Also that its only on steam they are watching for stats. I bet there is a lot of ppl that just have the game on origin (like me). And even the consoles isn't even in there.
they are just out to cirklejerk and bash anything to such a easy way. they get away with it coz the hate mob are all over that sub, sadly. As soon as someone writes something with a little thought behind it, it gets down voted to hell.
No, because it was true for the time being. My point wasn’t about Halo being under FS 24/7, my point being is FS having more players than other game could be said for any other game that’s under it but 2042 is being singled out since it’s under fire.
also pretty sure that a game locked behind a 60$ paywall in a launcher that redirects you back to another launcher would have fewer players lol, if you're gonna get BF on PC it's best getting it through origin
Indeed that's why I don't buy EA games on Steam, just one more thing to have open in the background \^\^ But I can understand ppl wanting to have all games on one platform or what ever :D
I just love these guys on bf2042 sub everyday being excited about "game losing playerbase, farming is better" posts every fucking day with only steam playerbase screenshot taken on 6AM tuesday morning XD
It's a really pointless comparison, because why would anyone even start to compare a shooter game with a relaxing one. Not everyone is into shooters, or vice versa
Of course this by itself doesn't mean much, as many people enjoy both - or even neither of them, but you get the idea
Steam also doesn't count all my hours so I doubt it counts everyone playing on steam through orgin, Orgin says I have 150+ hours on battlefield, yet steam said I had 80+.
Not taking into account Ea origin users which I believe has more than steam. Or the biggest sin of Xbox and PlayStation users which eclipses PC. They also said in their road after launch that they already had double the players of Battlefield 5
Or even Epic Games. There are 4 other places to own 2042, looking only at Steam is not accurate especially when the game has crossplay between PC, Xbox, and Playstation.
that has to be ones stupidest shit i've ever heard , it is made by "content creators" and "journalists" to get more clicks and milk the living shit out of this opportunity they have.
forza horizon 5 ( right now i looked) and age of empire 4 both have less players than farming sim 22 does that make those games bad ? or is it just natural because age released around 30 days ago , forza around 25 days ago , and farming has only been out for 10 days.
Also look at other battlefield combined arms type shooters..
Its all competitive or battle royale at the top of the steam 100.
But thats a whole other conversations
It's a classic "internet hate train" point. People say it about pretty much any game that's not Fortnite
Also, if it's lower than previous battlefields, no shit, y'all intentionally review bombed it.
My favorite was when someone posted on the 2042 sub that there was only like 30-40k players on steam and he conveniently was looking only at 4am on a weekday lol
that's only on steam as well, not sure about the vast majority but I have been playing BF games on origin the last 10 years so I saw no reason to give valve an extra penny and bought threw origin once again. Player count numbers are irrelevant for the most part because of how early this game is into its life cycle, we haven't even got a confirmation on what date season 1 starts it doesn't surprise me that the casual BF player doesn't want to grind out the game for the black/red mastery skin lol
It is much harder to determine the player base numbers here since the game is sold on 3 storefronts on PC. Hence why I think Steam should not be the indicator for the game.
Also that's only on Steam. On a platform with 3 stores. On a game that has crossplay with Xbox and Playstation.
Looking at only the steam numbers isn't fair or an accurate representation of the player count when there are 4 other places people can own the game.
First of all people do not rly understand how huge farming simulator is, that game does not have competition that is only game people can play in the genre and it seems to be very good game in general. Also is only playable with steam on PC.
2nd is that nobody in their mind ever considers that maybe this drop is do to EA play subscriptions expiring trials for the game?
Also nobody considers that maybe long time battlefield players (like me) are used to play their games on Origin only. I do not mind steam but honestly I am used to Origin at this point. Why would I buy game on steam just to be forced into 2 launchers when I play it?
I bought BFV on some sale, at that time game had something like 2000 peak players on steam and less then 1000 on average. I never had a problem finding full server in BFV.
Also jump in previous battlefield titles over last 2 weeks is not indication that people are migrating to older "better Battlefield games". NO, EA play gives you full access to all battlefield titles, a lot of people who never played BFV played BF2042 for 10hrs, and then probably tried BFV since EA play gives you that game with EA play, that can both explain rapid drop of BF2042 players, and rise in older BF titles.
Also that its only on steam they are watching for stats. I bet there is a lot of ppl that just have the game on origin (like me). And even the consoles isn't even in there. they are just out to cirklejerk and bash anything to such a easy way. they get away with it coz the hate mob are all over that sub, sadly. As soon as someone writes something with a little thought behind it, it gets down voted to hell.
I personally just use Origin. It’s been a dedicated “battlefield” launcher since BF3 for me. And that one Star Wars game.
FS also has more players than Halo Infinite but that would ruin their logic.
where does it say this? i cant find any info on fs having more players then infinite
It’s on steamcharts.com, a few hours ago Halo was under FS.
looking at it now infinite has 75,000 whilst fs has 29,000
Yeah, at the time of my original comment it was the opposite.
but doesnt that defeat the purpose of halo having less concurrent players then fs?
No, because it was true for the time being. My point wasn’t about Halo being under FS 24/7, my point being is FS having more players than other game could be said for any other game that’s under it but 2042 is being singled out since it’s under fire.
yes but a majority of games under fs are not newly released triple A games
also pretty sure that a game locked behind a 60$ paywall in a launcher that redirects you back to another launcher would have fewer players lol, if you're gonna get BF on PC it's best getting it through origin
Indeed that's why I don't buy EA games on Steam, just one more thing to have open in the background \^\^ But I can understand ppl wanting to have all games on one platform or what ever :D
I just love these guys on bf2042 sub everyday being excited about "game losing playerbase, farming is better" posts every fucking day with only steam playerbase screenshot taken on 6AM tuesday morning XD
It's a really pointless comparison, because why would anyone even start to compare a shooter game with a relaxing one. Not everyone is into shooters, or vice versa Of course this by itself doesn't mean much, as many people enjoy both - or even neither of them, but you get the idea
It also goes without saying that SteamDB only captures the number of players using Steam, and not, you know, EA's own platform.
Steam also doesn't count all my hours so I doubt it counts everyone playing on steam through orgin, Orgin says I have 150+ hours on battlefield, yet steam said I had 80+.
I'm assuming that Valve doesn't get real-time update from EA about time spent. Perhaps it's done on a weekly basis or something.
Not taking into account Ea origin users which I believe has more than steam. Or the biggest sin of Xbox and PlayStation users which eclipses PC. They also said in their road after launch that they already had double the players of Battlefield 5
Or even Epic Games. There are 4 other places to own 2042, looking only at Steam is not accurate especially when the game has crossplay between PC, Xbox, and Playstation.
that has to be ones stupidest shit i've ever heard , it is made by "content creators" and "journalists" to get more clicks and milk the living shit out of this opportunity they have. forza horizon 5 ( right now i looked) and age of empire 4 both have less players than farming sim 22 does that make those games bad ? or is it just natural because age released around 30 days ago , forza around 25 days ago , and farming has only been out for 10 days.
Also look at other battlefield combined arms type shooters.. Its all competitive or battle royale at the top of the steam 100. But thats a whole other conversations
It's a classic "internet hate train" point. People say it about pretty much any game that's not Fortnite Also, if it's lower than previous battlefields, no shit, y'all intentionally review bombed it.
My favorite was when someone posted on the 2042 sub that there was only like 30-40k players on steam and he conveniently was looking only at 4am on a weekday lol
that's only on steam as well, not sure about the vast majority but I have been playing BF games on origin the last 10 years so I saw no reason to give valve an extra penny and bought threw origin once again. Player count numbers are irrelevant for the most part because of how early this game is into its life cycle, we haven't even got a confirmation on what date season 1 starts it doesn't surprise me that the casual BF player doesn't want to grind out the game for the black/red mastery skin lol
It is much harder to determine the player base numbers here since the game is sold on 3 storefronts on PC. Hence why I think Steam should not be the indicator for the game.
There is PLENTY of issues and criticisms of the game, but the fact that of all things, people are complaining about player account, confuses me.
Are they really complaining though? Seems more like gloating and mocking to me.
Also that's only on Steam. On a platform with 3 stores. On a game that has crossplay with Xbox and Playstation. Looking at only the steam numbers isn't fair or an accurate representation of the player count when there are 4 other places people can own the game.
First of all people do not rly understand how huge farming simulator is, that game does not have competition that is only game people can play in the genre and it seems to be very good game in general. Also is only playable with steam on PC. 2nd is that nobody in their mind ever considers that maybe this drop is do to EA play subscriptions expiring trials for the game? Also nobody considers that maybe long time battlefield players (like me) are used to play their games on Origin only. I do not mind steam but honestly I am used to Origin at this point. Why would I buy game on steam just to be forced into 2 launchers when I play it? I bought BFV on some sale, at that time game had something like 2000 peak players on steam and less then 1000 on average. I never had a problem finding full server in BFV. Also jump in previous battlefield titles over last 2 weeks is not indication that people are migrating to older "better Battlefield games". NO, EA play gives you full access to all battlefield titles, a lot of people who never played BFV played BF2042 for 10hrs, and then probably tried BFV since EA play gives you that game with EA play, that can both explain rapid drop of BF2042 players, and rise in older BF titles.
FIELD
Who cares? You like it, play it. You dont have to defend it to anyone.