Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[Gorbles]

The difference is EU5 is still an EU game, though not close to the previous one, whilst Civ 7 has nothing in common with any of the previous games, & is actually a Humankind clone.

If EU players are saying that the game has changed significantly and that is a negative, who are you to correct them?

Somebody found a relevant comparison and you're trying to downplay it. Why?

 

[Leucarum]

Like I said, its a more or less, a like for like comparison.
That 84558 number for Civ 7 is for the whole of Feb, Just as the 162475 number for Civ 6 is for the whole of Oct 2016.
Those are the figures presented at the end of the release month.
Now you can take them or leave them, its your choice.

Please read my reaponses to intelligent disk as for why they aren't a like to like.

I'm not going to argue this twice in one day, and you would probably like me pointing out that the actual player retention numbers probably have to be somewhat worse than the peak suggests unless we have a really surprising (to me) number for console players.

But yeah, this approach has to be a leave it and not a take it.

 

[Smegger213]

Please read my reaponses to intelligent disk as for why they aren't a like to like.

I'm not going to argue this twice in one day, and you would probably like me pointing out that the actual player retention numbers probably have to be somewhat worse than the peak suggests unless we have a really surprising (to me) number for console players.

But yeah, this approach has to be a leave it and not a take it.

Like I said. take it or leave it.
If you want to say its not accurate data, then that's your choice, and your view.
I won't be going back to read your responses to the other guy.

 

[Leucarum]

Like I said. take it or leave it.
If you want to say its not accurate data, then that's your choice, and your view.
I won't be going back to read your responses to the other guy.

Not a choice or a view. The explanation is in this thread if you want it.

And honestly, probably a help to your argument so the odd choice is to dismiss it.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Exactly. We can't have as much confidence that we are in the right ball park for player numbers, and comparing across games, you aren't comparing like-to-like.

Again, I'm not demanding that you declare Civ7 to be a doomed flop. It's more that you are presenting the (unlikely) best case scenario, and our available data is too flawed for us to confidently say how much worse than that it is (FWIW I doubt it's as apocalyptically bad as others on here would like to claim).

Do you think we should just use the absolute peak concurrent player number at launch as opposed to the 30-day average peak concurrent players? That's the major difference. The split launches won't have a huge affect on the 30-day average peak concurrent player number.

Lets compare some like for like on player numbers.
Within the first year of release, is where I am looking at here.
Now, because SteamDB didn't start to give a player average count till October 2022. If we want to compare each game in its first year of release, we can only use the player peak number.

This is what it comes out as:

Civ 5
Sept 2010 = 70,096 peak players
Aug 2011 = 28,921 peak players
A drop of 58.74%

Civ V does certainly show as having much better player retention than both, and one of the best out of every game I've looked at, but it released at a very different time on a very different Steam.

1. It had the highest peak of any game in 2010 on Steam and was only behind Skyrim & Portal 2 in 2011.
2. Far greater users per game in 2010 compared to 2016/17 & 2025 - far less competition on Steam.
3. No Steam review system. There was only a recommendation system.
4. It was on sale for under $20 within its first year. Civ VIs lowest was $36 in the first year & Civ VIIs lowest is $45 in the first year so far.

 

[Siddorm]

Do you think we should just use the absolute peak concurrent player number at launch as opposed to the 30-day average peak concurrent players?

Am I correct in thinking that this is a mean average of 30 daily-peak numbers? If so, then I imagine that one additional outlier could affect the mean noticeably.
Why are we not talking about 30-day-average-of-the-daily-averages concurrent players numbers instead?
By the way, I am simply curious about this, but I am not otherwise interested in these kind of "first year of Civ VI versus first year of Civ VII" comparisons because I imagine that there are a lot of confounding variables related to the changes that occurred during that nine-year gap. I am more interested in (for example) the Civ VII versus EU5 comparisons because those games were released in the same year.

 

[Kwami]

Fun fact:

EU5 has a lower % of positive reviews over the past 30 days compared to Civ 7. Players are complaining over UI, persistent bugs, lack of immersion with the country they control and too much of a departure from the series’ established formula

EU5 is a disaster right now. Entire areas of the world are unplayable because of bugs and poorly designed systems. Tinto actually bragged about fixing a thousand bugs after release. Great, but they shouldn't have been there to start with! The HRE doesn't work, the AI blobs like crazy, the economic system is completely broken, and the research system is, too. The developers are working hard to fix all the problems, but it's going to be a while before that game is any good.

The difference is EU5 is still an EU game, though not close to the previous one, whilst Civ 7 has nothing in common with any of the previous games, & is actually a Humankind clone.

This is pure nonsense.

 

[Siddorm]

After trying out FM26 Demo, I feel absolutely fed up with buggy, baffling, bloated games, so franchises such as FM, Civ and EU are not on my radar right now. I am enjoying games such as Geometry Dash that I can fire up for 20 minutes and simply have fun.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Am I correct in thinking that this is a mean average of 30 daily-peak numbers? If so, then I imagine that one additional outlier could affect the mean noticeably.

That's correct. The big difference would come in the first 2 weeks, and it isn't a case of all the numbers being higher. The first weeks numbers would be higher (both launches combined), the second weeks numbers would be lower (no second launch).

Why are we not talking about 30-day-average-of-the-daily-averages concurrent players numbers instead?

SteamDB only started tracking average concurrent player data in October 2022, so if you want to compare to any game before October 2022 then you have to use peak concurrent players. As these are all games in 2025 we could use average concurrent player data too. But it makes comparison to games older than October 2022 impossible as they don't have average concurrent player data. I'll check them all using average concurrent player data at some point.

By the way, I am simply curious about this, but I am not otherwise interested in these kind of "first year of Civ VI versus first year of Civ VII" comparisons because I imagine that there are a lot of confounding variables related to the changes that occurred during that nine-year gap. I am more interested in (for example) the Civ VII versus EU5 comparisons because those games were released in the same year.

Last time I checked, Civ VII & EU5 were comparable, both better than the new Anno & Endless Legend II.

 

[Kev1916]

Last time I checked, Civ VII & EU5 were comparable, both better than the new Anno & Endless Legend II.

"Civ" vii 47 % positive

Anno 71%

Endless Legends 11 84%

 

[uppi]

And yet, more people are playing Civ VII then either of those

 

[Smegger213]

And yet, more people are playing Civ VII then either of those

Well, Endless Legends 2 is an early access game, so that is probably why it doesn't have tons of players at this time.

Does it really matter how many players are playing?
Civ 7 is still 52% negative on reviews.

 

[kotpeter]

Does it really matter how many players are playing?
Civ 7 is still 52% negative on reviews.

These are different metrics that tell different stories. And their combination tells another story.

And none of those stories is comprehensive enough to draw general conclusions or make accurate predictions.

 

[Smegger213]

These are different metrics that tell different stories. And their combination tells another story.

And none of those stories is comprehensive enough to draw general conclusions or make accurate predictions.

What does all that even mean?

52% negative review score is fact.

 

[Gorbles]

Does it really matter how many players are playing?

You spent a long time talking about player numbers. Why do they suddenly not matter?

 

[Smegger213]

You spent a long time talking about player numbers. Why do they suddenly not matter?

It was in the context of Uppi saying Civ 7 had more players than Anno & Endless Legend 2.
Nothing to do with discussing Civ 7's player numbers over time.

 

[Gorbles]

It was in the context of Uppi saying Civ 7 had more players than Anno & Endless Legend 2.
Nothing to do with discussing Civ 7's player numbers over time.

If player numbers as an indicator of doing well matter for one game being discussed, surely the numbers matter for all games being discussed?

 

[Smegger213]

If player numbers as an indicator of doing well matter for one game being discussed, surely the numbers matter for all games being discussed?

Like I said. You can't really compare player numbers between Endless Legend 2, and Civ 7. Endless Legend 2 is an Early Access game, and has only been out for 4 months.
Also Anno 117 has only been out for 2 months, so its unfair to compare that to Civ 7 too.

 

[kotpeter]

Like I said. You can't really compare player numbers between Endless Legend 2, and Civ 7. Endless Legend 2 is an Early Access game, and has only been out for 4 months.
Also Anno 117 has only been out for 2 months, so its unfair to compare that to Civ 7 too.

We could compare with Old World or Humankind, which have been out for years, and Civ 7 has more average players than those two combined.

 

[Smegger213]

We could compare with Old World or Humankind, which have been out for years, and Civ 7 has more average players than those two combined.

Yes, you can always compare Civ 7 with those 2 games. Yes Civ 7 has vastly more player numbers.
But, then again, both Old World and Humankind have far better positive review percentages than Civ 7.