What specific games are you comparing? Looking by the numbers, Darktide seems to be doing more or less the same as Vermintide 2.

Tbf all 40k games that are currently out are pretty trashy. Yes including the failed Dissapointment that was Darktide. 

Looking forward to Space Marine II tho, the game looks amazing so far. 

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
You talk about sales yet your charts do not show sales at all.

Also, notice how there's few WHFB games but a lot of 40k games. So you do have playerbases more concentrated for the former. See, this is how you get skewed pictures with badly assembled data.

Considering that total sales data is rarely shared by companies, we need to look at the stats which are available to us, which are peak and current player counts. I'm not making any assertions here beyond that WH40K IP is not a guaranteed success. Do you want to argue about that?

​

SerPus#7395 wrote:

What specific games are you comparing? Looking by the numbers, Darktide seems to be doing more or less the same as Vermintide 2.

I picked up the top 10 most played games, as titles in the charts. Its a safe assumption that they have the biggest playerbases.

And yes, Darktide is doing similarly to Vermintide, but that's my point - 40K IP is not providing any visible advantage over fantasy.

​

Captain_Rex#1635 wrote:

Tbf all 40k games that are currently out are pretty trashy. Yes including the failed Dissapointment that was Darktide. 

Looking forward to Space Marine II tho, the game looks amazing so far. 

Agreed, Space Marine 2 looks like it could do very well!

​

Wood_Sprite#1284 wrote:

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
You talk about sales yet your charts do not show sales at all.

Also, notice how there's few WHFB games but a lot of 40k games. So you do have playerbases more concentrated for the former. See, this is how you get skewed pictures with badly assembled data.

Considering that total sales data is rarely shared by companies, we need to look at the stats which are available to us, which are peak and current player counts. I'm not making any assertions here beyond that WH40K IP is not a guaranteed success. Do you want to argue about that?

Except you cannot derive sales from concurrent player numbers. Three Kingdoms had higher sales than WH2 but lower concurrent player numbers. Single-player games in general have lower concurrent player numbers because there's no incentive to play whenever other people are playing at the same time.

The reason the Total War Warhammer games have high concurrent player numbers than usual for TW is simple, it's MP. Do not bother telling me how MP is just 5% of 1% or whatever, that should have been debunked at least now when CA made a very visible and concerted effort to support MP and they have been doing so since launch. Campaign wise Total War Warhammer is a total bust with abysmal campaign completion rates that have not budged with any of the major content releases but MP-wise it provides a very cheap alternative to TT battles and that's a huge appeal and the secret to Total War Warhammer's success.

A hypothetical 40k Total War could go into the same direction because 40k TT is even more expensive.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

Considering that total sales data is rarely shared by companies, we need to look at the stats which are available to us, which are peak and current player counts. I'm not making any assertions here beyond that WH40K IP is not a guaranteed success. Do you want to argue about that?

Except you cannot derive sales from concurrent player numbers. Three Kingdoms had higher sales than WH2 but lower concurrent player numbers. Single-player games in general have lower concurrent player numbers because there's no incentive to play whenever other people are playing at the same time.

The reason the Total War Warhammer games have high concurrent player numbers than usual for TW is simple, it's MP. Do not bother telling me how MP is just 5% of 1% or whatever, that should have been debunked at least now when CA made a very visible and concerted effort to support MP and they have been doing so since launch. Campaign wise Total War Warhammer is a total bust with abysmal campaign completion rates that have not budged with any of the major content releases but MP-wise it provides a very cheap alternative to TT battles and that's a huge appeal and the secret to Total War Warhammer's success.

A hypothetical 40k Total War could go into the same direction because 40k TT is even more expensive.

Concurrent player count is meant to only show the current popularity. For a corelation to sales, the peak player count is the stat to consider. Any game which sells well generally has higher peak player count.

And yeah MP could have an impact on concurrents, I have nothing to argue about there.

Personally, I think Space Marine 2 will be very popular but, like everything, crap 40K games fail like every other. It's also worth remembering that Total War games have a popularity ceiling, those thinking that 40K will easily outsell WHTW maybe counting their chickens a little to soon.

Obviously 40k games can sell well. Dawn of War did well, and I can point to others.

However, the 40k community is also unforgiving and if you pull something like Dawn of War 3 they will abandon you in a heartbeat.

​

Wood_Sprite#1284 wrote:

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

Considering that total sales data is rarely shared by companies, we need to look at the stats which are available to us, which are peak and current player counts. I'm not making any assertions here beyond that WH40K IP is not a guaranteed success. Do you want to argue about that?

Except you cannot derive sales from concurrent player numbers. Three Kingdoms had higher sales than WH2 but lower concurrent player numbers. Single-player games in general have lower concurrent player numbers because there's no incentive to play whenever other people are playing at the same time.

The reason the Total War Warhammer games have high concurrent player numbers than usual for TW is simple, it's MP. Do not bother telling me how MP is just 5% of 1% or whatever, that should have been debunked at least now when CA made a very visible and concerted effort to support MP and they have been doing so since launch. Campaign wise Total War Warhammer is a total bust with abysmal campaign completion rates that have not budged with any of the major content releases but MP-wise it provides a very cheap alternative to TT battles and that's a huge appeal and the secret to Total War Warhammer's success.

A hypothetical 40k Total War could go into the same direction because 40k TT is even more expensive.

Concurrent player count is meant to only show the current popularity. For a corelation to sales, the peak player count is the stat to consider. Any game which sells well generally has higher peak player count.

And yeah MP could have an impact on concurrents, I have nothing to argue about there.

Nope. Concurrent player numbers are concurrent player numbers and represent nothing else until you provide additional data like player retention and new players being added to the pool. If the concurrent players are largely the same set of people then you cannot gauge the game's success based on those numbers alone especially with WH3 inheriting most of its playerbase from WH1 and WH2. 

Take Gladius for example. From the concurrent player numbers you might get the idea that the game is an abysmal flop, yet it has been continously supported with new content and patches for more than half a decade now, so the impression would be totally wrong.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

Nope. Concurrent player numbers are concurrent player numbers and represent nothing else until you provide additional data like player retention and new players being added to the pool. If the concurrent players are largely the same set of people then you cannot gauge the game's success based on those numbers alone especially with WH3 inheriting most of its playerbase from WH1 and WH2. 

Take Gladius for example. From the concurrent player numbers you might get the idea that the game is an abysmal flop, yet it has been continously supported with new content and patches for more than half a decade now, so the impression would be totally wrong.

Tbh I'm not sure why you're arguing about the concurrent numbers. The goal of the post is to consider the sales, which is better related to the peak player count. There is a level of inaccuracy due to not having direct sales numbers, but its a relatively reliable stat on how the game did at release. 

If you wish to see an estimate of current total owners of the game, I think Steamspy has that kind of data, but its pretty large range sets rather than actual numbers (like 1 milliom to 5 million players) and therefore not very useful.

​

Nyxilis#3646 wrote:
However, the 40k community is also unforgiving and if you pull something like Dawn of War 3 they will abandon you in a heartbeat.

Relic themselves abandoned Dawn of War 3 before the community did.

Talking about sales then posts concurrent player numbers

LOL

If ya don´t have the ACTUAL sales numbers maybe you should cease making unfounded claims in threads like this one.

​

Captain_Rex#1635 wrote:

Tbf all 40k games that are currently out are pretty trashy. Yes including the failed Dissapointment that was Darktide. 

Looking forward to Space Marine II tho, the game looks amazing so far. 

Gladius, Rogue Trader, Battlesector and Chaosgate are pretty darn' good games.

Mechanicus is a great game, didn't sell a vast amount due to the nature of the game. It's not guaranteed that 40K will initially outsell 3K. Initial concurrent players as well as number of reviews certainly gives us an idea of sales.

Anyone thinking 40K will massively outsell WH3 probably doesn't understand the limits of a strategy/RTS game in terms of sales.

​

Reeks#2417 wrote:

Talking about sales then posts concurrent player numbers

LOL

If ya don´t have the ACTUAL sales numbers maybe you should cease making unfounded claims in threads like this one.

Are you also unable to see the other stat, peak player numbers? Or perhaps you believe that this stat doesn't have a correlation to how well a game sold at launch?

Do we not use the Steamdb numbers after every DLC here to see how well it is selling?

Considering that I never mentioned anywhere that I have actual sales data, is it hard to see what datasets I'm trying to relate here?

​

davedave1124#4773 wrote:

Mechanicus is a great game, didn't sell a vast amount due to the nature of the game. It's not guaranteed that 40K will initially outsell 3K. Initial concurrent players as well as number of reviews certainly gives us an idea of sales.

Anyone thinking 40K will massively outsell WH3 probably doesn't understand the limits of a strategy/RTS game in terms of sales.

This is what I'm getting at. The 40K license is not going to guarantee 4 times the player count of WH3, at least the peak player data suggests that. So CA need to make sure that their current successful game keeps performing well.