ED Steamcharts "4,000" active players. Pathetic

[MickyG1982]

Really? last I looked it was just hovering around the 2000 mark (after its low of 500ish and a peak on release of 212,000 players) I play it, occasionally, it still isn't great, just slightly better than it was.

ED hasn't really changed that significantly between an average of 4k-6k players at once other than jumping when a new 2.x version is released.

 

[Skyjack]

I'm not there. Using non-steam version - performance pennypinching for VR

 

[Don Alvarez]

I made a joke once that out of the 145+ million war chest CIG took in for the promise of SC, some portion had been laid aside to pay internet trolls to come to this forum and bash ED while trumpeting the rose coloured vision of Star Citizen.

At the time, some people didn't appreciate the comedy.

Now, I'm starting think it's no longer a joke.

 

[fademist]

The number of players who played in the last two weeks by the total number of players.

You are correct that it doesn't show console and non-steam users. But it is great for establishing patterns and trends.

Right at this moment No Man's Sky has a better retention rate than Elite: Dangerous.

Ouch.

again:
Nope, you need to think about the data you are looking at. Quite simply, it's wrong by the data gatherer's own admission coupled to us simply not knowing the proportion of those who registered via steam not using steam and if they are reflected there. So you have a numerator of unknown quality, because it's from a poor source and not recorded accurately, divided by a number we can't agree on what it means. There is a technical term for basing all of of your statistical assumptions off that - it's junk.

- - - Updated - - -

I made a joke once that out of the 145+ million war chest CIG took in for the promise of SC, some portion had been laid aside to pay internet trolls to come to this forum and bash ED while trumpeting the rose coloured vision of Star Citizen.

At the time, some people didn't appreciate the comedy.

Now, I'm starting think it's no longer a joke.

looks like it

 

[Sole Hunter]

I made a joke once that out of the 145+ million war chest CIG took in for the promise of SC, some portion had been laid aside to pay internet trolls to come to this forum and bash ED while trumpeting the rose coloured vision of Star Citizen.

At the time, some people didn't appreciate the comedy.

Now, I'm starting think it's no longer a joke.

Chris Roberts paid me 1000$ to insult you.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Chris Roberts paid me 1000$ to insult you.

I doubt that very much

 

[CMDR Smior]

If a game doesn't require steam. I don't use it. I imagine more than half the players don't use steam.

 

[Don Alvarez]

Chris Roberts paid me 1000$ to insult you.

Then you ripped him off, because I don't feel insulted yet[big grin]

 

[Montague]

Which people?

SC doesn't even run at the moment for me, let alone be a playable game !

We also have no idea how many active SC testers there are, were, or have any numbers at all to make a comparison.

It's all just still the Dream

Well, people are still buying into SC, so whatever is available to play doesn't seem to be discouraging that. Maybe the same deal wouldn't have dampened NMS sales, but I suspect it would have.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Well, people are still buying into SC, so whatever is available to play doesn't seem to be discouraging that. Maybe the same deal wouldn't have dampened NMS sales, but I suspect it would have.

There's absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever

 

[Sole Hunter]

Then you ripped him off, because I don't feel insulted yet[big grin]

He says he's quite pleased.

 

[Wylie28]

This is 100% incorrect. Concurrent players does not equal the active player base or do you think the same players are playing the game 24/7.

How many times does this need to be said for people to understand steam stats. On steam alone, in the last 2 weeks there where roughly 80,000 active players, not 4,000.

This does not include players that bought it on steam but now do not open the game via steam and the non steam players.

Repped for understanding the real reason the his number is flawed

 

[Lestat]

Ya it kinda hard when we have Steam, PC, Mac, Xbox, Playstation. Maybe it Steam that fallen short and not the game.

 

[Montague]

There's absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever

No evidence of what, exactly?

That people are still buying into SC?

According to their website, players ponied up more than $51,000 today (March 31). More than four years and no releasable game later, money is still going into their coffers.

That players aren't discouraged from buying because of what's available to play?

Sure, that is conjecture on my part. 1.7 million players have signed up so far. This is new territory for game development. Sales are slower than they were, but it stands to reason there must be a limit to how many people can be expected to buy a game that doesn't exist yet, so who knows if they're encouraged or discouraged by the state of the game.

But if players were complaining about SC the way they complained about NMS once they got their hands on it, I'd expect the money to dry up.

 

[Asp Explorer]

No evidence of what, exactly?

You have expertly answered your own question

 

[krylite]

About a hundred videos in the past 24 hours related to ED on youtube. The ED following hardly looks "pathetic", more like classic considering it's been out for over 2 years.

https://www.youtube.com/results?q=elite+dangerous&sp=EgIIAkgA6gMA

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Oooooh, another DOOOOM thread.

Haven't seen one of these recently /s

 

[Dbrn47]

Oooooh, another DOOOOM thread.

Haven't seen one of these recently /s

 

[xondk]

what is happening is "alpha" and it is not insane long wait cos those things take time they are few years in development and it will take few more years to release it, ya Know like 2 years for horizons to be delivered!

I do not agree, alpha yes, sure, but netcode has been a glaring issue for a loooong while yet it doesn't seem to take priority to fix, and as such many people can't actually help test the game, because it to them is unplayable? it feels unfocused, at least in my mind you work on the skeleton of the game first, not adding new ships and such, and the skeleton would be amongst other things the net code.

But again, do not get me wrong, I want it to succeed...but that doesn't mean I won't comment on what I feel are odd choices.

 

[xondk]

https://steamspy.com/app/359320

91% of them have stopped playing the game.

If you would read my post a bit back, these numbers are at best only part of the deal.
Why? well it doesn't say which people are playing, it could easily be that the pool of players is rotating according to, holiday's family, whatever RL stuff, some people do not play as often as others, that doesn't mean they do not enjoy the game though.
the 9% number is a total sure, but again, I remind you, like in my post
You need to take it into context and also compare it to something more realistic, and also most of all remember that even if a game isn't top 10/20, doesn't mean it is doing bad, it all depends on its scale and Elite is on the scale of an indie/kickstarter game, meaning it doesn't NEED 10k+ players daily on steam to be profitable, where other games need that because their budget is much much larger.
I mean Dark soul's 2 must surely be dead.
Players in the last 2 weeks: 17,010 ± 3,718 (1.56%)

And many would go "But that's because 3 is out now" which is my point entirely, a new game new budget, many games aren't meant to 'last' that long, especially action and single run through games, once that is done, its done, comparing Elite to those makes little to no sense, Elite is a long term game, in terms of playing it, it isn't a jump in pew pew, you might want to look into games like for example dreadnaught for that.
https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/

So yeah, that people feel the need to compare Elite to the big budget games out there is praise for Elite, and it is doing just fine.