530°

Starfield has fewer players on Steam than Skyrim

PCgamesn writes, "The Starfield Steam player count has dropped below that of Elder Scrolls Skyrim, just two months after the new Bethesda RPG first launched."

Read Full Story >>
pcgamesn.com
TheEnigma313175d ago

Probably because most are playing it on GP. No reason to buy it full price when you can get it cheaper.

Crows90175d ago

But I thought that the claim was it sold well? If it barely sold on Xbox because of Gamepass then most sales would be on steam no? And it that's the case and there's very few players active...that doesn't bode well for something people would play for years

Profchaos175d ago

Anecdotally I know quite a few people who were obsessed at launch but they're interest fizzled out around two weeks and then dropped it completely around CP phantom libertys launch.

Seems that was a trend as the last month has been wall to wall releases if imagine most people moved on

EvertonFC175d ago (Edited 175d ago )

The truth is, the game was average to good at best, nothing to set the world on fire and when all said and done it'll probably sell about 4m across Xbox and PC which ain't great but the bigger problem for MS is that it didn't increase GP numbers.
Most GP casuals probably never played more than a few hours etc.

StarkR3ality174d ago

@profchaos

Exactly what I did, played it, beat it within like 60 hours, initially enjoyed it, and then replaying Cyberpunk made me realise how many elements of the game were below par.

itsmebryan174d ago

@Crow
How does this change the number of games already sold 9n steam and everywhere else? The people that bought the game could has finished. I for one don't continue to play games after 8 complete them. Numbers may change as new content comes out.
Do you feel a month and a half is not long enough to finish a game?

mkis007174d ago

Bryan

This was supposed to be a new skyrim. A game that has unlimited replay value for 10 years.

Juancho51174d ago

It’s a trash game. Only popular because there was nothing else to play on that console.

Lightning77174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

Do you expect the game to have 100, 000 players every month? You realize Skyrim has wealth of content and more mods and has been around for 12 years vs 2 months you also expect pplto ng+ 100 times also? Whenever the new Expansion drops the player count will go up that's how it all works. Plus they plan on sticking with it for 5 years this is only the beginning.

Congrats fail submission post. Next up let's post Exo Primals player count next, Mortal Kombat player counts.

Your little immature hate parade for this game is chilling you need to see a doctor bro.

babadivad174d ago

It did sell well. Doesn't mean people will keep playing it though. Both can be true.

Crows90174d ago

So I guess all these millions of players are hardcore gamers spending 10+ hours every day and finishing up the game quick. Doing all the content etc,...yeah right. Its a boring mess and most likely dropped it soon after starting it up.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 174d ago
StormSnooper175d ago

It says it dropped below skyrim two months after release.

Armaggedon174d ago

To be fair, Cyberpunk doodoos on Starfield when it comes to presentation and character builds and progression.But Starfield has its merits that have value.

StarkR3ality174d ago

Thank you! First person I've seen on here take a measured approach to Starfield other than me, it's disappointing but still can be a good time if you're into those games.

DivineHand125174d ago

I doubt it. Starfield doesn't seem like a game people will go back to like Skyrim. Skyrim is also on game pass for new comers.

GhostScholar174d ago

I agree. As much hate as this game gets I’m still playing it. Maybe like I’ve said it’s just a game made for me. I’ve had a blast with it, and I think it’s Bethesdas best narrative. It’s fallout in space which is a dream game for me. Im sorry for the people who don’t enjoy it, but I’m not gonna blast a game I have 250 hours in.

Zeref171d ago (Edited 171d ago )

The hate boner people have for this game (even before release) is actually disgusting.

These people aren't gamers.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 171d ago
175d ago
boing1175d ago

There are simply better games to play currently.

Armaggedon174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

Better is subjective. Starfield s***s on other games in certain aspects, and vice versa.

BehindTheRows174d ago

What games does Starfield "s**t" on?

ziggyzinfirion174d ago

@BehindTheRows

The amount of loading screens.

Armaggedon174d ago

I said it s***s on other games in certain aspects. Games have “strengths and weaknesses” of course.

Armaggedon174d ago

@ziggy

All of them items and objects need to load and be instanced bruv.

BehindTheRows174d ago

What aspects? From what I played, it did nothing better than other games and certainly didn't do anything substantially better. So, my curiosity remains.

Armaggedon174d ago

Let me specify: Starfield has crafting and Elden ring has crafting. This is to highlight that games have their own perks that give them value, and its not always as simple as game A is better than game B.

VivaChe174d ago

Oh god is the phrase "it s***s on..." becoming a thing now?

Crows90174d ago (Edited 174d ago )

Critically better games.

But you've stated it very nicely. Starfields shits a lot

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 174d ago
Flenter175d ago

The game sucks...get over it

Armaggedon175d ago

Perception manipulation at its finest

Rude-ro174d ago

Yes. That is what Microsoft’s marketing does.. pays for hype, manipulates, and drives impulse purchasing.
Through their sponsored content creators and media partners.

EvertonFC175d ago

I enjoyed it, but it felt more like a good 3rd party game than a AAA 1st party game.
As far as I'm concerned MS still has to convince me/gamers they can make AAA OMFG games.

Armaggedon174d ago

It doesn’t meet industry standards, but that has its own merits. Bethesda is just doing their own thing.

CrimsonWing69175d ago

Well, it’s been out long enough to beat it and it’s sort of super boring. How long are you expecting people to play this for?

badz149174d ago

According to Todd Howard,"for many years to come"

CrimsonWing69174d ago

I’m really amazed people still give him the time of day.

anast174d ago

More people are still playing Skyrim...

Show all comments (82)
50°

How Starfield Remains a Success Story In The Face of Failure

Expectations for Starfield were sky-high, and while many felt it fell short of them, raw sales and other statistics tell a different tale.

Read Full Story >>
gamerant.com
90°

Bethesda Might Have Dropped A Major Clue For Starfield Shattered Space DLC In May Update

Bethesda may have just dropped a major hint regarding the upcoming Shattered Space DLC for its action role-playing game, Starfield.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
300°

Starfield’s largest update since launch is coming on May 15

Bethesda has announced the release date for the biggest Starfield update since launch, which will bring map improvements, Xbox graphics options, and more.

Read Full Story >>
bethesda.net
Zeref6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

40fps and 60fps modes on Xbox is huge! Honestly didn't think it would be possible.
Too bad it wasn't there at launch but this and land vehicles definitely gets me way more excited to jump back in when Shattered Space drops.

darthv726d ago

Very nice. I will jump back into it at 60fps like I did with Fallout.

helicoptergirl6d ago

The real thing here is... why didn't they have 60 FPS at launch?

I remember so many people defending them saying that it must not be possible to have 60 fps for that game. So many people defending Bethesda. Saying its too hard for 60 fps. I hope a "journalist" goes back and looks at all the excuses made for Bethesda releasing only 30 FPS. Go back and look ath all their excuses and the fans' excuses and do a write up of it all. Bethesda keep messing up and getting a pass imo.

Releasing 60 fps now for this game is simply not good enough

I'll tell you one thing, if I had bought and played Starfield at launch on Xbox SeriesX I would be so damned angry right about now.

Futureshark5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

I remember Phil Spencer announcing that Starfield was to run at 30fps as a 'creative decision'.

https://www.purexbox.com/ne...

This is one of the reasons why I'm no longer a Xbox fan, yet another example of Mr Spencer treating the public and their customers as idiots, feeding them basic marketing bullsh!t that anyone can actually see straight through.

And now their is an update over 6 months later to that game that has since lost all it's momentum it had at launch that not only improves performance but apparently adds all the QoL fixes that should have been there at launch (city maps for example).

What a load of baloney, going to wait until all this customer beta testing is finished and will get it on PS5 when on sale.

LordoftheCritics5d ago

60fps loading screen is still a loading screen.

obidanshinobi5d ago

"40fps and 60fps modes on Xbox is huge! Honestly didn't think it would be possible."
Really? Have you played Starfield on the Series X ? It's not really a looker, many parts of it look very last gen, there's no doubt a base Xbox One could run it at 30fps if they toned down the resolution and some of the detail.

There are already better looking open world games that run at 60fps like Cyberpunk 2077, on the Series X.

The Series X could easily run Starfield at 60fps, it's just the developers couldn't be arsed to prioritise it.
Seems to be a recurring problem within Xbox Studios, Redfall and the upcoming Hellblade 2 are other examples.
And let's not forget that Aaron Greenberg tweeted in 2020 (around March I think) that 60fps would be the standard for the Series consoles.

Zeref5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

I'm not sure what game you've been playing but the Starfield I've been playing looks amazing. Only the characters don't look that great but everything else looks amazing.

Goosejuice5d ago

I don't think he said starfield looks bad, cyberpunk looks better though and has wayy more going on. There was no reason for starfield to be 30 fps. It was an unfinished game when they released it. You could tell just with the maps..how do u release a game with the maps they had for cities? In was terrible.

Tacoboto6d ago

Way to bury the best news here! Thanks Zeref for already sharing.

"You can now select your own frame rate target for Starfield if you're on a VRR display, allowing you to choose between 30, 40, 60, and Uncapped."

I'm glad I've waited to finish it. The PC version with frame gen feels great but I'll happily play it on my Xbox again away from my desk

darthv726d ago

I just started fallout 4 for the first time and did so because of the new patch that was released. I play it in performance mode from my SX through my g cloud and it works really well. I plan on doing the same with this one when it drops.

Snookies126d ago (Edited 6d ago )

What happened to the 30 FPS lock on consoles being a "developer choice"? I refused to touch it on console because of that. I honestly got pretty bored of the game after about 15-20 hours, but maybe I'll go back after a lot of updates. Still sad to see things like the map being fixed, and FPS options that should have been there in the first place. Being added in so much later.

darthv726d ago

the 30fps lock was the developer choice because they could not get 60 to be consistent (at that time). They could have offered 40fps as a trade off but I guess they were wanting to do more work to get 60. And now they got things working to support both 40 and 60 (on the SX) so you can rest easy now and enjoy it.

helicoptergirl6d ago

That isn't good enough. Other devs work hard and launch with 60 FPS. But it's Bethesda right? They always get a pass

Neonridr5d ago

@helicoptergirl - so either have something available at launch or don't improve a game moving forward.

That's quite the rationale you got going on there.

Eonjay5d ago

It seems pretty obvious just looking at the game that expecting it to run at 60 should definitely be achievable. We saw a similar thing happen with Redfall and now with Hellblade. The games are being pushed out too early. Its great that they are now getting 60 FPS... I can saw for sure that this makes me a lot more likely to buy the game when it comes out on PS5.

romulus235d ago

That's not a "developer choice" it's a developer incapability and a parent company not willing to wait eight months for them to become capable. No one should "rest easy" when they have to wait upwards of a year for developers to deliver on promises they made. They had plenty of resources being under Microsoft's umbrella, there's no excuse for them not getting a consistent 60 (at that time).

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5d ago
Lightning776d ago (Edited 6d ago )

I agree 100%. These devs need to be up front about why console is 30. In fact I don't believe for a second HB2 was a dev choice but ran out of time. Despite having plenty of time already.

Makes no sense how much dev time does a game need to be in a pipeline in order to be 60 at launch? Even after delays its still 30. MS needs to get this sorted out with their next batch of games but I doubt they will. I think Indy might be 30 despite it being another linear experience and Avowed might be as well going by MS feature incomplete track record.

Tacoboto6d ago

I'm confident with Avowed and Indiana both being 60.

Avowed has the 60fps gameplay footage, after their commitment to do better after Redfall.

Indy's footage is 60fps too and runs on id Tech.

chicken_in_the_corn5d ago

Because it was exactly that. Their choice.

andy856d ago

Remember all the excuses from 'fans' about why 60 fps wasn't possible on Xbox consoles. It obviously was they just couldn't be bothered.

CobraKai6d ago

Im still hoping for the landing cutscenes for previously visited planets

Show all comments (45)