Plenty of shooters are doing exceptionally well right now. Some of them will inevitably bomb. The only unhealthy thing is more companies chasing one audience than people reasonably have time for.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
LawBreakers' peak concurrent Steam playerbase dropped to 431 today [Up2: Down to 302]
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
n0razi
Member
Immortal Technique
Member
Those are fine questions but the game has already floundered. People frantically refreshing Steamspy in hopes to post a lower number than before does not give us any more insight into those questions. It's just people who get off on this kind of thing.
Neuromancer
Member
Title hasn't actually been updated since 9/1. Over a week ago.
TheSpoiler
Member
People in this topic are actively discussing WHY it failed. There are far more of those than people posting steamspy numbers (which, in the title, have not been updated for a week).
And, well, it kinda does give us insight. They announced a content roadmap, and it'll be interesting to see if people take a chance on the game knowing it'll be supported in the future.
Regardless of who made the game - this stuff happens. It has always happened and will always happen. The game isn't "good" as decided by the free market. I suppose a better term is "good enough". That is just how things work -it sucks for those involved and hopefully they land on their feet.
Maybe Battleborne wasn't bad, but it wasn't as good as Overwatch etc.. this is how monopolistic competitions work. It is exacerbated by the fact that low populations are a self-fulfilling prophecy. You need to have people to have it be successful. I cannot imagine a scenario where this game picks up steam even if it is free.
Anecdotally -i remember little to no marketing push for this game relative all the things i see. There was no widespread hype. Destiny and PUBG are here and this situation won't change. Also- and I mean no offense by this- console players( more the everyman) seem to be less critical overall than PC players(more critical enthusiasts) -a console release would have helped, but now the stink from the PC release has breached the console space. A console release with almost 100 million installs and a solid marketing campaign would have pulled more than 400 people in.
EDIT: the peak of 7500 ish.. still more than that would have bought this game, no doubt, and paid 60$. Plus, more restrictive returns policy on consoles vs steam etc et al.
Maybe Battleborne wasn't bad, but it wasn't as good as Overwatch etc.. this is how monopolistic competitions work. It is exacerbated by the fact that low populations are a self-fulfilling prophecy. You need to have people to have it be successful. I cannot imagine a scenario where this game picks up steam even if it is free.
Anecdotally -i remember little to no marketing push for this game relative all the things i see. There was no widespread hype. Destiny and PUBG are here and this situation won't change. Also- and I mean no offense by this- console players( more the everyman) seem to be less critical overall than PC players(more critical enthusiasts) -a console release would have helped, but now the stink from the PC release has breached the console space. A console release with almost 100 million installs and a solid marketing campaign would have pulled more than 400 people in.
EDIT: the peak of 7500 ish.. still more than that would have bought this game, no doubt, and paid 60$. Plus, more restrictive returns policy on consoles vs steam etc et al.
This game did only one thing wrong, market research. The mechanics are great, the characters designs and level design are fine.
They should have done a vin diagram between the 2 players bases they were trying to pull from ( Quake Arena and Overwatch/team fortress 2). I think that player base is really small.
In my opinion, the mechanics and universe would work better as a single player game.
They should have done a vin diagram between the 2 players bases they were trying to pull from ( Quake Arena and Overwatch/team fortress 2). I think that player base is really small.
In my opinion, the mechanics and universe would work better as a single player game.
$30. Even if 10,000 people bought that game, that's only revenue of $300,000 and Steam takes a 30% cut of that.
Plus however many copies were sold on PS4, including the Limited Run Games copies.
Orthogonal
Member
Okay, here's an update/
Its starting to stabilize. :/
Many people disagree with you when you say "the character designs are fine." It's been one of the negatives that is pointed out very often.
But honestly, there was a beta. My guess is that many people played it and came away the same way I did: unimpressed. Okay gameplay, solid level design, bad characters and art. So why would I play that over all the other games right now?
Judge Magister Zexion
Banned
^ This
I played the beta expecting a decent addition to the hero shooter genre, instead I saw this bland game that really felt like something Nexon would've made free-to-play.
R6 Siege and Ghost Recon Wildlands both had poorly received Betas, worse than LawBreakers, and they went on to both do excellently. One of them went on to be the best selling game this year. I don't think the Beta was much of a factor.
IMO it's just the nature of the competitive FPS marketplace. More than enough competitive arena shooters. Too many arguably.
All of that can and should be discussed and isn't really dependent on the updates to its abysmal playerbase. Does the fact that it went from 431 to 302 change the discussion? Not really, it's just macabre.
I'm not really talking about the thread itself, just the updates in the title, that's all.
fluffydelusions
Member
Just saw it on reddit gaming
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/6ze46o/lawbreakers_player_count_drops_below_50_on_steam/
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/6ze46o/lawbreakers_player_count_drops_below_50_on_steam/
It shows that the situation is not improving and it might be getting worse at a fast rate which is useful information when discussing how the game is doing.
Courtesy of Gamespot, Cliff Bleszinski On LawBreakers: "I Have To Keep This Game Alive;" "It's been very humbling for me."
More at the link.
More at the link.
I think its kinda hard to keep something alive that died on launch day.
Ive already bought games like OW and Quake Champions so i dunno if id even consider Lawbreakers right now unless it went F2P.
This is exactly how I felt. Played the beta, and it instantly killed all interest I had in the game. I just didn't enjoy it and there is so much other great stuff to play right now.
spindoctor
Member
It's peaking below 200 now
The NPD thread mentioned that shooters are down 30% this year so maybe that affected this game a bit too? People are just playing the shooters they already own and like.
The NPD thread mentioned that shooters are down 30% this year so maybe that affected this game a bit too? People are just playing the shooters they already own and like.
Why did you buy QC over Lawbreakers? Just a curiosity question
I watched TB and Vinny play the closed beta then eventually the early access version. So thats already a huge thing QC has over Lawbreakers, visibility from content creators.
QC also has easier to follow gameplay for spectators than something like Lawbreakers. Theres bound to be a class in QC a new player can jump into and enjoy but still have to rely on their individual skill. I also read and watched about how bad the tutorial is in Lawbreakers.
I mean it helps that Quake is an established franchise so its partially brand recognition too. Im not sure if QC will get even more players after its complete but right now about 1000 peak players a day (on steam) is not bad for early access with minimal content.
I think that there's so many cheap and F2P shooters on PC that are games as a service that you really need to stand out in some way if you're going to launch a new one. I hate to say it but nothing about Lawbreakers really stood out (especially the characters, which look like generic FPS characters unlike a lot of other hero/class based shooters like Team Fortress 2 or Overwatch).
It probably doesn't help that they launched Lawbreakers at a time when Playerunknown's Battlegrounds was just getting bigger and bigger. Obviously the two games are pretty different shooters but I imagine if someone had $30 to spend and had to choose between the 2 most would choose PUBG.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
I agree.
Jawmuncher
Member
I hope they can do something to boost numbers. At this point I can't imagine how the playstation numbers are. If they're that low I'd take cross play with pc players even if it was a death sentence
Shooters as a Service
The shooter market YoY comparison is because it was Overwatch and The Division vs. Ghost Recon and Splatoon this year.
The market has a strong chance of going up given the Destiny/CoD/Battlefront combo this year.
Goddammit,I laughed.
lol
ebullientprism
Member
I heard they were coming up with a competitive ranked mode.
Easiest top 100 ranking of any game ever? All you gotta do is launch it and you are in the top 100.
Easiest top 100 ranking of any game ever? All you gotta do is launch it and you are in the top 100.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Yeah seems early to say shooters are down when the biggest shooters either just released or have yet to release.
Why did you buy QC over Lawbreakers? Just a curiosity question
Not the original poster your quoted but I also did the same.
Played both in beta, found both very enjoyable, but Quake Champions, depsite it's issues, just felt like it would hold a community better. Honestly I would have been a free to play person if the Bethesda launcher wasn't so awful for me, but retaining access to all champions has been worth it to me. I've had a ton of fun with it despite some netcode issues with the nail gun and rocket launcher.
I would play lawbreakers if it went free to play and had people to play against though. I did enjoy the open beta.
adversarial
Member
I heard they were coming up with a competitive ranked mode.
Easiest top 100 ranking of any game ever? All you gotta do is launch it and you are in the top 100.
I feel bad that I laughed at this.
I don't like pooping on this game and want it to succeed, but god damn this was hilarious.
I heard they were coming up with a competitive ranked mode.
Easiest top 100 ranking of any game ever? All you gotta do is launch it and you are in the top 100.
Hahaha, funny but sad
. As for me, when this came out, I wasn't even aware of its existance, and when I saw it, it just didn't appeal to me. The game looked very generic graphically and like people say, theres also already pubg/paladins/overwatch with more players (I personally prefer paladins over all), so a new shooter wasn't exactly what I was craving for. I do hope, however, that things turn around for the game, its pretty sad that its not even half a year old and its already on its deathbed
ricardo_sousa11
Member
I hate when people do this,
On PC there is you wanting to declare something a success or a bomb by this internet culture that loves to just observe things.
He's basically blamming the PC community, still not accepting that all of this was his fault with terrible art direction, terrible characters, bad level design and bad explanation of their new mechanics (even with good gameplay)...not to mention a lack of deathmatch. Also saying that the PS4 is "fine" sounds like complete bullshit, the PS4 should be having the same ammount of players or slightly more, but definetly not "doing fine".
One of the big issues with low player figures is long matchmaking times. Here in Australia, GameSpot has not been able to find a match on PS4 at all over the past two weeks after multiple attempts. We stopped trying the last time after 45+ minutes of matchmaking.
I think this is what separates a good developer from a bad developer (or any other career), is the ability to admit you failed, to be aware of your failure and where you failed.
He continues to compare this game to warframe and how warframe succeeded, however what he's missing is that, over 7000 people payed 30$ for his game, and even after paying that amount they still thought it wasnt worth it (and this is PC alone), so I dont see how he can boost player number, even if the game hits F2P, it simply will not last more than a few months because money isnt an issue right now...keeping players engaged is, and unless theres a radical change (different art style, different character designs, lore wich is non existant and so on) the game will flop regardless of its price point.
Dreams-Visions
Member
All this banging on about the art style and level design. That's not the reason why most of us haven't bought the game dude.
It had a quiet build up and launch, devoid of any hype and without the support of any prominent YT or Twitch streamers to get people interested. Then it launched into maybe the most crowded FPS market ever, in an awkward month where the oxygen is being sucked out of the room by Overwatch, PUBG, CSGo, BF1, where people are already looking forward to Destiny 2, SW Battleftont, and other AAA budgeted and marketed games.
Sometimes small businesses fail because the product isn't good, but sometimes it's simply a failure to respect the art of marketing or choosing the right location to set up at or what season to do your grand opening. If this game had come out in March and paid enough Twitch streamers to give it good exposure it would have had a chance. Their fall opportunity to get a playerbase was a fools errand whose window is almost closed. Poorly chosen name of the game didn't help. Lack of studio name (first game, only Cliffy is known and not especially popular) left no room for execution error as player trust has to earned from the ground floor if you didn't care enough to play the beta.
Unfortunate, but plenty of lessons to be learned.
Interfectum
Member
Niceguydan8
Member
Two things:
1.) All of this was "his" fault? Are the other 64 employees not at all held responsible? The game is a team effort, everybody probably worked really hard to create this video game. As such, I think pinning criticisms on him rather than both Cliff and his team is ignorant. He might represent his team, but that's not the same and I think you probably know that.
2.) Based off of what metrics do you think the install base should be the same/slightly better on PS4? The sheer potential playerbase for something like Lawbreakers on PS4 is going to be dramatically higher than the number of Steam players that could realistically play the game. Where is the data suggesting that these two platforms perform on the same level? If you don't have it, why are you presenting that opinion?
Darkstorne
Member
That's interesting. Doesn't explain why the numbers are THIS low but it's definitely indicative of problems in the genre as a whole. I guess genre fatigue is finally setting in, and gamers want a little more depth in their shooters these days, like PUBG or the loot and RPG-lite mechanics of Destiny and next year's Anthem. Also can't be fun competing in the exact same space as Overwatch.
The biggest problems with this game are undeniably a marketing failure and a very poorly received visual identity. Best thing Cliffy can do is scrap it and start anew. Not enough gamers knew this game even existed, and even the majority of those who saw it thought "nope, looks bland."
ricardo_sousa11
Member
1) Obviously when I say "his" fault, im refering to the whole team, but since he was responsible for this project, he is also responsible for its sucess or failure. At least this is how I see how a team leader should act like, when im working with people and im responsible for a project, in case of failure it ultimately should fall on me.
2) There are numerous reports (even on the article, I quoted something about that) that is really hard to find any match on PS4 on Lawbreakers, which leads to the conclusion that the game is in a similar situation than PC, if you go on reddit you will find a lot about this.
There was a terrible marketing strategy for this game, most reviews and most people cant even remember a single character in this game, there was absolutely no lore surrounding it, and their direct competitor (like it or not) is Overwatch, which has a very attractive art style (even though I personally dont enjoy) and lore. I dont believe this failed because of the circumstances, because if it did, there would be no reason for the 7k+ people that bought it would stop playing it. Another thing that hurt the game, in addition to the art style and character design, is the "highschool" syndrome the game has, with those terrible one liners, and even the logo being outdated and not very inspiring.
The game has some great mechanics, and good gameplay, but it falls short ine very single other department, and just like you said, battling against OW,PUBG,BF1,CSGO isnt easy, specially if you're lacking in a lot of departments that these other games are strong at.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=247500131&highlight=#post247500131
PS4 was roughly 1.5x as big in concurrent numbers well after the death spiral was underway.
Also, Cliffy is overthinking it regarding the PC critique. Since Steam numbers are officially and easily observable in the community hub it would naturally prompt more commentary and population spirals (both positively and negatively) at a much faster rate. If people can actually see that no one is playing the game, they will have less incentive to play themselves which creates a vicious cycle. This can work to your benefit, too, but clearly this game was a victim and not a benefactor.