chakkra said:
Ehh.. except I never said that Helldivers 2 had fizzled out or that it was not successful. I mean, it would be really stupid of me to say such a thing when the numbers are right there for everyone to see, as the game has obviously beeing able to maintain a player base on the same ballpark as many other games that are considered to be successful so, again, it would be foolish of me to go against the numbers. I still think that Palworld has a slight edge over it, considering it has remained on the Steam top 100 selling games for 29 consecutive weeks, but yes, I think we can conclude that both games have been succesful (which I think should be obvious). |
I'm pretty sure a logical interpretation of what you said is that Helldivers was not successful if it didn't reach the top 10. But, that's a semantic argument, so if that's not what you meant, we'll just agree that it was a misunderstanding. We can then move on to the latest place you've moved the goalposts to, which is the top 100 sales. I'd say player count is a much more relevant stat with these types of games, but hey, that doesn't support your argument, so just move those goalposts I guess. Still won't help.
First off, you said that Palworld has a slight edge because it's been in the top 100 for 29 CONSECUTIVE WEEKS. So, how long has Helldivers been in the top 100?
26 |
HELLDIVERS™ 2
|
$39.99
|
▲ 16
|
29
|
Oh... 29 consecutive weeks.
So, major face palm right there. It's also in a significantly higher place. So... not sure how you're arguing that Palworld is a bigger success.
And, is being the 78th (80th now) best selling game on steam really such an accomplishment? It is interesting that in all other cases you chose to show a section of the chart, but here you only showed Palworld. So lets expand it and see what other games are selling at the same level right now.
Palworld is selling below Forza Horizon 5, a 3 year old game that was fairly popular, and above Icarus, a 3 year old game that I'm pretty sure most of us have never heard of, and didn't even have good reviews or anything.
So, yeah, I don't think that's very impressive. But, when we're arguing about whether Palworld has fizzled out or not, the real question is how its sales have changed over time. Here's a convenient chart.
Month | Helldivers | Pal World |
Launch | 72 | 1 |
2 | 1 | 4 |
3 | 1 | 20 |
4 | 2 | 31 |
5 | 9 | 70 |
6 | 19 | 63 |
7 | 38 | 24 |
8 | 26 | 69 |
They launched the same week, with Palworld at number 1 and Helldivers at 72. Within a week, Helldivers was on top of the charts. Helldivers stayed in the top 10 for a month. In that month, Palworld dropped down to 70. It briefly picked up when it got the update, but then went right back down. Just as with the player count, Helldivers has been ahead in sales pretty much the entire time, aside from the month or so after Palworld's update.
I mean... it's abundantly clear that Palworld's fall from its peak was exceptionally fast. I.e. it fizzled out. Your evidence to the contrary was that it briefly had a surge in players, but it has since lost all that it gained. One would think that once it lost the players it gained, you would just be like "whoops, guess that was just a temporary bump. Guess it did fizzle out." Instead you've moved the goalposts to increasingly random metrics to try and deny the obvious. It's kind of fascinating.