What makes you say that? I think it's a great game from the little I've played of it but I might have missed some stuff since I'm so late to the party.
Yah I should have added the context in the video and not just the description about us east peak times. So for other areas it might really be considered more accurately a dead game. But I thought dang if everyone reads these comments like I did and pass on buying the game they might miss out on a really fun time like we had!
It's dead bro. It averages around 1,200 players globally after peaking at over 87,000. Losing over 98% of your player base means you're a dead game. It's a shame but it's the truth.
I believe it's more contextual. The game was never going to maintain numbers even close to that. It course corrected and dropped to what you would kind of expect from a game that looks like this especially an indie one. Arguably in certain locations it could be considered dead but I bought it, downloaded it and 5 minutes later I was in a full 256 player server and played for a few hours on a full server. I don't count that as a dead game personally. It also isn't helpful to put off potential buyers by everyone calling it a dead game. People might miss out on a potentially great game and experience by overly negative coverage calling it a dead game. But ultimately we may just agree to disagree on the terminology.
The same could be said for WH40k: Space Marine 2 tho? From 226k to 13k concurrent players (94% loss in playerbase) in your logic means it's a "dead game" but that ain't true. If there are still a large number of players playing the game, it's not a dead game. No game will ever be able to keep it's peak amount of players past the first few months
@@MrVal3ntine comparing apples to oranges. The difference is that game isn’t dependent on large numbers of players to fill servers. Look at Battlefield 1. Maybe my statistic is a bit reductive but Battlebit is at best dying. Compare to Battlefield 1, still maintaining 3x the players on Steam alone (plus whoever plays from EA launcher). I enjoyed Battlebit but when queues started getting to be longer than Battlefield, I dipped too.
@@NothingWeird-sw6cl you admitted yourself you caught in on a sale. That sale did nothing to boost player count. That one server was more than likely the only full one on the entire game.
Golden times are Long over 😢
What makes you say that? I think it's a great game from the little I've played of it but I might have missed some stuff since I'm so late to the party.
Yeah , it's not dead , love the game , still not on it's peak
Problem is the servers availablity
Asia servers are just dead no people in it
Yah I should have added the context in the video and not just the description about us east peak times. So for other areas it might really be considered more accurately a dead game.
But I thought dang if everyone reads these comments like I did and pass on buying the game they might miss out on a really fun time like we had!
@@NothingWeird-sw6cl
Yeah, you and I had fair share of fun, truly
Would you like to join?
If you wanna play we join in together with ya buddy
It's dead bro. It averages around 1,200 players globally after peaking at over 87,000. Losing over 98% of your player base means you're a dead game. It's a shame but it's the truth.
I believe it's more contextual. The game was never going to maintain numbers even close to that. It course corrected and dropped to what you would kind of expect from a game that looks like this especially an indie one.
Arguably in certain locations it could be considered dead but I bought it, downloaded it and 5 minutes later I was in a full 256 player server and played for a few hours on a full server. I don't count that as a dead game personally.
It also isn't helpful to put off potential buyers by everyone calling it a dead game. People might miss out on a potentially great game and experience by overly negative coverage calling it a dead game.
But ultimately we may just agree to disagree on the terminology.
The same could be said for WH40k: Space Marine 2 tho? From 226k to 13k concurrent players (94% loss in playerbase) in your logic means it's a "dead game" but that ain't true. If there are still a large number of players playing the game, it's not a dead game. No game will ever be able to keep it's peak amount of players past the first few months
@@MrVal3ntine comparing apples to oranges. The difference is that game isn’t dependent on large numbers of players to fill servers. Look at Battlefield 1. Maybe my statistic is a bit reductive but Battlebit is at best dying. Compare to Battlefield 1, still maintaining 3x the players on Steam alone (plus whoever plays from EA launcher). I enjoyed Battlebit but when queues started getting to be longer than Battlefield, I dipped too.
@@NothingWeird-sw6cl you admitted yourself you caught in on a sale. That sale did nothing to boost player count. That one server was more than likely the only full one on the entire game.
@@DasBeefCakewell you're wrong bout that one
Not just on weekends, it ishas 4-5 full servers in US and EU bruh