Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[IntelligentDisk]

The number of Steam games and users has changed over time, as have external factors such as the pandemic.
So, my suggestion is to compare the rankings of games (in addition to the absolute numbers). For example, I believe that Civ 7 has spent most of this year ranked between 150th and 250th for player numbers, and a bit lower than that for active users.
Moreover rankings are more robust to seasonal and weekend factors than absolute numbers are.

I'm not sure how you'd get that information for Civ VI.

Best I could find was "Most Played on Steam By Daily Active Users" on SteamDB and changing the release date for Civ VI to match the same amount of days as Civ VII has been out. But that is only counting games which were released in that time period and it skews in favour to games which have been released at the end of that period.

It shows:

• Civ VI 3rd out of 301 games (October 21st 2016 to August 21st 2017), Top 1%
• Civ VII 42nd out of 1886 games (February 6th to December 7th), Top 2.2%

The 2 games above Civ VI were VRChat (free) & Skyrim Special Edition. Civ VI was only 1 of 2 games at $60 in the top 100, the other being Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare.

10 of the games above Civ VII are free. 5 games above Civ VII are also $70. 10 of the games in the top 100 are $70.

 

[Kev1916]

Civ7 is fine on console and PC. It's great that Firaxis put the effort into both.

I'd have to disagree, I and no disrespect for Nintendo switch players much prefer a game made for PC only.

I understand the monetary aspect for creating a simpler less complex game that can cater to a younger broader fan base .
Imho thou a Civ game should not have a meta and a fortnight character base were Mary Poppins can lead the Mongol horde

 

[Gorbles]

I understand the monetary aspect for creating a simpler less complex game

Civ VII, the game was criticised on release for (among many other things) being completely impenetrable to figure out because it didn't tell you how anything worked, is not quite the poster child for "simpler less complex game" you think it is.

 

[Kev1916]

Civ VII, the game was criticised on release for (among many other things) being completely impenetrable to figure out because it didn't tell you how anything worked, is not quite the poster child for "simpler less complex game" you think it is.

"impenetrable to figure out" is more than likely due to a game released before it was properly tested or just a basic flaw in it's UI . Or maybe a game that at best is a rather boring mobile game with multiple toons and a leveling up of said 1/3 "Lets"

Thou TBF "Civ" Vii may be many things, but at least it can run on a switch

 

[Gorbles]

"impenetrable to figure out" is more than likely due to a game released before it was properly tested or just a basic flaw in it's UI . Or maybe a game that at best is a rather boring mobile game with multiple toons and a leveling up of said 1/3 "Lets"

I said "because it didn't tell you how anything worked". I gave you the (critical) reason.

That doesn't change the fact in that if something is difficult to figure out, it's probably not simple. This is completely separate to whether or not "complex" or "simple" are positives or negatives.

 

[Leucarum]

I'd have to disagree, I and no disrespect for Nintendo switch players much prefer a game made for PC only.

I love having a version of Civ which I can also play on the move. I don't buy criticism that it was somehow dumbed down to also play on consoles... Because it isn't dumbed down...

I understand the monetary aspect for creating a simpler less complex game that can cater to a younger broader fan base .

Compare it to Civ6 at launch. I'd argue 7 is the more complex game. Now I don't think all the complexity is good. The age system will be bad until/unless modern/exploration are fixed and they work out a plan for snowballing. And Civ Switching just isn't to my taste... But it's more complex than any previous "launch" Civ that I can think of.

Imho thou a Civ game should not have a meta and a fortnight character base were Mary Poppins can lead the Mongol horde

Is this the real issue for you? You don't like civ/leader mixing and matching?

As much as I don't like Civ Switching, mixing/matching is one of my favourite features added in Civ7.

 

[Kwami]

Funny that the last 5 days has seen really small numbers of reviews each day, with today looking to be the same.
I wonder if the November patch novelty has worn off now?
Player numbers are dropping too, with last nights peak being down to 10,326.

Meanwhile Europa Universalis V peak is over 35,000.

Nominations for the Steam Awards have ended and you can no longer get a badge for writing a review for a game that you nominated. So, reviews drop. We see this every year.

 

[Smegger213]

Nominations for the Steam Awards have ended and you can no longer get a badge for writing a review for a game that you nominated. So, reviews drop. We see this every year.

Spikes in reviews started well before the Steam Awards thing. They started directly after the November patch. Which is why I wondered if patch novelty was wearing off. After all, player numbers has also dropped steadily over the last couple of weeks.

 

[Evolena]

Spikes in reviews started well before the Steam Awards thing. They started directly after the November patch. Which is why I wondered if patch novelty was wearing off. After all, player numbers has also dropped steadily over the last couple of weeks.

There is "spike after the patch" and "massive spike during award nomination" (for reviews).

 

[IntelligentDisk]

An increase in reviews happening after an update which then declines the further away we get from said update is nothing new. It has happened with every update. Same with the player count increasing after the update and then slowly declining.

Last week didn't actually drop, it remained steady with a 0.1% decrease. This week has seen a 7% decrease. This update has still seen higher player counts compared to the previous 5 though. Week 5 isn't actually over, we still have tomorrow left. I used an estimated figure of 8,000 peak tomorrow to finish week 5.

 

[fantsu]

The game being built around all consoles absolutely relates to sales and player numbers but whatever bud.

It has always been the case with Civilization.
Even the first one sold much more on consoles.

 

[Kwami]

Week 5 isn't actually over, we still have tomorrow left.

And then, probably the very next day, another update! That should cause another spike in player counts.

 

[itix]

Yeah the big growth won't come until more & bigger sales, more updates & expansions come.

Civ VI:

• Year 1: 28,070 average peak concurrent players. Sales ranging: 10-40% Days of sale: 56
• Year 2: 25,844 average peak concurrent players Sales ranging: 33-67% Days of sale: 76; Rise and Fall expansion released
• Year 3: 33,157 average peak concurrent players Sales ranging: 67-75% Days of sale: 106; Gathering Storm expansion released
• Year 4: 42,664 average peak concurrent players Sales ranging: 70-75% Days of sale: 108; 1/2 of New Frontier Pass, Pandemic
• Year 5: 43,722 average peak concurrent players Sales ranging: 75-85% Days of sale: 126; 1/2 of New Frontier Pass, Pandemic

Are sales by units or revenue? If it is by revenue, it looks like they inflated the player base by selling the game at bargain prices.

 

[itix]

That doesn't change the fact in that if something is difficult to figure out, it's probably not simple. This is completely separate to whether or not "complex" or "simple" are positives or negatives.

Because something is difficult to figure out, it is not necessarily complex. Very often, if not always, it is just an illusion.

 

[Gorbles]

Because something is difficult to figure out, it is not necessarily complex. Very often, if not always, it is just an illusion.

Not necessarily does not mean not. It just means we shouldn't hold it to a truism.

Systems in VII are at times (intentionally) simpler and at times intentionally more complex than in VI. Intentional simplification is around the dev's stated goals of reducing (pointless) micromanagement. An example of increased complexity is around areas with intentional depth (Ageless buildings, overbuilding, and so on - a much more detailed model than exists in VI)

What sometimes happens though is that people (not you) map "I think the game is bad" onto external factors like "because console", and this creates a situation where explanations for this assumed cause this have to be invented.

A good example of console impact on development is the size of maps on release. Which is a common and accepted goal of "what content can we fit in for release". As has been seen, the developers expanded on this within the first year of support. The state of the UI, the lack of UX signposting around (often core) features . . . these are not. The lack of refinement for Exploration and Modern? Also not. These flaws existed completely independently of any "made for console" claims.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Are sales by units or revenue? If it is by revenue, it looks like they inflated the player base by selling the game at bargain prices.

Sales as in discounts.

 

[PlatinumPoster]

What sometimes happens though is that people (not you) map "I think the game is bad" onto external factors like "because console", and this creates a situation where explanations for this assumed cause this have to be invented.

A good example of console impact on development is the size of maps on release. Which is a common and accepted goal of "what content can we fit in for release". As has been seen, the developers expanded on this within the first year of support. The state of the UI, the lack of UX signposting around (often core) features . . . these are not. The lack of refinement for Exploration and Modern? Also not. These flaws existed completely independently of any "made for console" claims.

Great post

 

[IntelligentDisk]

1.3 is over and it's the best reviewed period of the game at 64.9% positive with 1,910 reviews.

 

[Leucarum]

1.3 is over and it's the best reviewed period of the game at 64.9% positive with 1,910 reviews.

View attachment 749971

Deservedly so! Still a long way to go to fix Civ7, but that was one of the better course corrections Firaxis have made thus far.

 

[Smegger213]

1.3 is over and it's the best reviewed period of the game at 64.9% positive with 1,910 reviews.

View attachment 749971

With a false spike towards the end of November because of the Steam awards thing.
If you discounted the reviews during that Steam awards week, then it would look a lot different.

Plus the player counts have now dropped back to around the same levels as pre November patch.
This game has far more to go before it can get anywhere near the popularity of previous versions.