Starfield has, according to official statements by Bethesda and Microsoft, 10 million unique players. Steam only accounts for 330,000 (give or take) of them. Yet, you are going to sit there and tell me that a subset of 3.3% is a proper representation of the entire body?
What the HELL does Cyperpunk and Starfield numbers on Steam have to do with each other?
There are 10 million players of Starfield, but the all-time peak on Steam has been 330k. That means, the player count on steam is not accounting for roughly 9.7 million players.
This is the worst, most egregious example of a this site showing bias I have ever seen.
@mogan: How is it different, because previous counts equaled licenses sold?
Well, that's not how subscription metrics work. Measuring success by unique players is the same as video or music streaming services mentioning how many people streamed the content.
@mogan: Yeah, all of you who want to see Xbox fail are all of a sudden saying "player counts don't matter ", even though player count is the metric for which Halo Infinite, Forza Horizon, Hi-Fi Rush, Outriders, and Redfall were judged as a success or failure.
But now, since its the next game by Bethesda, and you're are snorting the copium because its not on PS5, suddenly player count is some "new thing" that is questioned.
You can't play new Playstation games for free. The number of unique players in a subscription model is equivalent to the number of copies sold in a traditional unit-sales model when determining "success" of a launch.
@julianwhatthe: "Players" insinuates that it's people who have played the game. So all they had to do was run the program and it's considered a "player." It takes nothing else into consideration.
So, when Sony buys studios, does Game Spot say things about that studio's next game like "NewGameX is exclusive on console to PS5, and that means millions in potential lost sales."?
dabear's comments