Member
You can argue all you want, here are the figures:
Average playercount on weekends: 3455 players (uplay and steam, uplay being based on steams bought/playing rate)
Loss in players: down from about 85 000 players max to about 10000 players max on weekends now.
Player reviews (bought the game): 53% is not recommending this game, mainly due to the problems (not the game itself which is awesome)
Everyone should be on the same page about this, we should not attack one another, the numbers are there.
"Well i guess i have to uninstall then"
No, but you should see the problems and adress them. You have less and less players to play with, and soon it will be unplayable for you too. The players reporting problems are living in the regions that are difficult for the P2P system.
Let me explain;
The P2P system is good as long as:
1. The client player does not leave
2. The client player lives close to you
3. There are multiple clients in your area
If you can mark those three as "true" you will have no issues. As the game continues to lose players at an alarming rate, the three problems will accur more and more often and the problem will increase exponentially.
I also see alot of players stating that Siege also has a P2P solution, and had the same kind of problems. That is not true, i have played Siege since the beta.
Siege has dedicated servers and has had them since alpha. SIege also has more players playing now then launch. See the difference. They actually gained players, and i would credit that to ubisoft actually, for listening and patching. Eventually they got it right, and they were fairly quick to adress balancing issues. Not perfect, but fairly good.
If you love the game, like i do, you should avoid thrashing the players reporting their problems. Their problems are true, and the facts is there. Your statement is false, cause why is there 53% of pc players saying they cant play the game? Why is it losing players like no other aaa title since No Mans Sky?
Member
Senior Member
This is a very reasoned thread with decent points(which I wasn't expecting from the we are doomed in the title), if most threads were like this (and there were a few less of them) I don't think players would have as much of an issue as they do. The problem is most threads go like this.
OMG YOU SUCK **** I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS (insert gripe here) IS BROKEN FOR TWO DAYS AND IT HASN'T BEEN FIXED YET. I ****ING QUIT AND WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!!!111!!
That doesn't get anyone anywhere and it just causes the players who are waiting for ubisoft to get stuff together to either ignore yet another rant or reply and possibly get a little saltier than they would have. Not that I am saying this thread is a problem or you are, just that I can understand the other side of it.
Senior Member
As I already replied to your comment in the other thread:
The player base is decreasing not because of problems, it's decreasing because people are gettign absolutely destroyed in this vicious, brutal, and unforgiving game.
This was the most predictable thing in history.
No matter how many problems there would be, if the game was enjoyable for you - you would still play it no matter how many problems it had, and just wait for fixes.
As I said before, Star Craft came out in year 1855 or whatever, and to this very day it is being patched and balanced monthly, FH has been out for month and a half, and if you expect it to be perfect straight away, you are simply ridiculous, there is no better word for it.
On the other hand, if you are not a battle hardened fighter game ace, you will have a very bad time in the first week online in For Honor, as you will get absolutely destroyed and streamrolled by more experienced players, and most likely quit on day one, because there are not that many players out there who can die 100 times over and over without getting salty
Honestly, it would be a smart idea to not even let people play PVP untill they complete a 1000 games VS bots, they would git gut more in the process and be ready for PVP.
This is the major, if not the only reason why player base is declining.
I do not understand why was that not enough and you had to start a whole new thread just to copy paste your comment
Member
Senior Member
And we miss you dearly every single day...Originally Posted by Xynrex Go to original postplease come back ?
Banned
But they already said thatOriginally Posted by Xynrex Go to original postI predict ubisoft will tell you: Nothing is wrong right now. Player count is stable and they removed the in-game player count because of a bugg.)
Member
There!Originally Posted by CandleInTheDark Go to original post
You said it perfectly CandleInTheDark. Why are there so many angry players? Every thread is like this! **** those haters (is the usual reply, not yours mate)
The overrepresentation of negative threads in here are a direct consequence of the horrible connection. And that is my point. The very reason the forum is constantly fighting is the horrible connection.
If they went for a more expensive and longer living system with server bases (like siege has), this would not be the most discussed thing here. So whatever way you would discuss this, the players complaining are right. They have bought something that does not work, and the threads vary between the **** THIS ****ING GAME UBISFOT ****S, to the more intelligent approach.
The thing im trying to say is, why do we fight? We are on the same team. Ubisoft is the part which did a mistake, not the players. And the players are paying for it, and the rate of players paying for it is going up.
Senior Member
#UbisoftDidNothingWrongOriginally Posted by mammakamelen Go to original post
#StopTheWhinyBabyCircleJ'erk
#GameWorksFineUpgradeYourBroadband&GitGutt
Member
What you are saying is what i just discussed to be a problem. You are actually agreeing with me.Originally Posted by MassiveD. Go to original post
You stated the reason for all the players leaving is that its too hard.
Do you have data on this? Too big difference on K/D from top players to bottom? Not the case sir.
Other games considered as hard, just as a comparison for your false statement'? Sure!
Rust is considered to be a hard game to master. Not loosing players like FH.
Siege is considered a hard game to master, not loosing players like FH. Actually gaining them.
Dark Souls III is considered hard, althought not a MP game, still not loosing players like FH.
Dirt Rally, hard game to master, not loosing players like FH.
War THunder, free game, hard to master. Although its years old, still more popular than FH.
I guess you just lost an argument. Better call me something hurtful again, since that is your only way to "win" this.
It's not loosing games that's flooding the forums, it's the connection. I would reckon the chance of winning a game in FH actually is higher, considering that the game has such a low playercount and has not been around for long.
Edit: I did not see the last hashtag. I have a 100/100 fiberoptic line. I play ALOT of onlinegames, none of which has connectivity issues. My pc can coordinate a Nasa program
