Is Elite Dangerous a dead game? I compared it to some others ...

Nice post, Alien. :) If FD would stop bolting new half baked features on to the game and focus on fixing bugs and QOL issues, that would be great.

Maybe there’s multiple degrees of dead? Because while the game isn’t dead, expecting frontier to be normal with elite is long dead and buried? Maybe expectations are what is actually dead, not the game. Think we all knew something was dead…? :p
 
VR support hasn't been dropped, they just didn't extend it into on foot.

Elite Dangerous - Built for 4k & VR
Elite Dangerous : Horizons (console platforms added, Mac dropped)
Elite Dangerous : Odyssey (consoles dropped, VR on-foot stuffed all cos Cobra engine can't handle it therefore rolled back)

Extended the game and dropped support... Players unaffected don't care let's hope they don't drop support for Windows or Hotas controls next eh maybe then others take an interest?
 
Well only for fun, would be interesting to know what the current number is.

Well, in 2020 peak monthly average concurrent players on Steam charts was 10,000.
FDev said peak players was 500,000 monthly players (excluding Epic accounts)

Now - last 30 days average - ED gets 5000 average monthly concurrent players which, based on the same ratio as above, would mean at least 250,000 monthly players without Epic (and now Epic probably makes for some numbers too). So 250k-300k monthly players. At least 250k-300k.

Seems quite healthy to me.
 
I would strongly suggest this community considers the fact Elite is an alive game but Frontier won't ever develop on the speed or scale most of us want because at the end of the day the market isn't big enough warrant the cost. I play a lot of the NHL ice hockey games made by EA Games. A big developer but in terms of popularity no where near football Fifa or basketball NBA they still make the game but content and features come every few years rather than every release.
I'd think that the pace of development depends on revenues. If it makes money it keeps on living, and if it doesn't it dies. If it brings in a lot, then the development can be faster.
 
[1] The biggest problem with using Steam stats is that "concurrent online" measures massively overestimate changes in "total player" numbers, both on the way up and the way down ... and this is probably a bigger source of error than "not everyone uses Steam" is! Steam figures have varied over a 4x range over the last few years, whereas most other activity indicators which don't rely on people being online at the same time rather than in the same week/month have varied by more like 1.5x or 2x (usually in the same direction; Steam is probably fine for estimating "going up" or "going down", just not for "how much?")
I'd think that the steam charts are just good for telling that the game isn't dead, and has on average had similar player numbers with some ups and downs in it's lifetime..
 
Maybe there’s multiple degrees of dead? Because while the game isn’t dead, expecting frontier to be normal with elite is long dead and buried? Maybe expectations are what is actually dead, not the game. Think we all knew something was dead…? :p
Maybe the game is dead for some people, while it's very much alive for others.. :D
 
It is "dying" because Obsidian Ant says so about three times a week in his highest rated videos.
Apparently he has an axe to grind, FDev hacked him off in some way, I'm told.
Content creators like OA have been trying to reason the community into believing it is dead for quite a while now. It is starting to get old.
I'm not sure whether some CMDRs on this forum have some sort of weird problem with Obsidian Ant, but he has never said Elite Dangerous is dying. Instead, many times when discussing the topic of player numbers he's specifically stated "I don't think Elite Dangerous is dying" (or similar).
And this is a thread suggesting the game is not dying. It's my attempt to say I was wrong in the past, and have changed my opinion.
Funny the responses that assumed the Original Post was a doom thread and obviously didn't read it. To be expected.
The irony of this thread being taken as a "game is dying thread" isn't lost on me.
 
- The usual tangent, the last numbers i heard from star citizen were huge. Im not assuming for a moment its factually true, but that could mean there are many multiples of people playing star citizen than elite at the moment. Really?
I've no idea what numbers you heard and by whom, but they would be wrong. Both at Citizen Con and in Chris Roberts' latest letter, we were told the total number of SC's playtime hours in 2022 which gave us an average hourly concurrency of ~5500 players. That number is dwarfed by Elite Dangerous' concurrency on all platforms.
 
Maybe the game is dead for some people, while it's very much alive for others.. :D

Another option with excellent reasoning. Good point.

Wait that means this thread is pointless because its validly subjective.

So if the game is dead is the wrong question, what about the game being doomed? Maybe it its already doomed from Ian Doncasters analysis in the annual report thread. But going back to swtor, its been doomed for 7 or so years from memory and there are tonnes of players, even i got hooked again a few weeks go rolling some new alts. Doom can linger if there's a fundamental thing done well.

White knights and trolls have such a hard time getting it right.

I've no idea what numbers you heard and by whom, but they would be wrong. Both at Citizen Con and in Chris Roberts' latest letter, we were told the total number of SC's playtime hours in 2022 which gave us an average hourly concurrency of ~5500 players. That number is dwarfed by Elite Dangerous' concurrency on all platforms.

Look im not an expert, i just watch saltemike every now and then (often while playing elite funnily). Errr, last chairmans letter 100k players? Not certain in the slightest tho.

Oh wait yeah i've been thinking monthly users not concurrent. That's the pr boasting stat usually, not steam charts.
 
Last edited:
OK, so maybe no-one has asked this question, and maybe some (including me, I admit) have suggested that Elite Dangerous is a dying game. I thought that given another game on the list I will put below is pretty much dead, much to the annoyance of those who liked its promising start, I wanted to see how Elite Dangerous compares to other MMO's currently still going, regardless of genre. So I looked up the numbers on Steam Charts based on past 30 days:

GameSteam Charts Numbers
Final Fantasy XIV Online19,000 - 24,000
World Of Tanks14,600 - 12,000
World Of Warships8,300 - 7,300
Elite Dangerous4,200 - 4,900
Star Wars The Old Republic3,700 - 4,800
Eve Online3,700 - 3,700
Star Trek Online940 - 970
Lord Of The Rings Online737 - 842
Fisher Online517 - 612
DC Universe Online412 - 505
Dungeons & Dragons Online201 - 290
World Of Warplanes129 - 138
Champions Online72- 97
Starbase39 - 64

A couple of things to note here: Some of these games listed have their own launchers and those numbers aren't included here because there is no information available on those numbers. One obvious omission here is World Of Warcraft for that very reason, it's not on Steam. Single player games like Cyberpunk are also not included in this list.

So, as far as player numbers go, Elite Dangerous is doing quite well, based on Steam numbers. Starbase is the game I mentioned earlier, and even reviews and discussions on Steam are warning everyone it's a dead game. The developers are still trying to keep the game going, holding an in-game event in a few days time, but players are not expecting a good turn out for it.

So why is mentioning Starbase relevant? It's a game where you play a robot, in space, building and piloting space ships, with activities such as mining, trading, salvaging and pirating, just like Elite. And like Elite has come under heavy criticism for the decisions made by developers to add or remove features from the game, and yet the player numbers are incredibly low.

Even a game like SWTOR is still going, with pretty decent numbers compared to Elite Dangerous. SWTOR is a little older than Elite Dangerous, having launched in December 2011, at about the time Elite Dangerous's kickstart launched. It has had constant support from the developers with regular expansions, has a thriving cosmetic store, is Bioware's #1 earner for microtransactions and yet has had people saying or asking if the game is dead, for years.

So to summarise: Is Elite Dangerous dead? No, not yet it isn't, and there's no reason to think it will die any time soon, but Frontier only need to make one mistake, and they could see player support for Elite disappear overnight. You might say Frontier have made many mistakes since 2014, such as offline mode, dropping VR support and console support, but these haven't resulted in player numbers dropping to levels where the game is dead, such as Starbase. Personally, I hope Frontier turn things around and Elite Dangerous is still going in 10 years time, after all, World Of Warcraft is still going strong nearly 20 years after it launched, so who knows?
Based on the Steam Charts numbers provided, Elite Dangerous is currently doing well in terms of player numbers compared to other MMOs such as Starbase, World of Warplanes, and Champions Online. It is worth noting that some games listed have their own launchers and those numbers are not included in the comparison. The game Starbase, which is similar to Elite Dangerous in terms of gameplay, is considered to be "dead" by players and the developers are holding an in-game event in a few days time with low expectations of attendance. The comparison of Elite Dangerous to Star Wars The Old Republic (SWTOR) shows that even though SWTOR is older and has had constant support from the developers with regular expansions, it has also had people asking if the game is dead for years. This concludes that Elite Dangerous is not currently dead but Frontier, the developer, could see player support disappear overnight if they make a mistake. The hope is still alive that Frontier will turn things around and Elite Dangerous will still be going strong in 10 years.
 
Another option with excellent reasoning. Good point.

Wait that means this thread is pointless because its validly subjective.

So if the game is dead is the wrong question, what about the game being doomed? Maybe it its already doomed from Ian Doncasters analysis in the annual report thread. But going back to swtor, its been doomed for 7 or so years from memory and there are tonnes of players, even i got hooked again a few weeks go rolling some new alts. Doom can linger if there's a fundamental thing done well.

White knights and trolls have such a hard time getting it right.
Lol, indeed they (we) have.. :D

That it's dead is obviously wrong as it's still recieving development, but who knows maybe it is indeed doomed! I hope we have many more years to reflect on this fundamental question.

I think many of us have played hundreds or even thousands of hours, that's already saying a lot about the game.. Of course as a player one can reach saturation or maybe a lull where one doesn't quite know what to do anymore. I'd imagine that this is particularly true for the grinders among us. Still there are so many aspects of the game to experience, and changing it up makes it more fun. Joining a squadron or maybe a PMF can also bring new life to the game. I mean I like the new thargoid shooting gallery, but prefer to change it up with on foot combat, raiding, some nav beacon or res/cz ship combat, exploration, bioscanning, etc.
 
I find it funny that a thread I started as a way of saying "The game's not as dead as I thought" has evolved into a discussion on player numbers, but that's the way this forum goes sometimes, and I wouldn't want to change it.
Once down the path to the Doom Side, forever will it dominate your destiny.
 
I'm not sure whether some CMDRs on this forum have some sort of weird problem with Obsidian Ant, but he has never said Elite Dangerous is dying. Instead, many times when discussing the topic of player numbers he's specifically stated "I don't think Elite Dangerous is dying" (or similar).
I have no issue with OA as a person. I don't really watch his videos, because for the most part it is too much... waffling, theorycrafting and speculation to keep my interest piqued. What I really dislike are some of the clickbaity and suggestive video titles, like the recent one about Frontier losing money, or video titles and topics like "How to fix Elite", "Elite Dangerous: Is that all there is", "Elite Dangerous: A sinking ship?". Even if he does draw contrary conclusions, I dislike the style, and I very much feel he at least rides on the aura of Doom to gain viewership. At least for the casual viewer like me who only skims the video titles.
 
What I really dislike are some of the clickbaity and suggestive video titles, like the recent one about Frontier losing money, or video titles and topics like "How to fix Elite", "Elite Dangerous: Is that all there is", "Elite Dangerous: A sinking ship?". Even if he does draw contrary conclusions, I dislike the style, and I very much feel he at least rides on the aura of Doom to gain viewership. At least for the casual viewer like me who only skims the video titles

Same here.
 
I'm not sure whether some CMDRs on this forum have some sort of weird problem with Obsidian Ant, but he has never said Elite Dangerous is dying. Instead, many times when discussing the topic of player numbers he's specifically stated "I don't think Elite Dangerous is dying" (or similar).

The irony of this thread being taken as a "game is dying thread" isn't lost on me.
I have no issue with OA as a person. I don't really watch his videos, because for the most part it is too much... waffling, theorycrafting and speculation to keep my interest piqued. What I really dislike are some of the clickbaity and suggestive video titles, like the recent one about Frontier losing money, or video titles and topics like "How to fix Elite", "Elite Dangerous: Is that all there is", "Elite Dangerous: A sinking ship?". Even if he does draw contrary conclusions, I dislike the style, and I very much feel he at least rides on the aura of Doom to gain viewership. At least for the casual viewer like me who only skims the video titles.
Same here.
Clickbaity and suggestive video titles are what work on Youtube, they're important for maintaining views and the algorithm, so OA will naturally do what's best for his channel as advised by his official Youtube manager.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2xHZPH5Sng

Do you mean the video titled "Frontier LOSE ~$1.5 BILLION In Two Years On Market Value"? The title is factually accurate.
Drawing conclusions based on video titles alone seems naïve as you'll regularly be incorrect, for as the saying goes: never judge a book by its cover. The videos are made to be watched and listened to of course.
 
Back
Top Bottom