I don't really care for what is likely to become a response to my post (I know you would like to attest, you know who you are), but I find this kind of comparison to being that of arrogance. For starters it's using EGS data, not Steam data with BL3's sales, and for another, it's using a combination of console data in conjunction with the EGS data.

Comparing a AAA game with "non" AAA games priced below $60 also makes for a bad comparison. imagine if they were comparing Ooblets sales on EGS and consoles vs whatever AAA game is being sold on Steam, it's absurd and just makes the whole thing appear like some stupid self made, self fulling prophecy. 

I find the whole point of the tweet to being disingenuous at the end of the day. 

I know 1 or two on here are very highly likely to disagree, but I don't really care for what is already illogical and pointless, because if this is a one off comparison, then why make one like it in the first place, and if it isn't, why aren't there more, why haven't there been more in the past 2 and a half years in this exact same format? (You have to admit it is rather illogical).

It's made for publicity my friend. LIttle purpose otherwise.

Cherry picked data to look better for investors. Of course a new popular game on three platforms is going to do well in its opening months or even first year. Quite impressive that it still has an active player base though of course thats across many platforms. And its not even on the top 50 on Steam lol which should tell you about how well the game well on PC - https://store.steampowered.com/stats/ with F2P dominating - as it should.

But also probably shows that they can still make a lot of revenue off sales and aftersales (DLC/MTX) on PC due to Epic shelling out millions for exclusivity.

Yes I'm aware, but even that reason serves little purpose and will just get lost in the sea of info that is twitter.

What I think will be more interesting and a better comparison, is that Tiny Tina game being directly compared to EGS sales of BL3 and then use the combined data from consoles, because if we're going to play by an investors "logic", may as well use theirs to show them up (because I know that spinoff isn't going to do as well as BL3 itself, esp with the lack of free console upgrades and again, store exclusivity). 

Anytime Randy Pitchford gets involved with anything, it becomes disingenuous.

Yea it's a pretty nonsense comparison but I wouldn't think too much about it cause the people that made the comparison sure didn't

Which cloud service you recommend or other ways to backup and store data? Thanks. 

Yeah I mean showing concurrent players is pretty useless metric that in itself however that could means they could be more consumer engagement - thus more people spending money on in-game content, or not. Though comparing with select cherry picked data is big yikes and pretty useless metric. And I doubt they'll put data in comparison for Tiny Tina's Wonderlands since that since it'll be quite unfavourable for them lol.

And like the comparison to something like GTA V is laughable. People spend so much money on that game and buy it multiple times for ingame currency. Which I fail to see how Gearbox can come anywhere near to that despite more players one one select month (of release). I feel graphics like this, shows investors like "hey.. look at our game and how well its doing!"

If anything this will probably want to make them make more looter/live games since they are trending rn and that BL's is Gearboxes biggest and hottest IP. Sad because they are stilling on a select IP's like Duke Nukem and doing jack shit on it - give it back to 3DRealms damn you!!!

Mega never disappoints. 

More censorship nonsense from Blizzard - Link via WoWhead.

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Meanwhile WoW players..

Honestly, so pointless. They need to fix the damn games first starting with Retail.