But... It doesn't really matter if it updates at different times? I mean, the point was that they'd both been in the top 100 for the same length of time. The exact place it is at the moment is irrelevant. If you scrolled down further, you'd see Helldivers, or you can look at the weekly data which is static. If you did either of those very easy things, you'd see that Helldivers has indeed been on the list for 29 weeks as of now. It is not pointless to argue about it because we don't have the same data, it's just pointless for you to argue because it's an easily verifiable fact.

And no, I am not arguing Helldivers 2 is more successful. I'm arguing that its success is more surprising. Because... that's what the thread is about... 

Based on the "it's Pokemon with guns" thing, I would expect a lot of people check out Palworld, and then for it to lose the bulk of its playerbase, or fizzle out, quickly unless it was better than it appeared at first glance. Seeing as Palworld did about what I expected, Helldiver's success was more surprising.

You objected to that because you didn't think Palworld "started out strong and fizzled out quickly". So, what we were debating, as I have pointed out several times, is whether Palworld indeed did fizzle out quickly. That's where the difference between its peak and its current amount of users is relevant. Because, that's what fizzling out quickly means, losing a lot of players over a short period of time.

Helldivers 2 is not directly relevant to that point, as I pointed out several times, but since they launched around the same time and both started high on the charts, it is probably the best available comparison. When we compare them, we see that despite Palworld starting with about 5 times as many users, but by two months in, it had half as many players as Helldivers. And it stayed about half of what Helldivers 2 was doing until its update, where it briefly took a lead that it has already lost. Based on this, or just looking at the Palworld's user base or sales figures trends in isolation, it is pretty clear that Palworld fizzled out quickly. 

But... It doesn't really matter if it updates at different times? I mean, the point was that they'd both been in the top 100 for the same length of time. The exact place it is at the moment is irrelevant. If you scrolled down further, you'd see Helldivers, or you can look at the weekly data which is static. If you did either of those very easy things, you'd see that Helldivers has indeed been on the list for 29 weeks as of now. It is not pointless to argue about it because we don't have the same data, it's just pointless for you to argue because it's an easily verifiable fact.

And no, I am not arguing Helldivers 2 is more successful. I'm arguing that its success is more surprising. Because... that's what the thread is about... 

Based on the "it's Pokemon with guns" thing, I would expect a lot of people check out Palworld, and then for it to lose the bulk of its playerbase, or fizzle out, quickly unless it was better than it appeared at first glance. Seeing as Palworld did about what I expected, Helldiver's success was more surprising.

You objected to that because you didn't think Palworld "started out strong and fizzled out quickly". So, what we were debating, as I have pointed out several times, is whether Palworld indeed did fizzle out quickly. That's where the difference between its peak and its current amount of users is relevant. Because, that's what fizzling out quickly means, losing a lot of players over a short period of time.

Helldivers 2 is not directly relevant to that point, as I pointed out several times, but since they launched around the same time and both started high on the charts, it is probably the best available comparison. When we compare them, we see that despite Palworld starting with about 5 times as many users, but by two months in, it had half as many players as Helldivers. And it stayed about half of what Helldivers 2 was doing until its update, where it briefly took a lead that it has already lost. Based on this, or just looking at the Palworld's user base or sales figures trends in isolation, it is pretty clear that Palworld fizzled out quickly. 

Glancing at the player counts over the years, it looks like Palworld definitely held up a lot stronger than Helldivers 2. With 1.0 launch showing to be another success, yeah I'd definitely give this one to Pocketpair.

In revenue, Helldivers 2 has consistently ranked far above Palworld and never left Steam's top 100. Palworld was often (mostly?) outside the top 200. And sequels are historically much less likely to explode in popularity compared to new IP's. Tons of IP's were popular from the first game, whereas not many sequels/successors outsell their best selling predecessor 5 to 1. As a matter of fact I can't think of a single title coming close to this other than maybe Monster Hunter World?

But Palworld was pretty much early acess until now, and we don't know how much higher it can go. They both shattered expectations.

Eh. More revenue doesn’t necessarily mean greater “sales success” as much as it means the publisher behind the game maybe milked consumers more for their money. And that’s a fair point regarding Steam top charts (assuming true? Do we have source for this?), though again, the higher consistent concurrent player count looks a lot stronger to me than placing more frequently in top sales charts. Palworld was frontloaded yes but it did a better job maintaining its base.

But that’s just my take. I can see where you’re coming from.

Steam top sellers and rankings are public information just like concurrent players. Helldivers 2 has been in the top 100 (typically in the top 50 and in the top 3 with every big update) for 129 consecutive weeks, while Palworld just re-entered the top 100 (currently 4th). Helldivers 2 also held its players better relative to its opening, but again, the comparison isn't exactly fair to Palworld which was in early access, and things may change going forward.

Revenue is a better sales metric than concurrent players. Palworld had an explosive start but it's clear that Helldivers 2 outlegged it until now.

I still lean towards Palworld being the bigger surprise, but an argument can be made for Helldivers 2 which achieved something that not a single sequel I know ever did. Helldivers 2 will sell like 6 times more than the first game, and generate like 20 or 30 times more money 🤑 Granted it costs a lot more to maintain and update, being a live service game and all that.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that any content that Palword has received in the past two years have been free content? If that's the case, then you are basically comparing revenue from pure units solds of one game to revenue from traditional online monetization of the other.