Steamdb will probably stop publishing peak player-counts due to Concord ?

[Predator]

Given the bashing this game has received due to poor peak-counts, I wouldn't be surprised if game publishers get Steam to stop displaying peak player counts for their game ?

Also might be in Steam's interest as they get revenue from each game sold - by hiding player-counts for potentially weak games, they could in essence reduce the bad publicity and the corresponding lack of game-sales.

Also, they will claim that player peak-count numbers are being used to unfairly disparage games, etc, etc - the usual arguments when trying to suppress information.

[Moogle140]

I don’t think that’s how it works. This game is Dead so it’ll make no difference if they “hide” it or not

[Plake]

SteamDB is not affiliated with valve or any other gamecompany. They thrive on objective representation of numbers, other than sites like rottentomatoes, etc...

[Caly]

It would look worse for concord to remove it, the peak player is actually the best metric to still try to market the game for them. The very very little chance they have. Seing only 150 players connected is worse.

[Raisti]

Originally posted by Plake:

SteamDB is not affiliated with valve or any other gamecompany. They thrive on objective representation of numbers, compared to sites like rottentomatoes, etc...

Well they need the API provided by Valve to give those Numbers. If Valve decides to exclude does Numbers, SteamDB can´t do anything about it. But given Lord Gabens hand´s off approach on "Drama" i doubt that he ever will give in to such removal requests.

[Plake]

Originally posted by Raisti:

Originally posted by Plake:

SteamDB is not affiliated with valve or any other gamecompany. They thrive on objective representation of numbers, compared to sites like rottentomatoes, etc...

Well they need the API provided by Valve to give those Numbers. If Valve decides to exclude does Numbers, SteamDB can´t do anything about it. But given Lord Gabens hand´s off approach on "Drama" i doubt that he ever will give in to such removal requests.

Can you imagine the fallout that would come from this? Nah, I am not even sure this is how SteamDB gets their data, but am not technical enough to go into that topic...

[Verdeth]

i mean at this point they lost the whole playerbase
Mistakes made:
1. cater to the modern audience
2. removing the LGBTQ tag, to deceive normal people, meanwhile loosing the support of the original audience
3. calling normal people criticizing the game talentless freaks
4. believing that they are capable of creating a tripple a game

[Kimochi]

Originally posted by Moogle140:

I don’t think that’s how it works. This game is Dead so it’ll make no difference if they “hide” it or not

OP is talking about future games

[BOT_BAJlEPA]

Then they will have to handle an awful lot of refunds.
The problem is not that steam shows the truth, but that the product is ♥♥♥♥.

[Hard Core Rikki]

Charts will still be available somewhere, but PC/steam alone having charts can be damaging to crossplatform releases.
For Sony, this will likely make them reconsider simultaneous launches of ps5 games to steam - let your games thrive on ps5 first for a while then bring to steam.

What should matter normally is that theres enough players to matchmake against with low ping. With cross-play, it should normally not be an issue - if a game is active on ps5, even if there were only 4 players on pc they wouldnt be losing out.

I think some changes to the active player stats ought to be considered by valve though. For example:

- very new games shouldnt display anything. always been norm for consoles, you buy in peace. theres ratings, reviews and forums already. First release day, hours are always slow unless there were preorders or preinstalls.
- games with optional or mandatory online features like multiplayer/pvp/coop should display vague activity ranges like 'less than 500', 'from 500 to 1000', 'from 1000 to 5000', more than 5000, more than 50.000. steam's active player stats should also take these ranges into consideration instead of doing a ranking based on precise count (ie top 10 games share the 5000+ interval but are otherwise randomly listed at the top).
- singleplayer-only games shouldnt display anything. its not useful information in any way and any launch woe ends up causing massive negative PR that causes further loss of sales from 'lol nobody but clowns bought that'.