Steam Numbers Don’t Define Success

[cypher]

Let’s get one thing straight: If you’re still hanging your judgment of a game’s success on Steam numbers in 2025, you’re stuck in the past. Seriously, cut the crap. Assassin’s Creed Shadow hit the market, and while some Steam fanatics were wringing their hands over what they thought were disappointing peak player numbers, the truth was staring them right in the face—the game is thriving—and it has absolutely nothing to do with Steam.

Let’s break it down: Steam is just one platform—it’s not the only barometer of a game’s success, no matter how much fanboys want to pretend it is. Ubisoft has been operating in its own ecosystem for years, and with Assassin’s Creed Shadow, they’ve proven that Steam charts are just a blip in the grand scheme of things. The game is everywhere. It’s selling millions across Epic, Ubisoft Connect, Ubisoft+, and consoles, and the player engagement is off the charts. But sure, go ahead, stress over some Steam stats like they’re the ultimate measure of a title’s impact.

Here’s where it gets really spicy: the fact that people are still hung up on Steam numbers shows just how behind the times they are. Shadow’s audience isn’t just on Steam, it’s everywhere. Those "low" Steam numbers? They don’t mean jack squat when the game is dominating other platforms and making waves across the industry. Assassin’s Creed Shadow isn’t fighting for a spot on Steam’s charts—it’s carving out its own damn legacy. The game’s immersion, story depth, and jaw-dropping visuals are making it a bona fide success regardless of Valve’s little store.

And let’s not forget Ubisoft’s loyal fanbase, who eat up exclusive content, perks, and all the juicy stuff that makes their ecosystem the place to be. Shadow isn’t just a game—it’s a cornerstone of their long-term strategy. This is a community-driven success. Not some hollow achievement dictated by Steam’s fickle metrics.

So, for anyone still clutching to Steam’s approval like it’s a badge of honor: get over it. Assassin’s Creed Shadow doesn’t need Valve’s validation to be a game of the year contender. Steam numbers? Irrelevant. Shadow’s already winning, and it doesn’t need to wait for permission from a digital storefront to do so.

[Smirk]

Say what you want, but AC:S wasn't good enough to prevent Ubisoft from getting partially bought out. Hopefully these new investors will have a better vision for what constitutes a good game going forward.

[Anf]

This is obviously bait... right?

[Empukris]

This is what copium sounds like.

[Ziattic]

"Moving the goal post"

[Katah]

I actually agree with the OP. I'm playing via their subscription service as I'm sure tons of people are. Why pay $70 to play a game I can complete for $18? Steam in my opinion is not a good gauge of success or failure of most titles unless they are Steam only.

[Monty Hall]

the same copium that i saw in ssktjl discussions

[cypher]

Originally posted by Katah:

I actually agree with the OP. I'm playing via their subscription service as I'm sure tons of people are. Why pay $70 to play a game I can complete for $18? Steam in my opinion is not a good gauge of success or failure of most titles unless they are Steam only.

Same here brother

[GuerillaTactix]

Its so funny seeing the two who are white knighting for the game in almost every Steam thread admit the game isn't worth actually paying for in their opinion.

If you play the game on a subscription service, fair dues. Its not a good look trying argue with others about a game that you yourselves aren't even wiling to pay for though.

[H.Honor]

Yeah having to sell part of the company to Tencent is a success hehe
AM I ROOOOIGHT GUUUUYS

[Iwantacookie]

No one who you want to understand this will.

Some people desperately want this game to be a failure. It is what it is.

[knoxnum1]

That's a long cope post, buddy. I hope you forgive yourself one day

[BEEP!]

Whos going to tell OP what just happen with Tencent.

[Anticitizen 1]

What about the fact that Tencent more than doubled their stake in Ubislop as a result of this game's "success"?

[tfa]

Originally posted by Katah:

I actually agree with the OP. I'm playing via their subscription service as I'm sure tons of people are. Why pay $70 to play a game I can complete for $18? Steam in my opinion is not a good gauge of success or failure of most titles unless they are Steam only.

So you paid $18 instead of $70. This means you're only subscribing for one month. How does your example support the idea that the game is a success?

[XxEyeDragonxX]

Originally posted by tfa:

Originally posted by Katah:

I actually agree with the OP. I'm playing via their subscription service as I'm sure tons of people are. Why pay $70 to play a game I can complete for $18? Steam in my opinion is not a good gauge of success or failure of most titles unless they are Steam only.

So you paid $18 instead of $70. This means you're only subscribing for one month. How does your example support the idea that the game is a success?

In the same way that they treat Steam as if it were just another platform and not the biggest PC platform by a huge margin, probably surpassing Xbox as well. PlayStation is a different story. I don't know the numbers