Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Daybreak MMO's status

jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
I recently started playing pretty much all their MMO's again and was curious to see how populated each of them are. 

Both EQs don't seem to be doing that well with daily CCUs around 150-300. EQ 1 is only pulling ahead by a bit. DCUO is doing a little better with around 600 daily CCUs, and Planetside 2 is their leading MMO with around 1700 daily CCUs.

This is all according to steamspy, so not totally accurate, but it gives a general idea how each of their MMOs are doing.

Pretty sad to see that the true MMORPGs... EQ 1 and 2 are the least popular, IMO, kids are too stimuli addicted to get immersed in actual MMORPGs these days and need stuff like shooters to keep them entertained.
«13

Comments

  • CelciusCelcius Member RarePosts: 1,878
    edited September 2018
    Steamspy is no longer reliable information, like, completely unreliable. For MMO's specifically, even more so since those particular games most people don't actually play using Steam. You are talking about some games that existed for about a decade before Steam was big too. 

    Steamspy gathers information only from those who publicly share it, which is not many, given that information is private by default now unless the user specifically opts in to share it. 

    Hell, if you look at Steamspy it claims that 500k-1million people own this free title. Given the fact that it has been out for around 2 decades at this point, and that the game was reaching 500k back in it's prime (So around, 1999-2001) That would mean that a very small number of people either purchased or download it in 17 years. It also would mean that the estimate is based purely on Steam users, so that means the total number of people that have played the game will have far exceeded the number on steam by the time it launched. This would also mean that, percent wise, even if 1% of people who own it across the board still play it..the lowest numbers you would see are nearly 10k. 

    I know this is all napkin math based on napkin math, but logic dictates that Steamspy numbers are just flat out wrong to judge a game's numbers by unless the game was only released on Steam. (IE: Bless)

    Another example is ESO. It is available on multiple platforms, obviously, but it is just an example of a game you can't judge by steam numbers. According to Steamspy, that game has 1-2 million owners on Steam. According to Bethesda, as of the end of 2016 (So 2 expansions and 2 years ago) they had roughly 8 million people that had purchased the game. 

    Not to mention the accuracy of ownership, 500k-1million and 1-2million is such a broad statistic it may as well not be listed. 
    [Deleted User]AlBQuirky
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    From the amount of people I've seen in the games and talking in chat channels, it seems to be in the ballpark. Also, how do you know who does and doesn't share what games they play?
    Celcius
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    Anyways, EQ1 and 2 were put on steam around the same time DCUO was released on it, same with Planetside 2. So if you're comparing apples to apples, as in free MMOs from Daybreak on steam, I think you can conclude that EQ is the worst performing game(s) from Daybreak.

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
  • madazzmadazz Member RarePosts: 2,115
    lol.... Steamspy is the new false global metric people are going to base completely over-generalizing opinions on? What was the last one that people tried to explain before? Raptr or something?

    Same old thing again. As was before, and before that, you aren't going to get any meaningful information from an app that only a very small minority of the playerbase use. 

    And it seems OP will remain in denial and base opinions on it regardless, as is tradition.
    CelciusVengeSunsoarBeezerbeezcraftseeker
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    edited September 2018
    Ok, so prove it wrong. Not getting too hooked up on the exact accuracy of the numbers, I'll bet I'm right that EQ is doing the worst in Daybreak's lineup.
    Dagon13
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,813
    SOE (now Daybreak) missed their chance to revolutionize the genre with EQNext. That would have been a success, imho, similar to WoW's success when in launched back in 2004.
    craftseeker
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    EQNext was one of the only newer MMOs I was hyped for... Sucks they decided to axe it.
    Galadourncraftseeker
  • CelciusCelcius Member RarePosts: 1,878
    jusomdude said:
    Anyways, EQ1 and 2 were put on steam around the same time DCUO was released on it, same with Planetside 2. So if you're comparing apples to apples, as in free MMOs from Daybreak on steam, I think you can conclude that EQ is the worst performing game(s) from Daybreak.

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    You can conclude that EQ is the worst performing Daybreak game on Steam based only on people who have their information set to public. That is pretty specific, lol. 
    Dagon13
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 7,081
    edited September 2018
    Sad part of EQ 2..... Emulators would never be good.  All the expansions would confuse and make imposable any designer.  Their like jig saw puzzles. 

    However, I'm not sure how the original EQ2 by it self would play. 
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    Question related to this topic... now that Smedley isn't in charge of these games... who's the new scapegoat?
  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,813
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    jusomdude said:
    Question related to this topic... now that Smedley isn't in charge of these games... who's the new scapegoat?
    Huge assumption there that anything has really changed since he left tbh. :/
    craftseeker
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    Weeell... they're still releasing expansions/updates to their games.
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,177
    If I want to play EQ I will play P99 that is the best memory of the original time I played in 1999. I don't think I ever got past the tutorial on the later version of Everquest that SOE then Daybreak had.

    Everquest 2 I last played when Luclin released then when they released Time Locked servers and played till level 50 and left again. I enjoyed my time of the Time Locked server especially because I was in an amazing guild.

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,404
    The Everquest game that Daybreak has now is like some creature that has been put together using different items in a junkyard and while some are treasures other things not so much. It has become something unrecognizable and possibly monstrous , unwieldly , confusing and incongruous. Don't want to play that.
    delete5230[Deleted User]AlBQuirkycraftseeker
    Garrus Signature
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    I'm hoping that EQ3 rumor is actually true... just not the battle royale part.
  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,813
    jusomdude said:
    I'm hoping that EQ3 rumor is actually true... just not the battle royale part.
    Do you really trust DB to produce anything actually requiring "creativity"? They've been selling off assets ever since they took control.
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:
    I'm hoping that EQ3 rumor is actually true... just not the battle royale part.
    Do you really trust DB to produce anything actually requiring "creativity"? They've been selling off assets ever since they took control.
    I don't know about their creativity. What's your source on them selling assets though?
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    edited September 2018
    DBG took over the loss making SOE - we know it was loss making because Sony wrote off many  $Ms in their results just before the sale to DBG. They have done what was required to keep some of the games up and running. 

    DCUO has been split off and is operated by its own CEO. Appropriate because DCUO was never  "wholly owned" by SOE; it was a joint venture between Sony (through SOE), DC and WarnerBros. So setting it up in its own unit will have made things clean and tidy.

    Nothing has been sold. Staff were let go as part of the take over - but they would have been let go anyway by Sony. Development on EQN was halted and various "lesser" titles, presumably loss making, have been closed and studios were consolidated. And whereas before money that EQ1, say, earned was been spent chasing the next big thing now there is a chance - perhaps - that some of it gets spent on EQ1. Or EQ2 etc. I have little doubt that the remaining games have to pay their own way.

    DBG could be likened to "security guards". Might be the proverbial dull and boring but before DBG there had been 5 major restructurings at SOE in 6 years; with huge staff cuts, titles closed, studios closed and so on. With no indication that things were going to get better.

    Maybe one day there might be something else. Maybe but we shouldn't get optimistic - maybe all that lies ahead is further closures. Either way things look an awful lot more orderly than they used to be. Boring it maybe but before DBG things just kept were lurching from bad to worse.


    GaladournPhry
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,427
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    Well because by definition it would not be playing on a PC. ;)
    craftseeker
  • UtinniUtinni Member EpicPosts: 2,209
    I played EQ1 on a progression server for a few months earlier this year and there were guilds with 300+ active users, so I can't see 150-200 total players being anywhere close. It's still extremely small though, probably 10-12k total subs across all servers.
  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,813
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    I thought this was self-evident
  • Po_ggPo_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,749
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    Yep, it was a weird statement considered DCUO was built for the PS3 and at launch it was a real pain to play it on PC... or that according to their own numbers it has way more players on PS4 than on PC.
    (for the record, I play on PC, and after the first fixes it has decent handling on here as well)
Sign In or Register to comment.