Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[IntelligentDisk]

How big of a jump is it?

4% increase from last Saturday (8,287 to 8,639). Saturday 13th September was 8,613. There was a Saturday in June when it peaked at 8,436. So this Saturday was 4th lowest out of 34. Fridays peak was also higher than the 2 previous Fridays.

 

[aieeegrunt]

4% increase from last Saturday (8,287 to 8,639). Saturday 13th September was 8,613. There was a Saturday in June when it peaked at 8,436. So this Saturday was 4th lowest out of 34. Fridays peak was also higher than the 2 previous Fridays.

Thank you

 

[Core Imposter]

I am climbing out on this limb that is marked "no significant impact".

 

[Lazy sweeper]

I think this is a good argument.

The best videos are those spectator mode video where AI battles itself on crafted maps.
We can't have those because both the World Builder is missing and the spectator mod is missing.

In second place are the Multiplayer battles replays with commentary, where there is no AI at all, and the players just compete for dominance - military might - victory.

We can't have both. And civ-switching and Age resets would completely break both experiences anyway.
Maybe there is a workaround for the first, AI only battles, but I doubt it will be ever possible.

 

[youngsteve]

I have just looked at the Steam player count. Civ 7 struggling along with around 6,200 players, whilst that ancient game Civ 5 is on 14,000. One of the biggest gaps I have seen considering the hour, when fewer people play. Civ 7 is really going well.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I have just looked at the Steam player count. Civ 7 struggling along with around 6,200 players, whilst that ancient game Civ 5 is on 14,000. One of the biggest gaps I have seen considering the hour, when fewer people play. Civ 7 is really going well.

Less than half, approaching a third.

That is a debacle

 

[Bug Repellent]

Less than half, approaching a third.

That is a debacle

Unfortunately it is. These are the ownership estimates, averaged over the 3 tracking services, average review scores, average concurrent Steam players over 30 days, and Twitch viewers as of Sunday, September 28, 2:20PM UTC:

Civ5: 14M owners; 94.4% positive; 13,117 avg. concurrent players, 95 viewers over 6 streams
Civ6: 17M owners; 85.0% positive; 30,234 avg. concurrent players, 239 viewers over 25 streams
Civ7: 1.1M owners; 47.2% positive; 5,900 avg. concurrent players, 13 viewers over 7 streams

A couple of caveats here: ownership estimates vary and might include or not DLCs. If that's the case, of course older titles will show higher numbers. Civ7 was launched on consoles as well, so its ownership numbers are higher, potentially by a significant amount.

That being said, there's no question Civ7 needs an intervention of some sorts. The game simply lacks traction, both commercially and with the fan base.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Unfortunately it is. These are the ownership estimates, averaged over the 3 tracking services, average review scores, average concurrent Steam players over 30 days, and Twitch viewers as of Sunday, September 28, 2:20PM UTC:

Civ5: 14M owners; 94.4% positive; 13,117 avg. concurrent players, 95 viewers over 6 streams
Civ6: 17M owners; 85.0% positive; 30,234 avg. concurrent players, 239 viewers over 25 streams
Civ7: 1.1M owners; 47.2% positive; 5,900 avg. concurrent players, 13 viewers over 7 streams

A couple of caveats here: ownership estimates vary and might include or not DLCs. If that's the case, of course older titles will show higher numbers. Civ7 was launched on consoles as well, so its ownership numbers are higher, potentially by a significant amount.

That being said, there's no question Civ7 needs an intervention of some sorts. The game simply lacks traction, both commercially and with the fan base.

I mean you can (and people will) spin that as hard as you like, but either the data is off *by an order of magnitude* ot it’s a debacle.

We also have the example of two other franchises, both far far more powerful and significant than Civilization; namely Fallout and Halo that did the same “ditch the core gameplay because innovation for the sake of innovoation because late stage capitalism stupidity” that cratered just as hard.

God forbid we don’t fix it if it isn’t fracking broken

 

[Kev1916]

I mean you can (and people will) spin that as hard as you like, but either the data is off *by an order of magnitude* ot it’s a debacle.

We also have the example of two other franchises, both far far more powerful and significant than Civilization; namely Fallout and Halo that did the same “ditch the core gameplay because innovation for the sake of innovoation because late stage capitalism stupidity” that cratered just as hard.

God forbid we don’t fix it if it isn’t fracking broken

Then you look at Endless legends Two released in early access with 20% off right away no cut content and no "Civ"lets to punish your wallet

Full engagement with players and a road map to future content, less than a week in decent player count and 89% positive reviews
One as below
"
This was the release that 4X fans deserved after the disaster that was Civ 7.

EL2 has familiar Endless DNA for those that have played others in the series while feeling modern and fresh. The game is in Early Access but feels really solid and only needs small polishes - this is doing Early Access right!

The factions feel fun to play and have deep lore and flavour for those that want more of a role playing experience. The tidefall mechanic is so creative. It adds natural pacing to the game and requires a bit of luck. Over many hundreds of hours of play it may start to feel repetitive. However, I expect that the devs have other interesting environmental challenges up their sleeves like we saw with the original EL.
"

 

[aieeegrunt]

Then you look at Endless legends Two released in early access with 20% off right away no cut content and no "Civ"lets to punish your wallet

Full engagement with players and a road map to future content, less than a week in decent player count and 89% positive reviews
One as below
"
This was the release that 4X fans deserved after the disaster that was Civ 7.

EL2 has familiar Endless DNA for those that have played others in the series while feeling modern and fresh. The game is in Early Access but feels really solid and only needs small polishes - this is doing Early Access right!

The factions feel fun to play and have deep lore and flavour for those that want more of a role playing experience. The tidefall mechanic is so creative. It adds natural pacing to the game and requires a bit of luck. Over many hundreds of hours of play it may start to feel repetitive. However, I expect that the devs have other interesting environmental challenges up their sleeves like we saw with the original EL.
"

There is an open ecological niche for someone to pull a Helldivers 2 and snatch the crown Civ7 cast into the gutter

If I was younger and could stand the AA dev lifestyle I’d be seriously considering seeing if anyone else was on the same page.

Hell I mean it might be time to exit machining anyways since that is also hard on your body.

 

[Core Imposter]

Unfortunately it is. These are the ownership estimates, averaged over the 3 tracking services, average review scores, average concurrent Steam players over 30 days, and Twitch viewers as of Sunday, September 28, 2:20PM UTC:

Civ5: 14M owners; 94.4% positive; 13,117 avg. concurrent players, 95 viewers over 6 streams
Civ6: 17M owners; 85.0% positive; 30,234 avg. concurrent players, 239 viewers over 25 streams
Civ7: 1.1M owners; 47.2% positive; 5,900 avg. concurrent players, 13 viewers over 7 streams

There is something here other than Civ7 bad. Civ 5&6 were not my cup of tea, but people obviously are devoted to them just like I am to Civ IV. I am, for all intents and purposes, still waiting for the next Civ IV expansion. I know it's not coming but I am still never going to load a 1UPT game. There appears to be a lot of stubborn 5&6 fans as well. We have even found some noisy Civ 2 and 3 diehards.

Civ7 has to weather these headwinds to gather the flock and it's not happening. It seems like a minor work, a scenario pack or, to speak plainly, a result of management ineptitude.

Firaxis should consider doing expansions of Civ IV through Civ VI. Auto sales. I know the teams get burned out working on a title, but the fans are still around, and new ones come into the market daily.

Days of our Lives. General Hospital. Coronation Street. Guiding Light.

The new formula should be: 1/10th new +1/10th improved +95% of the existing + new graphics and audio + better AI. To the greatest possible make everything flexible, optional, modifiable (by non coders). Versions that can be competitive solo duels and also versions with deep event driven thoughtful narratives.

They have left so much on the table.

 

[Pfeffersack]

Civ5: 14M owners; 94.4% positive; 13,117 avg. concurrent players, 95 viewers over 6 streams
Civ6: 17M owners; 85.0% positive; 30,234 avg. concurrent players, 239 viewers over 25 streams
Civ7: 1.1M owners; 47.2% positive; 5,900 avg. concurrent players, 13 viewers over 7 streams

Regarding content creators... Today evening Writing Bull (German Streamer/Youtuber with a dedicated Civ focus) returned to playing Civ6 (after several months of Civ7 content since release and a recent civ pause of two months)...and while I could imagine that he gives Civ7 another chance at some point in the future, his announcement message is IMO telling and somewhat hitting a nail (translated from German by myself):

"Back to the roots! Civ6 comes back in the program. Game start now. Finally again epic adventures with a good civilization. Now live on twitch (...)"

Aside from the part "...with a good civilization..." being a pretty strong verdict from him now (given that he was for sure more in the camp of the seeing positive aspects of Civ7 even after release), the reference to "epic adventures" hints for me towards what I think Civ7 lacked from the release on and is still lacking: An credible ingame world allowing true story telling. Civ7 has some great feature ideas, but it is also an odd mix of railroading and repetitiveness on the one hand, while on the other it artificially messes up things pretty hard and sharp at some points (civ switching, era resets, crises). It just doesn't suck me into like past installations of the series did, as I'm constantly reminded that I'm playing a game (and one that has quite a couple of problems) and so I would never consider to watch a someone doing a Civ7 Lets Play for pure entertainment (I did around release, but only to get an impression how the game works). The playthroughs just don't feel that "unique" anymore... I'm not disputing that the patches adressed some points or at least softened their impact, but it is still far away from the past experience and so it is no wonder for me that it also fails as content machine, when people are looking for a "classic civ experience". Of course, in theory it could just occupy a different niche - more competitive, more MP, shorter games - but it doesn't seem that it strikes a vein here either.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

That being said, there's no question Civ7 needs an intervention of some sorts. The game simply lacks traction, both commercially and with the fan base.

Let's not forget the game broke the pre-order record for the franchise and was "very consistent" with the series "lifetime value" according to the Take-Two boss a few months ago. Most of a Civ games sales come after the first year. 90% of Civ VIs steam reviews came after the first year, 85% came after two years, 78% came after 3 years.

 

[Askia Muhammad]

Let's not forget the game broke the pre-order record for the franchise and was "very consistent" with the series "lifetime value" according to the Take-Two boss a few months ago. Most of a Civ games sales come after the first year. 90% of Civ VIs steam reviews came after the first year, 85% came after two years, 78% came after 3 years.

You must have never been in an investor call before or worked in that setting.

You absolutely cannot say anything negative even if the release is an unmitigated failure on a scale far grander than Civ 7s. There’s ways to manipulate data to make basically anything look acceptable. The fact he even uttered that it was “off to a slow start” is extremely surprising

 

[Bug Repellent]

Let's not forget the game broke the pre-order record for the franchise and was "very consistent" with the series "lifetime value" according to the Take-Two boss a few months ago. Most of a Civ games sales come after the first year. 90% of Civ VIs steam reviews came after the first year, 85% came after two years, 78% came after 3 years.

This is true, but I do not see Civ7's release anywhere near Civ6's.

Eight months post Civ6's release (May 2017 data):
Civ5: ~35k concurrent average players
Civ6: ~22k.concurrent average players

Eight months post Civ7's release (September 2025 data):
Civ6: 30.2k concurrent average players
Civ7: 5.9k concurrent average players

In both cases, the finished prior installment had around 30-35k concurrent average players. But Civ6 already had 66% of Civ5's players, whereas Civ7 barely has 19% of Civ6's numbers. This means Civ7 is pulling about a third of what it should've done if it behaved like Civ6 8mo post its release. Console numbers will help Civ7's numbers to some degree, but I personally consider Civ7's release to be somewhere around very disappointing to disastrous. The only saving grace might be its long life cycle, so there is time perhaps to fix its issues. But it's a mighty deep hole to climb out of and it points to very sluggish DLC sales going forward.

 

[itix]

Most of a Civ games sales come after the first year. 90% of Civ VIs steam reviews came after the first year, 85% came after two years, 78% came after 3 years.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Not if you drop the ball to this extent

 

[Kumbao]

You must have never been in an investor call before or worked in that setting.

You absolutely cannot say anything negative even if the release is an unmitigated failure on a scale far grander than Civ 7s. There’s ways to manipulate data to make basically anything look acceptable. The fact he even uttered that it was “off to a slow start” is extremely surprising

The same happened with Resident Evil 6. It broke all their internal sales records on day one, but nearly killed the franchise.

 

[Kev1916]

The same happened with Resident Evil 6. It broke all their internal sales records on day one, but nearly killed the franchise.

And not so strange and like this "Civ" , one of the criticism is instead of a single long campaign like Res 4 or 5, 6 is split into 4 smaller campaigns........

Another possible parallel is, if it didn't have the RE name on it, Res 6 may be considered a semi - decent zombie shooter that would have been forgotten about by now.
But when compared to other RE titles it's really bad and people actively try to forget it's a resident evil game

 

[Leucarum]

That's an interesting contrast. 7 apparantley beating preorder records but over the first month having half as many average players as 6 did during its first month... A lot more players bought it but don't play I guess.

If you want to be optimistic, 7 probably has a bigger potential audience who already owns it that they could win back with updates and it will be saved... If you want to be pessimistic 7 turned off far more players than 6 did and it is doomed...