Really interesting figures

cheyane

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/07/steam-data-leak-reveals-precise-player-count-for-thousands-of-games/2/

The numbers revealed here are surprising.

Glad to see Path of Exile doing so well.

techblogger911

A lot of leakages these days :P I hope only the figure count was leaked and no personal information.

rpmcmurphy

I was really surprised at the popularity of Jurassic World Evolution, I thought those sort of park management games would be quite niche but to sell nealy 500,000 in 3 weeks is awesome.

Scorchien

 Hmph a little surprised how strong the FPS is represented there , i know its vastly popular but , thats a bit more thatn i would have guessed for a list with those parameters..

   

Scot

Surely some games feature more achievements than others and this could distort the figures?

Scorchien

Scot said:

Surely some games feature more achievements than others and this could distort the figures?

well they do TF2 has 520 many more than some games some have 20 for ex.. , But it does say  unique players that played at least once , so not so much the completionist count as just log ins on unique accts, im assuming, and as of 7/1/18 .    just wow 50 mill , something does not seem right tho , that is incredible then ,,

  So in just 7 days 50 million unique players logged into TF2???  Am i reading that correctly?

Po_gg

Scot said:

Surely some games feature more achievements than others and this could distort the figures?

Can't say the reason, but those numbers are clearly way off... APB near 6 million? Mafia 2 2.3 million while Mafia 3 is not even a million?

My favourite: CO, 1.6 million   if only...
CO never had that number even if you add up and total every player since launch. (which is a shame of course, go and play CO, folks! )

Waan

That can't be right..

MaxBacon

These figures are so irrelevant, like you are seeing TOTALs, how many people own that title, not how many people play it.

Especially with F2P titles on the mix it's not easy to tell either the game is doing well or not, because the older they are the more people that have owned it.

The only surprising thing for me there is seeing ESO as the top owned MMO, that overcomes even the F2P MMO titles. ~~ EDIT nevermind ESO is not on that list it's Skyrim.

Octagon7711

MaxBacon said:

These figures are so irrelevant, like you are seeing TOTALs, how many people own that title, not how many people play it.

Especially with F2P titles on the mix it's not easy to tell either the game is doing well or not, because the older they are the more people that have owned it.

The only surprising thing for me there is seeing ESO as the top owned MMO, that overcomes even the F2P MMO titles.

I wonder how ESO would compare in numbers to GW2.

MadFrenchie

I agree with @Torval, this doesn't seem to be a super simple calculation.  I don't wanna comment on the data too much because of it.

Wizardry

claiming the term "PRECISE" and mentioning Steam discredits ANYTHING that article or site has to say.
Anyone having used Steam knows that simply clicking on a game in your library ,weather you actually login and play or not still registers as having played.
Sometimes i only need to see the first 2 minutes to know a game is worth going into the trash can.

All i need do is d/l a game to see it and now i am a figure,a number where a game can say look here >>>50 million players.

The REAL number that matters is one we will NEVER fully see and that is how many players that reside within a game are actually playing for FUN,how many are RMT,how many are box accounts,how many are friends of friends who just bought the game or logged in because their friends are.Another number of importance is longevity of players/accounts,i would put more value into a game that kept my interest for 10 years than 50 million accounts of which nobody lasts beyond 3 months.
All of the deeper stats matter because a crappy game can simply say 50 million accounts,does that mean the game is automatic good?No not at all and why simple numbers mean nothing.

Maybe even the most important factor is WHY should ANY of us care about these numbers,are we as gamer's not thinking for ourselves,do we not choose the game that is right for us?seriously what do numbers mean to me...nothing,only thing that matters is if I like the game.

bcbully

kitarad

^^^

That is what people say about MMORPGs that statement is not about MMOs. MMOs actually have a larger population engaging in PvP. You already knew that didn't you but was trying to be funny.

Quizzical

A thermometer will tell you the temperature of the thermometer, which may or may not be related to the temperature of what you're actually trying to measure.  That a measurement doesn't tell you what you'd like to know doesn't mean that the measurement is wrong.  It only means that it's measuring something different from what you'd like to know.

In this case, it sounds like they're looking for people who logged into a game at least once.  Someone who uninstalled the game five minutes later would count the same as someone who played the game actively for two years.  That's a major caveat, but it doesn't mean that the numbers reported are wrong.  From looking at player activity, you'd have no idea how many people logged in briefly before quitting a game and never playing again.

Lokero

What astounds me the most(not that it's news to me, but still) is how many people keep on playing these ancient, dated(relative) games like TF2 and CS, etc.

That's dedication to keep playing games that are from 10+ years ago.  Perhaps "obsession" would be a better word

Of course, in the MMO genre, there are still millions playing WoW after all this time, so it's clearly not a genre-specific thing despite me mentioning a couple FPS titles.

Tiller

kitarad said:

^^^

That is what people say about MMORPGs that statement is not about MMOs. MMOs actually have a larger population engaging in PvP. You already knew that didn't you but was trying to be funny.

Engaging and activating living within are two different things. I like PvP, but I hate games where you can't get a break from it, AKA Korean gankfests. As side content it's fun, sure, not as the only content when it comes to an MMO. GW2 as an example, My guild which is one of the largest in GW2 does WvW and pvp stuff every night for a few hours, but then we all go back to pve. If GW2 was nothing but WvWvW it would get boring pretty fast. Sure there are those who live in the WvW realms, but if there is no one to actively to play against, then I guess they are logging out.

sayuu

DMKano said:

Trove is the top ranked MMO on that list

so what? all it means is a lot of people tried it then moved on to a better game. . .


"Most tried then dumped game" is not a good trophy to have. . .

mgilbrtsn

I love these types of statistics.  Sadly, by the time the debating on sources and possible exceptions, arguments, competing stats...  Because of this, I never know they are 'good' stats, but I find them interesting nonetheless.

mmolou

Wizardry said:

claiming the term "PRECISE" and mentioning Steam discredits ANYTHING that article or site has to say.
Anyone having used Steam knows that simply clicking on a game in your library ,weather you actually login and play or not still registers as having played.

All i need do is d/l a game to see it and now i am a figure,a number where a game can say look here >>>50 million players.

Looking at the article and actually reading it, the numbers are produced by people playing the game and completing achievements.

So you are wrong.

sayuu

DMKano said:

sayuu said:

DMKano said:

Trove is the top ranked MMO on that list

so what? all it means is a lot of people tried it then moved on to a better game. . .


"Most tried then dumped game" is not a good trophy to have. . .

Its interesting to see that its the most tried MMO on the list.

7.7 million Steam players have played it.

So much for the theory of blocky voxel graphics being a turnoff.

Too bad there are no figures for consoles.

I think being the most tried and then dumped game is a better argument FOR the voxel graphics being a turn off theory. . .but that's just me

and having a retention rate of 0.0007% is not something to be proud of for any product or service.

Scorchien

DMKano said:

sayuu said:

DMKano said:

Trove is the top ranked MMO on that list

so what? all it means is a lot of people tried it then moved on to a better game. . .


"Most tried then dumped game" is not a good trophy to have. . .

Its interesting to see that its the most tried MMO on the list.

7.7 million Steam players have played it.

So much for the theory of blocky voxel graphics being a turnoff.

Too bad there are no figures for consoles.

Huh , im no fan of Trove but , also have never heard that theory , anyone remotely familiar with a little game called Minecraft and its endless clones , would know that is a fools theory , which im ceratin your aware of so wondering where thats coming from ...Voxels are hugley popular which everyone knows..

 

  And being F2P , well then 7 mill is not so impactful on a F2P game as a game which people had to pay for ...

blamo2000

I wonder how accurate the numbers are?  I know I play steam offline exclusively.  I don't pay attention to achievements, but once in a while I get trading cards.  I used to sell them until that became a hassle, and now I turn them into gems that I have no idea what they are for.  I think the trading cards are related to achievements, but I'm not sure.

I know they usually show up in my inventory when I have to load a game with steam online, which I rarely ever have to do.  Usually it has to do with unlocking the files it locks as some sort of drm protection so I can install a mod.  Or if I have to play a game through another thing - like M&MX has to be played through the Ubisoft portal thing and I think steam needs to be online when running it.

Other than that, these numbers must exclude me and people like me that stick to steam offline as much as possible.  I doubt it impacts the popular games, since I only play good games and there are almost none on this list.

Sephiroso

Scorchien said:

Scot said:

Surely some games feature more achievements than others and this could distort the figures?

well they do TF2 has 520 many more than some games some have 20 for ex.. , But it does say  unique players that played at least once , so not so much the completionist count as just log ins on unique accts, im assuming, and as of 7/1/18 .    just wow 50 mill , something does not seem right tho , that is incredible then ,,

  So in just 7 days 50 million unique players logged into TF2???  Am i reading that correctly?

I think as of 7/1/18 means from the time they've been on steam up to 7/1/18.

Sephiroso

DMKano said:

sayuu said:

DMKano said:

Trove is the top ranked MMO on that list

so what? all it means is a lot of people tried it then moved on to a better game. . .


"Most tried then dumped game" is not a good trophy to have. . .

Its interesting to see that its the most tried MMO on the list.

7.7 million Steam players have played it.

So much for the theory of blocky voxel graphics being a turnoff.

Too bad there are no figures for consoles.

Blocky voxel graphics are a turnoff for most that are interested in playing an mmorpg. The main people trying Trove are the kids who liked minecraft and figured Trove was the next big Minecraft.

Secondly, i don't see how Trove is an mmo. MORPG sure...but mmorpg?

Narwrynn

Wizardry said:

claiming the term "PRECISE" and mentioning Steam discredits ANYTHING that article or site has to say.
Anyone having used Steam knows that simply clicking on a game in your library ,weather you actually login and play or not still registers as having played.
Sometimes i only need to see the first 2 minutes to know a game is worth going into the trash can.

All i need do is d/l a game to see it and now i am a figure,a number where a game can say look here >>>50 million players.

The REAL number that matters is one we will NEVER fully see and that is how many players that reside within a game are actually playing for FUN,how many are RMT,how many are box accounts,how many are friends of friends who just bought the game or logged in because their friends are.Another number of importance is longevity of players/accounts,i would put more value into a game that kept my interest for 10 years than 50 million accounts of which nobody lasts beyond 3 months.
All of the deeper stats matter because a crappy game can simply say 50 million accounts,does that mean the game is automatic good?No not at all and why simple numbers mean nothing.

Maybe even the most important factor is WHY should ANY of us care about these numbers,are we as gamer's not thinking for ourselves,do we not choose the game that is right for us?seriously what do numbers mean to me...nothing,only thing that matters is if I like the game.

I swear you are one of the dumbest people I have ever seen. Every time I see a post from you I get closer to pouring bleach into my eyes to stop from having to see this trash. 

claiming the term "PRECISE" and mentioning Steam discredits ANYTHING

 No where in that link do they even use the word "precise." Not even in one of the game titles. Closest you get is precision from "EVGA Precision XOC."

Edit: they do use the word precise in a previous page on the article I didn't see. 
I'm a dumbass too. 

Anyone having used Steam knows that simply clicking on a game in your library ,weather you actually login and play or not still registers as having played.
Sometimes i only need to see the first 2 minutes to know a game is worth going into the trash can.

This data doesn't tell you what games are or are not good or currently in a healthy state. It never claims that. Of course these numbers are going to skew towards F2P and older games, their is no barrier to entry to F2P games and older games have had more time to be on sale and get users to start the game once.  

All i need do is d/l a game to see it and now i am a figure,a number where a game can say look here >>>50 million players.

Yeah, that is how statistics work. These stats didn't say if you enjoyed the game or if you are still actively playing. However, there is some decent overlap between this list and the current players list from steam. 

The REAL number that matters is one we will NEVER fully see and that is how many players that reside within a game are actually playing for FUN,how many are RMT,how many are box accounts,how many are friends of friends who just bought the game or logged in because their friends are.

I don't even think devs could give you those numbers. How could anyone tell you if you a user logged in for their own enjoyment or because they just wanted to play with a friend? 

Another number of importance is longevity of players/accounts,i would put more value into a game that kept my interest for 10 years than 50 million accounts of which nobody lasts beyond 3 months.

Why would longevity matter here? This is for all steam games with developer added achievements. What about games that have good single player stories like Spec Ops: the Line? or indie hits like FTL. They aren't going to have the longevity of a triple-A single player sandbox or multiplayer game. I can see why longevity matters to MMO players because we tend to invest a lot of time into single games, but why to everyone else? 

All of the deeper stats matter because a crappy game can simply say 50 million accounts,does that mean the game is automatic good?No not at all and why simple numbers mean nothing.

Yeah, some games use accounts created as an advertising pitch. It is dumb and doesn't mean much. This isn't the case here. This was leaked data - it wasn't a sales pitch.

Maybe even the most important factor is WHY should ANY of us care about these numbers,are we as gamer's not thinking for ourselves,do we not choose the game that is right for us?seriously what do numbers mean to me...nothing,only thing that matters is if I like the game.

Because numbers and data are interesting to (some) people for their own sake. It is nice to know a game you enjoy, especially an online one that might get shut down, is doing well. It also matters because in MMO's players are part of the content. Games like Wildstar struggle to even have a few PvP matches pop a day. Even if you like the PvP in a game like Wildstar more than PvP in WoW, you might choose to play WoW because the queue is only 20 minutes as oppose to a few hours. 

But ultimately if these numbers don't mean anything to you, that's cool. They don't mean anything to me either. No one claimed that if you like a game that isn't high on the list that you are wrong for liking the game or that you should only play the most popular games.