It also did better in the second month, and also how many of games like that had to go agaisn’t a game or company like overwatch/blizzard.
Another thing to keep in mind, most of those are highly successful games.
If BB can stop the bleed and start adding players it could do well.
BB was
-76%
-21% but this month isn’t over so we will see how this comes out
Fair play. I think I understand your point, and you know my position, so I’m going to duck out of this.
First, love your youtube channel. Thanks for that btw.
Second I agree that we need to stop the bleed.
It would also help to bring back some of those we lost over the last couple of months.
Lootmeggedon is a start but we need more cowbell.
just sayin’.
Community can change things.
At one point people said the Bekah sucked, people said the Pimpernel sucked. We can help change things.
I think the point is just that, some of those are highly successful games, and that’s what this data shows. Unless you measure success in terms of units sold, in which case, that data isn’t included, but I’d guess some of those games are highly successful in that regard as well. However, then I’d be interested to see what BB’s performance was like on that metric.
Otherwise we can also say that Battleborn is not a highly successful game. And if it isn’t, why isn’t it? What’s the problem?
Your claim is that it’s because of market competition. But like I said, proving causation is much more difficult than proving correlation. You can easily say Battleborn had a precipitous fall in its first month and Overwatch came out at the same time, so there may be a relationship. But you can’t say it’s because of Overwatch that Battleborn had a such a fall without proof of causation. It’s a valid theory however.
I’m not saying its highly successful, but its too early to say it’s not or won’t be.
I’m not saying its because of that but if you point out one reason you should point out others there are many factors. Just trying to remain in the middle.
I’m not going to say the sky is falling, but I’m not going to say everything is wonderful. There are issues, but its not hopeless. It’s early.
Absolutely, but like I said earlier if an average AAA game drops 60% on the first month, BB comes out and right after it you have Overwatch open beta and release. Well you should expect it to do worse than average. How much worse, I don’t know maybe 70% instead of 60%.
Again none of this helps the player base issue on PC, but when people keep saying BB lost 80% of its base you can put it in context and let them know its not as bad as it seems.
The real issue will be in the next few months weather than can turn it around. That remains to be seen, there is a lot in the pipeline as we have been told. Can those things help bring in new players or bring back old, we will see.
I agree, it’s not hopeless by any stretch.
The only reason I jumped in to this thread was that there was a lot of attacking the neutrality and validity of the claims. And rather than shouting down anyone, I wanted to get at why that was happening.
I know your intention was just to provide more data. But others didn’t perceive it that way, and some good old data stewardship would go a long way toward alleviating that.
If we only measure Battleborn’s success by the data we have here, player retention as a percentage in the first 30 and 60 days, then it’s performance put it well outside of being a highly successful game. That shouldn’t be the only way success is measured, and I pointed out another common way of measuring it. But it’s an important component of a multiplayer focused game, so it counts for something.
But as the sample population grows Battleborn continues to have the worst player retention of all titles in the first 30 days. And that’s not good. In fact, it’d probably be a pretty decent challenge to find a game that lost more players, as a percentage, in its first 30 days than Battleborn did.
It was mainly to shed light on the 2 big numbers I saw getting thrown around everywhere
BB lost 80% of its players and that’s unheard of
and
Overwatch has 10,000,000 players BB has 1,000
What I showed should help bring those 2 into context.
BB lost ~80% of its players since it came out, sure but that isn’t so far out of normal for AAA games. Sure the first month is worse than most but the 2nd is better than most. This says nothing about the player base but just that 80% number.
The second number I don’t think anyone here has complained about.
That is what the op is about, nothing more. This isn’t meant to be some great massive study, just context for 2 numbers people have been talking about.
A lot of posts here seem to want this thread to be about something other than that. But it is not.
For those tuning in late:
The winner of the debate so far seems to be Sbspalding, for exiting the thread at the opportune moment.
Can we put a bow on this one and call it done, yet?
The conversation is fine, if you don’t have anything to add to it then you shouldn’t.
I’ve enjoyed the back and fourth with @zesban, more and better info has been pulled out for it. There is nothing wrong with that, in fact its a good thing.
2 sides both disagreeing and agreeing on things is how we get to a better place. We are not fighting or insulting each other but just going for clarity and more information.
I’m finding it to be a wonderful debate. I like to be challenged, it makes me better.
I’m sorry, I’m not getting into a debate about how Battleborn is doing. My only intent on participating in this thread was to decry those who seem to insist on giving @Derch a position on this very debate, simply because he posted graphs comparing Battleborn’s performance with other Gearbox titles
Moderators are not moderators because they love a particular game. Moderator status here is across all of Gearbox’s gaming forums and is given to people who are able to be fair and impartial in enforcing the rules. I know of many people who have been around a long time who are not moderators here and it isn’t because they just weren’t very good at spouting the party line.
As for the rest of your post and those following, @sbspalding is a better man than I, because I’m not going any further into it than the following: I’m not an apologist, I’m not a cheerleader, I’m not wearing blinders. As I don’t own stock in GBX, there are only two sales that matter to me in the slightest and my husband and I have most certainly gotten our money’s worth. We played PvE until we finished it and now he plays PvP on PC and has no difficulty getting games.
These are the facts of my position. FWIW, I liked the OP because I appreciated the work he put into it and that he did his best to stay neutral while presenting the numbers in a way that someone who didn’t have a single extra brain cell to dedicate to math or statistics after passing the requisites in college.
Enjoy your climb.
EDIT: [quote=“sbspalding, post:94, topic:1539992”]
so I’m going to duck out of this.
[/quote]
I spoke too soon.
I don’t normally agree with what you have to say, no offense, but that is an interesting graph. I don’t play BB on PC, but I was under the impression the queue times were a lot better with the new matchmaking… was that not the case? (I know you don’t play PvP, though)
Obviously, it’s Friday, which can impact numbers. However, to me, it seems to indicate that choice of modes was the more important factor. I hate long queue times, so it’s definitely a different mindset from me.
Hopefully that is seen through GBX data.
Lol.
Well it’s a lot easier to agree with me when I am not saying anything.
I’m letting the numbers speak for themselves.
Draw whatever conclusions you wish.
Haha, I guess there isn’t anything to agree to, true. We are just normally at odds.
Thanks for the info, either way.
I agree.
Don’t you hate it when people just pop up and try to put things to an end prematurely?
283 - players online…
637 - 24 hour peak…
Looking good as always…
Battleborn, where actually reading the comments here is more fun than playing the game, lol.
Bye, Bye 60 dollars…
I’m sure this has already been pointed out, OP, but … you do realize that the graphs you posted only prove one thing:
That this is, by far, the least successful gearbox game, ever.
You can see that, right? I only have to ask because it appears you’re trying to put some spin on it that implies that the other games did ‘around’ as bad and this is ‘normal.’ That’s not true. This is their worst game ever in terms of players and retention. Your graphs show only that this game will die months and months before any of their others did, and on PC this game is very close to being dead already.
Nope, gearbox has made more than borderlands and battleborn.
Seeing as you decided to Necro this thread, I’ll provide an update. Link found here.
If we compare the 2 week player count to the one I provided 10 days ago, the total number of people playing Battleborn has dropped by 21%. Average playtime is up, however this is to be expected given that the remaining playerbase is probably more dedicated.
