enthusiasts on GAF are all high end builders, most of the community for the games you see topping the charts on steam have relatively low system requirements.

This pulls in folks who don’t have dedicated gaming devices but still play with their friends. Not at all tapped into the industry, but way into one or two games. They play on laptops or desktops with weak graphics.

 

[Optimus Lime]

None of this should be surprising. PC and console audiences are very different, despite the tentative convergence of the hardware/software.

The PS4/XBone currently enjoy the largest player counts for annualised AAA FPS franchises - there's absolutely no doubt about that. CoD is a dismal failure on the PC, Battlefield shows significantly lower numbers, and TF2 was DOA.

The PC, however, has absolutely massive player bases for many different genres - RPGs, MMOs, whatever Warframe is, strategy games, stuff like World Of Tanks/War Thunder, and of course the Valve titles and PUBG. The PC game library, at any given time, hosts enthusiast communities for many different genres, and is often where they break first.

I have no horse in this race - I'm a PC/PS4 guy. I'm 90% PC and 10% PS4 for exclusives and AAA FPS games. I just don't think it's as simple as 'console numbers high/PC numbers low'. The numbers break down into a picture far more complicated than that.

 

[Finaika]

The most popular PC games are graphically light games that can run on toasters.

 

[dracula_x]

It's is a casual platform, people don't buy PC just for gaming.

Also much more younger audience outside of US and Western Europe – they can't afford to buy a lot of games.

 

[Rockk]

For the last decade whenever a new multiplayer FPS game comes out people have to ask - "Is this better then Counter Strike or Team Fortress 2?" Turns out most games can't match up.

If your really old school then you ask "Does this still hold up to Quake?" And the answer is hell naw.

 

[taoofjord]

I think what makes this surprising for me is that PC and consoles player bases haven't converged as much as I'd have expected to by now.

I'm also forgetting that I'm a bit of an outlier, being someone who grew up playing and loving both PC and consoles games in the 80s and 90s.

Anyway, thanks for the input everyone.

 

[Durante]

The most popular PC games are graphically light games that can run on toasters.

To be fair -- and I made a somewhat similar argument further up, so I don't really disagree -- it must be noted in the current situation (of it just breaking 1.4 million concurrent earlier today) that PUBG is an exception to this rule. As the SteamSpy situation indicates, it's also bringing in new mid/high-end PC gamers, so surely that is related.

 

[galv]

The most popular PC games are graphically light games that can run on toasters.

Not for the top 10 on Steam at any rate.

617,049 1,462,708 PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS
400,978 726,513 Dota 2
258,869 616,808 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
55,814 60,776 Team Fortress 2
51,564 68,540 Divinity: Original Sin 2
46,044 55,700 PAYDAY 2
40,647 56,691 Warframe
38,663 65,508 Grand Theft Auto V
38,441 53,989 Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
37,299 54,787 ARK: Survival Evolved

Out of the top 10 on Steam right now, PUBG, Divinity OS2, Payday 2*, Warframe, GTAV, Rainbow 6 Siege and ARK all are good looking games that do not run well on laptops/toasters without at least a dedicated GPU, Payday 2 probably being the easiest to run by far.

 

[Renekton]

To be fair -- and I made a somewhat similar argument further up, so I don't really disagree -- it must be noted in the current situation (of it just breaking 1.4 million concurrent earlier today) that PUBG is an exception to this rule. As the SteamSpy situation indicates, it's also bringing in new mid/high-end PC gamers, so surely that is related.

To add to your point, I noticed more GAFers in the "I need a new PC" thread wanting a new rig for PUBG.

 

[CountAntonius]

Name a console game that has people playing that has been out as long as Team Fortress 2 , World of Warcraft or even league of legends?

There are none and that's part of why newer games have a larger presence on console. When a new console comes out all of those old games are generally left to die so people tend to move on to what's new and active. The new BF, the new CoD etc...

On PC we can always go back and odds are since these games are PC-centric the devs are still supporting them with new content. New games sell well enough on PC but they don't maintain a playerbase because we have the option to go back to the classics which still have huge communities a choice you don't have on consoles.

 

[Strakt]

Now I am wondering how Destiny 2 PC will fare.


BF1 and TF2 aren't annual I think


What about Overwatch then?

I think destiny 2 will fare solely cause its on battle.net (and its a decent game)

 

[mrlion]

Titanfall 2 is 10 years old?

Nobody cares about Titanfall 2 why would they be talking about it?

 

[dracula_x]

Name a console game that has people playing that has been out as long as Team Fortress 2 , World of Warcraft or even league of legends?

WarHawk, BF1943

btw, it won't be at all a problem with BC anymore

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Not for the top 10 on Steam at any rate.

617,049 1,462,708 PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS
400,978 726,513 Dota 2
258,869 616,808 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
55,814 60,776 Team Fortress 2
51,564 68,540 Divinity: Original Sin 2
46,044 55,700 PAYDAY 2
40,647 56,691 Warframe
38,663 65,508 Grand Theft Auto V
38,441 53,989 Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
37,299 54,787 ARK: Survival Evolved

Out of the top 10 on Steam right now, PUBG, Divinity OS2, Payday 2*, Warframe, GTAV, Rainbow 6 Siege and ARK all are good looking games that do not run well on laptops/toasters without at least a dedicated GPU, Payday 2 probably being the easiest to run by far.

I think a lot of folks on GAF might be surprised what some people play those games on, under what conditions. I bet a number of people got into PUBG while it was on the lowest possible settings, running at 15-20 fps.

Also, integrated graphics can at least handle an Xbox 360 level of game quality, and most of those would run. Not well, but well enough for a casual fan of that one game to enjoy it. Maybe they upgrade (minimally) after enjoying that one game for a while.

 

[TimeEffect]

Shocking, right? Battlefield sits at around 12K global. It's pitiful.

On PS4, it's at a strong 60K or so though. I partly blame map pack DLC, but I think people are also not a fan of how streamlined BF became. Conquest has a Domination styled ruleset while there's a lack of big, big maps with all out warfare. Or maybe people arent a fan of the limited setting, I dont know.

I guess the AAA quality hurts big too for low end PCs

It really surprises me to see PUBG doing so well. Besides that, PC gamers seem to buy into games as service. Games with super long legs and no annual releases seem to do great. Siege is doing pretty well and its around 60K I think

 

[CountAntonius]

WarHawk, BF1943

btw, it won't be at all a problem with BC anymore

Do either of them even have 1k player concurrent? They also don't have continued dev support.

The games I'm talking about on PC still have some of the largest communities around. Now that free to play and games as a service are become bigger on console I can those options opening up for console players but they really weren't before outside of a few exceptions.

 

[dracula_x]

Do either of them even have 1k player concurrent? They also don't have continued dev support.

The games I'm talking about on PC still have some of the largest communities around. Now that free to play and games as a service are become bigger on console I can those options opening up for console players but they really weren't before outside of a few exceptions.

Imagine what would be if those games would have continued dev support and were available on more modern platforms.