Worst player numbers than Veilguard

[Pomni]

How did they flop so hard

[Spectrum Fox]

Wait until you hear about consoles.

[Wing Gaster]

who gives a ♥♥♥♥

[alex010300]

Oh look another whiner

[Gabi]

Originally posted by Pomni:

How did they flop so hard

Player numbers on steam or moot when the games primary purpose is to push a subscription service that isn't on steam (thus player numbers are not reflected). Sure more sales are the absurd price this is at Microsoft is happy at, but what they primarily want is more people subbed to gamepass. I have mixed feelings on that, but i'm not the one at Microsoft deciding the direction of there games division.

As for DA Veilgaurd. It opened large enough to be a hit, but the quality of the game meant people did not continue to play the game and recommend it, and others buying it as time goes on dropped to an extreme degree. It opened almost as big as witcher 3 on steam to put it into perspective. The difference is the gulf in quality between the two games (people kept playing, and others buying witcher 3 over time). It also looks like Veilgaurd did best on pc, and even worse on console, though specific numbers beyond the abysmal total players after a few months for a game ten years in development isn't available.

[deadscene]

BRO forget that is on gamepass, if i had no dollar to spend , i would have played it on gamepass too ahhaha XD

[Nekros]

Originally posted by Gabi:

Originally posted by Pomni:

How did they flop so hard

Player numbers on steam or moot when the games primary purpose is to push a subscription service that isn't on steam (thus player numbers are not reflected). Sure more sales are the absurd price this is at Microsoft is happy at, but what they primarily want is more people subbed to gamepass. I have mixed feelings on that, but i'm not the one at Microsoft deciding the direction of there games division.

As for DA Veilgaurd. It opened large enough to be a hit, but the quality of the game meant people did not continue to play the game and recommend it, and others buying it as time goes on dropped to an extreme degree. It opened almost as big as witcher 3 on steam to put it into perspective. The difference is the gulf in quality between the two games (people kept playing, and others buying witcher 3 over time). It also looks like Veilgaurd did best on pc, and even worse on console, though specific numbers beyond the abysmal total players after a few months for a game ten years in development isn't available.

You just wasted all your time responding to a troll. Do not feed them, do not acknowledge them, do add them to block list and move on.

[sBuckler]

Such an original post from a non-owner of the game. Move on.

[V I D A L]

You troll as if the Veilguard had low numbers.

Despite the controversy, Veilguard peaked at nearly 100k players, which is a decent number even for AAA standards. So it's not a good comparison.

Plus, Dragon Age is a brand for the masses. Doom nowadays is a more niche game.

[Helifax]

Veilguard SCUKED and Doom The Dark Ages SCUKES even more. Doom Eternal is the biggest SCUCKER of all time and so is all DOOM games since 1993! That's WHY I OWN and played them for HUNDREDS or HOURS... Because I am also a SCUKER!!

PS: It's not a TYPO, it is INTENTIONAL! ^_)

[Some Kinda Kobold]

Originally posted by Gabi:

Originally posted by Pomni:

How did they flop so hard

Player numbers on steam or moot when the games primary purpose is to push a subscription service that isn't on steam (thus player numbers are not reflected). Sure more sales are the absurd price this is at Microsoft is happy at, but what they primarily want is more people subbed to gamepass. I have mixed feelings on that, but i'm not the one at Microsoft deciding the direction of there games division.

As for DA Veilgaurd. It opened large enough to be a hit, but the quality of the game meant people did not continue to play the game and recommend it, and others buying it as time goes on dropped to an extreme degree. It opened almost as big as witcher 3 on steam to put it into perspective. The difference is the gulf in quality between the two games (people kept playing, and others buying witcher 3 over time). It also looks like Veilgaurd did best on pc, and even worse on console, though specific numbers beyond the abysmal total players after a few months for a game ten years in development isn't available.

The point of a subscription service is to get people to stay with it and pay month after month.

Microsoft gains nothing by having people pay for a month to play a game then dump it right after. People are essentially then just paying 10-15 bucks to play the game for a few days then ditch it.

[psychpayload]

0/10 ragebait
could do better