Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
My brain is stuck on why this was the opener. I can't get past it.
Best of luck.
I usually like walls of text.
PS nobody cares about your self-diagnosed ADHD
Not self Diagnosed, i have several doctors and psychiatrists along with a the medical records to prove it, also thank you.
The reason i mentioned this is because my ADHD makes it so i go off topic a lot, like ill explain one thing and in the middle of it ill just start explaining something else at what feels like random.
The user expresses concerns about the longevity and depth of “Helldivers 2,” a PVE live service game. They note that while the gameplay is enjoyable, it lacks compelling content beyond the mechanics, feeling like an “endless war simulator.” The user points out that the lore for the aliens is more developed than that for Super Earth, which hasn’t evolved much from the original game. They worry that, like “Deep Rock Galactic,” players may eventually lose interest once they’ve maximized their achievements or when new games are released. The user suggests that unlike competitive PVP games like “Counterstrike” or “Apex,” which retain players through competition, “Helldivers 2” needs to offer more engaging gameplay or narrative elements to maintain its player base.
I agree with the AI assessment of the user original text, under the condition and impression it appears to be factual.
I counter with the premise that this game must be enjoyed with friends to acheive fullest potential.
It's not that the game requires the game be played with friends to be enjoyed. Only that for the sake of longevity, cooperative efforts of friends might extend an already determinedly finite existence.
TLDR: It's a fun game for sure. you should play it with or without friends until it no longer brings you joy, and not a moment longer.
Apex doesnt retain players lol, CS does for sure but no apex is a seperate beast. Theres constantly a new flux of either returning players or new players which tell you that more people quit apex and come back later rather than stick around and play season after season im obviously not talking about streamers or pros.
and regarding ships, I would love to walk around the hangar and customize the inside of my ship. There are also more modules planned for the eagle and the others (as seen in the galactic war trailer)
there is also a Liberty-class cruiser that gets mentioned from time to time in the announcements from the TV in the hangar. it would be nice if we can get one as our own. maybe it will get added down the line in the next months and years? Im hopeful the game stays alive for a very long time. Its genuinely one of the few games that actually got me hooked (and for a long time too)
So i can agree with you that the live service is great for helldivers 2, but i cant agree with you when looking at the numbers for Deep rock galactic, going off of steam charts they barely hit 12 to 30k peak on a monthly basis and 10ish k on a 24 hour basis which is actually bad for a live service game, yes its not a dead game by any means but the numbers are quite clear, as for Apex their monthly was 400k+ peak and they hold a steady 100k on steam with a 340k 24 hour peak, mind you that's just steam charts so we can assume via console that those numbers are a bit bigger, I'm not brain dead by any means considering the numbers have a huge player gap between them, and yes players quit games and return to them normally when a big update or new season comes out but thats normal uphill then downhill on players for almost any game, Apex can retain players better then deep rock can.
For instance/example, Darktide, another coop shooter, is in one of the roughest content droughts of it's life so far, and I can still find a match pretty easily with decent ping. Long after content stopped coming out for Helldivers 1 and before the announcement of the second game, there were only ever a few hundred players on at once, but those same few hundred players kept playing the game, years after support ended.
Helldivers 2 has metric tons of depth and fun to it's gameplay, and presented itself as one of the most solid coop shooters not only recently, but of all time. It's a fantastic game, a lot of people know and feel this same sentiment, and if your concern about the player counts is related to the longevity of the game then rest assured it should be the least of your considerations when it comes to how long this game will last.
EDIT: Basically what I'm trying to say is, player counts really don't matter in the end. Yeah we can all point and laugh at say, Payday 3 for having a pitifully low player count despite it being the latest entry in a multi million dollar franchise that probably single-handedly funded the mortgage or a lot of higher-ups at OVK, but ultimately, as long as the game has people playing it, and you can find a match, it doesn't matter how many people there actually are playing it, at least to you, the player. I know this because I played tons of Helldivers 1 back before HD2 was even announced, and despite the tiny player count, I could still play multiplayer whenever I felt like it, and on top of that still found newer people coming to the game after so long in what appeared to be a kinda niche one off couch coop experience.