Yggjrasil Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 15. 857 Ragna [wanakr] I love this guy's Ragna to death.
SpartasSKiLiZ Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 18. 856 Bang [stayFreeScrub] It cant....be....Noooooo!!!! (Darth Vader)...*dies*
StayFree( ' 3') Posted February 9, 2012 Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) 18. 856 Bang [stayFreeScrub] It cant....be....Noooooo!!!! (Darth Vader)...*dies* don't worry sparta...I'll make you my jester after I initiate armageddon Edited February 9, 2012 by StayFree( ' 3')
zeth07 Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 PSN - BBCSEX - Character Usage / "Popularity" [02/18/2012] (4 Days after US release, 16 Days since last checked) # of Players Who've Played Online = ~41,580 (up 4,800) # of Players Who've Played Ranked = ~32,577 (up 3,777) # of Players Who've Played These Characters At Least Once In Ranked: 1) Ragna = 11,250 ---(same) 2) Jin = 6,351 ---(up from #3) 3) Hazama = 6,262 ---(down from #2) 4) Platinum = 5,045 ---(same) 5) Noel = 4,993 ---(up from #6) 6) Relius = 4,895 ---(down from #5) 7) Hakumen = 4,880 ---(the rest are the same) 8) Tager = 4,829 9) Lambda = 4,646 10) Tsubaki = 3,395 11) Makoto = 3,015 12) Mu = 2,844 13) Bang = 2,627 14) Valkenhayn = 2,374 15) Rachel = 2,320 16) Taokaka = 1,823 17) Litchi = 1,581 18) Arakune = 1,518 19) Carl = 1,006
zeth07 Posted April 17, 2012 Author Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) It's been a while. XBL - BBCS:EX - Character Usage / "Popularity" [04/16/2012] (~2 months) # of Players Who've Played Online = 10,603 # of Players Who've Played Ranked = 8,217 # of Players Who've Played These Characters At Least Once In Ranked: 1) Ragna = 2,702 2) Jin = 1,562 3) Hazama = 1,267 4) Noel = 1,252 5) Tager = 1,248 6) Hakumen = 1,214 7) Platinum = 1,200 8) Relius = 1,189 9) Lambda = 1,049 10) Tsubaki = 804 11) Bang = 798 12) Makoto = 785 13) Mu = 730 14) Valkenhayn = 701 15) Taokaka = 588 16) Rachel = 567 17) Litchi = 506 18) Arakune = 436 19) Carl = 387 PSN - BBCS:EX - Character Usage / "Popularity" [04/16/2012] (~2 months) # of Players Who've Played Online = 56,504 # of Players Who've Played Ranked = 44,582 # of Players Who've Played These Characters At Least Once In Ranked: 1) Ragna = 16,268 2) Jin = 9,499 3) Hazama = 9,046 4) Noel = 7,757 5) Platinum = 7,292 6) Hakumen = 7,247 7) Tager = 7,237 8) Lambda = 6,923 9) Relius = 6,722 10) Tsubaki = 5,128 11) Makoto = 4,557 12) Mu = 4,358 13) Bang = 4,033 14) Valkenhayn = 3,556 15) Rachel = 3,412 16) Taokaka = 2,832 17) Litchi = 2,448 18) Arakune = 2,379 19) Carl = 1,580 Edited April 17, 2012 by zeth07 XBL = 360 lol whatever
Goldchampion200 Posted April 18, 2012 Posted April 18, 2012 wow i knew there were more people on PSN but damm thats quite the differrence kinda sad
zeth07 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Posted April 18, 2012 wow i knew there were more people on PSN but damm thats quite the differrence kinda sad Honestly speaking, both systems probably only sold 15k-25k each outside Japan. For the JP numbers (PSN) it was at 36k before the US release and it apparently sold 38k Week 1 in JP. Now it is at 56k and sales are at ~63k. That difference can pretty much give a ballpark idea of how much it has sold outside of Japan, then just add some arbitrary amount for the # of people who haven't played it online. My guess for PS3 would be 25k-30k sold outside Japan. Now for 360, no sales numbers even showed up during JP release. And now looking at the number that have played online on 360 2 months AFTER US release it gives a pretty good reason why. 10k have played online, if we're generous we might say they've sold 20k+ total for 360 Worldwide. Obviously we have no idea how accurate the "sales" numbers are but all things considered, it is not a good look for Extend no matter how you look at it, especially for 360. To give a better idea: CT (PS3) = ~507k Global CT (360) = ~323k Global CS1 (PS3) = ~270k Global CS1 (360) = ~188k Global CSE (PS3) = ~63k "Global" - I don't think this is accurate at all at least compared to the others, but considering how many have played online, it could be close enough. CSE (360) = ????? (10k+ at least I guess) In other words, they need to step their shit up with the next game or else things aren't going to get any better.
Star-Demon Posted May 6, 2012 Posted May 6, 2012 To give a better idea: CT (PS3) = ~507k Global CT (360) = ~323k Global CS1 (PS3) = ~270k Global CS1 (360) = ~188k Global CSE (PS3) = ~63k "Global" - I don't think this is accurate at all at least compared to the others, but considering how many have played online, it could be close enough. CSE (360) = ????? (10k+ at least I guess) In other words, they need to step their shit up with the next game or else things aren't going to get any better. That's pretty troubling. Yeah, I'd say they'll need to really put forth an honest effort to get back to CT levels. And let's be real here - 500 thousand playing your game is pretty damn good. The next BlazBlue is going to have to be marketed and supported very strongly by the company. They need to show up to events - we need to show up to events. Merchandising Merchandising MOICHENDISING!
zeth07 Posted May 6, 2012 Author Posted May 6, 2012 Do the PSN numbers include both the ps3 and vita? No, I just took it from the PS3's numbers.
noxxle Posted May 6, 2012 Posted May 6, 2012 Is BB:CSE currently more active online than BB:CT, despite the disparity in sales?
zeth07 Posted May 6, 2012 Author Posted May 6, 2012 Is BB:CSE currently more active online than BB:CT, despite the disparity in sales? Logically speaking I would say no.
noxxle Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Checked the leader boards this morning for the PC version of Calamity Triggers and there were almost 100,000 listed. How is that possible?
zeth07 Posted May 8, 2012 Author Posted May 8, 2012 (edited) Checked the leader boards this morning for the PC version of Calamity Triggers and there were almost 100,000 listed. How is that possible? Cause Calamity Trigger was a "brand new" game/series so interested people bought it to at least see what it was like. PC getting 100k is reasonable compared to PS3s 500k and 360s 300k, so it's not that surprising. Continuum Shift getting lower numbers isn't surprising because the "average fighting game fan" already knew what to expect because of CT and it was no longer "new". So only people actually interested in the game would buy it by comparison. Extend pretty much took this a step further because on the surface it is "just another version" of CS, which means you REALLY gotta be a fan of the game to have a reason to buy it compared to the others. That's just the way I look at it though. And let me rephrase my previous post about CSE not being more active than CT. What I meant was CSE NOW isn't more active than CT WAS when it first came out / before CS1 released. Just so there's no confusion that someone might think CT even NOW is more active than CSE because I doubt that, or at least it'd be really weird. Edited May 8, 2012 by zeth07
cookiehours Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Those numbers are troubling...didn't think it was that bad.
noxxle Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 If 100,000 are listed on leader boards, doesn't that mean they have logged in recently? Doesn't seem possible for the pc version. I rarely see more than 2-3 non-ranked lobbies.
noxxle Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 According to the following post, the Vita's leader board lists 12,800 players. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/632918-blazblue-continuum-shift-extend/62736539 Can anyone else confirm?
zeth07 Posted May 9, 2012 Author Posted May 9, 2012 If 100,000 are listed on leader boards, doesn't that mean they have logged in recently? Doesn't seem possible for the pc version. I rarely see more than 2-3 non-ranked lobbies. I never had the PC version but if it works like the other games then the numbers would just be the total that have at least played the game online. Now if you actually looked at the monthly thing (assuming it's there), that's a different story, and would be surprising to me at least. The leader boards never reset to my knowledge for these games. So if you go to Rebel Points or whatever they were called in CT and go to the last ranked person, that would be the number of people who have played online on PC since it released.
noxxle Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 I never had the PC version but if it works like the other games then the numbers would just be the total that have at least played the game online. Now if you actually looked at the monthly thing (assuming it's there), that's a different story, and would be surprising to me at least. The leader boards never reset to my knowledge for these games. So if you go to Rebel Points or whatever they were called in CT and go to the last ranked person, that would be the number of people who have played online on PC since it released. The monthly filter lists 230, the weekly 100. That seems more accurate.
Airk Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 This is a little bit depressing, but it's pretty much par for the course - even if you look at sales for fighting games that sell really well (SF4, mostly) you'll observe that while SF4 sold like 3million copies, Super SF4, which was a better game, only sold like 1.8. Same deal with MvC3/UMvC3 - the latter sold something like a third of what the former did. This absurd rehash/rebalance nonsense just bleeds people out of the franchise. I said it before and I'll say it again now: Extend should have been a free DLC balance patch, a paid DLC purchase for Relius, a paid DLC purchase for story mode, _AND_ an "all in one" disc release for new players that was compatible with a fully patched (for free) BBCS. All the "$40 disc with rebalance and one new character" trick did was piss people off and fragment the player base. It makes me sad, but I don't really expect "further entries" in the series to do particularly well, though I guess a new chapter in the story might bring in people who only want story mode stuff.
Circuitous Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Sequels to fighting games usually don't sell as well because everyone who either got their fill or decided they hate the game has no need to buy them. A series is only new and exciting for so long. In the rare instance that it's a monetary concern, they're not adequately dedicated to the franchise to carry on anyway. So yes, the next version will sell worse than the previous, unless they add something particularly amazing that makes it a practically new game, because we're getting to the point where only the legitimately dedicated will even bother to pick it up. You can complain about the current method all you want, but before BlazBlue and SF4 the idea of patching a fighting game didn't even exist, and the "new release once a year" setup was the only way to keep a game updated. It's not something a developer's going to jump right into after years/decades of doing it the old way. The only FG developers consistently doing updates instead of new releases are NetherRealms and (eventually) Reverge, and there's a reason for that.
Airk Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 You can complain about the current method all you want, but before BlazBlue and SF4 the idea of patching a fighting game didn't even exist, and the "new release once a year" setup was the only way to keep a game updated. It's not something a developer's going to jump right into after years/decades of doing it the old way. The only FG developers consistently doing updates instead of new releases are NetherRealms and (eventually) Reverge, and there's a reason for that. Sure; But I really don't think it's too much to ask that if these companies are going to update their games for the new millenium or whatever, that they do a little more than than give them a shiny new coat of high resolution paint. I would expect them to try to treat the games like games that came out in 2010/11/12 rather than games that came out in 1996. I consider the whole thing even more embarassing in light of the fact that ARCADES got patched to CS:EX, while consoles did not... AND the fact that Arksys managed to GET IT RIGHT for CS2, and then go back and do it wrong. I'm not obligated to support that kind of business decision making.
toanenadiz Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 You do realize that they are a business and have to make money, right? They can't keep updating the game for free, especially considering BB isn't as popular as other franchises. It was surprising that they did that for CS2 and that was great, but you can't expect that to be the norm. If you don't like it, you can just not buy Extend but complaining on DL isn't going to change anything. And I'm pretty sure that arcades have to pay a portion of what they earn from Extend to ArcSys, which is probably why it got patch for free, since they will still be making good money on it.
zeth07 Posted May 9, 2012 Author Posted May 9, 2012 Sure; But I really don't think it's too much to ask that if these companies are going to update their games for the new millenium or whatever, that they do a little more than than give them a shiny new coat of high resolution paint. I would expect them to try to treat the games like games that came out in 2010/11/12 rather than games that came out in 1996. I consider the whole thing even more embarassing in light of the fact that ARCADES got patched to CS:EX, while consoles did not... AND the fact that Arksys managed to GET IT RIGHT for CS2, and then go back and do it wrong. I'm not obligated to support that kind of business decision making. I tend to look at Extend like you would "Game of the Year editions" of other games or whatever they want to call their versions that get packaged with all the DLC previously released. It added a new character (could've been DLC), it had balance changes (could've been DLC), and it included 3 more characters (previously DLC), but then they added other new things as well. Story modes for the DLC characters, the extra stories, Abyss Mode, more challenge mode combos, the in-game "store" to unlock previously DLC items, the CT retelling. Having to somehow incorporate all that into DLC would probably take enough work that it might as well be a new game. As a fan of the game, this would probably be more than enough to warrant a $40 purchase, which is already $20 cheaper than "regular" priced games anyway. Now a "casual" fighting game fan or someone only half interested might just see it as another version of CS like I mentioned in one of my previous posts. So they see little reason in purchasing the game after already owning CS, then they form the same argument you make and try to quantify what it takes to make it "it's own game" and not DLC. None of this is really surprising to me though since it isn't hugely popular to begin with. I do however expect the next major version of BlazBlue to do better, and if it doesn't......that'd suck.
Circuitous Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Sure; But I really don't think it's too much to ask that if these companies are going to update their games for the new millenium or whatever, that they do a little more than than give them a shiny new coat of high resolution paint. Apparently it is. I consider the whole thing even more embarassing in light of the fact that ARCADES got patched to CS:EX, while consoles did not... ARCADES have to buy multi-thousand-dollar cabinets or several-hundred-dollar games to keep updated normally. The CS:EX arcade patch was an easier and more economical way for them to get the product out and still make some good money. AND the fact that Arksys managed to GET IT RIGHT for CS2, and then go back and do it wrong. Nebulous concepts of right and wrong notwithstanding, it's ArcSys's decision with regards to how to issue an update, and they'll do whatever they think makes the most business sense. I'm not obligated to support that kind of business decision making. Indeed, you're not, nor are we obligated to listen to your ranting again and again. Put up or shut up: if you don't like how they do business, walk away. Plenty of other people did.
Recommended Posts