• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

DOOM: The Dark Ages

It is also possible that Doom is not the commanding IP that it used to be. Not sure how much marketing they did with it.

has decent review score on psn 4.8 but 3400 reviews seems low to me.

I know it's early, some games get traction later instead of at launch.
 
Dan_D said:
I was set to agree with you as I thought you were talking about Dragon Age Veilguard. If you mean Doom The Dark Ages, I have no idea where you are getting that from. Granted I'm only about 5 or 6 hours in, but I've heard no woke dialog or seen anything of the sort. Games can sell badly and perform badly on Steam for reasons other than being woke trash.
Click to expand...
I am not sure if you did not get the sarcasm or adding a new step to it...
 
socK said:
Shadows went broke from woke and launched at twice the player count compared to Doom on Steam

Ergo, we can extrapolate using science that Doom is also plagued by woke, perhaps to an even more debilitating degree

It's a perfectly logical correlation

Gamers want Stellar Blade and this is what they gave us

View attachment 731106
Click to expand...
That is Kreed Maykr. I don't get your point.

Thira:
1000001343.jpg

Prince Ahzrak:
1000001345.jpg
 
Darunion said:
It is also possible that Doom is not the commanding IP that it used to be. Not sure how much marketing they did with it.

has decent review score on psn 4.8 but 3400 reviews seems low to me.

I know it's early, some games get traction later instead of at launch.
Click to expand...

the game is not doing as well as Doom (2016) or Eternal...seems like a good game but outside of the new Dark Ages setting they didn't evolve the gameplay enough...some other things like the soundtrack and $70 price also play a role
 
evhvis said:
You actually need to have the numbers from all the platforms to actually know how popular a game is.
Click to expand...
You never have all the numbers, publishers often hide them even from investors. SteamDB is the best you'll ever get. Give me one good reason why steam charts shouldn't be used as an indicator of a game's popularity and through that sales performance.
evhvis said:
Some of you want games you don't like to be viewed as failures so you extrapolate what you want from a small portion of the dataset and spend lots of time trying to convince others that the game they like is a failure.
Click to expand...
That's projection. I was shocked and disappointed by the lackluster numbers too. I don't want Doom Dark Ages to be a failure, I think it actually seems better than both eternal and 2016, I was on the fence about buying it, and only put it off due to having numerous unfinished games I want to play first.

Have you heard about the term representative sample size? If steam is not a good representation of the whole gaming community then nothing is. Exit polling is usually sampled on just a few thousand people and it's very rarely more than 5% off when extrapolated to the whole voting base.
evhvis said:
I don't really understand why it is so important for people that some games must be a failure.
Click to expand...
If I was a betting man I'd bet that it is actually you who want it desperately to be a success, because you like it. I'm just a realist, I accept that some games I like aren't popular. And some games I hate are popular. I don't need to invent narratives to dismiss steam charts just because it doesn't match how I feel about a game. I think even double of this performance would be disappointing for Doom, given that Eternal had a 100k peak.

evhvis said:
Sometimes I wonder if some of you enjoy posting negative stuff about games you don't like a lot more than playing games you actually like.
Click to expand...
As I've said I don't dislike this game, so your assumption is false right out of the gate. It has nothing to with whether stuff is negative or positive, what triggers me to post is when I see someone pushing a narrative that I think is clearly false.
evhvis said:
I'm telling you that you do not have enough data to conclusively say the game is a failure or a success so the burden of proof is on you to show us that the game is a failure.
Click to expand...
The proof is the steam charts, you can't just dismiss it because you don't like what it says. Otherwise the burden of proof is on the publisher to show that the game is a success. All they need to do is release the numbers. You know if they are hiding them then the game is performing bellow their projections, or anything they could be proud of.
evhvis said:
Their strategy seems to be to grow gamepass, more than outright financial gain on a single game. If people keep gamepass to play other stuff they wouldn't have bought then it will be a success, but if people only get gamepass for 1-2 months and then cancel then it is not ideal for them. Only time will tell if they succeed or not.
Click to expand...
If it's a blowout success on games pass then there should be millions of extra new sign ups on games pass right now. Surely they'd be banging their chest if that was the case. Sorry, but as long as the only available data point is steam we have to accept that as reality.
 
socK said:
It's right in front of your face, why do you try so hard to deny it

View attachment 731133

It so obviously exceeds the Fibonacci threshold of mandibular divergence; the whole jawline collapses into one telling conclusion
Click to expand...
She reminds me of a tik toker I saw that was a woman and pretty hot too until she converted to a woman at age of 12. My reaction was same as your conclusion ... Fuck. I washed my eyes with bleach and deleted tik tok.
 
Tbh after Eternal, I'm in "wait and see" mode with this new DOOM.

Eternal was good, maybe close to great, but it wasn't magic like 2016.

And what id software did to Mick Gordon, well, I'm happy to make them work for my money.

And I think a lot of people are in my boat.
 
Last edited:
Armenius said:
I think it was Forza Motorsport where they said Steam only represented about 17% of total sales, so no, Steam player numbers are not a good consistent data point to use.
Click to expand...
You think, or you know? I searched but found no articles mentioning 17% or even comparisons between games pass and steam for FM. I'm not saying it can't be true, but I'd need more than a "I think" as proof.
Armenius said:
And as pointed out in other threads so often, Steamdb numbers are player numbers, not sale numbers. Sites that claim to be able to extrapolate sales numbers from the player numbers are full of shit.
Click to expand...
Of course they are player numbers, do you think I am a retard? Nobody is suggesting that it sold 30k copies. But surely you can accept that less players mean less sales. There is some fluctuation, and the most representative is the first weekend after release. I'm not saying this tells us the total copies sold down to the last digit, but surely a game with 100k peak will have outsold a game with 30k peak by at least 2:1, at least on steam, or you want to deny that?
 
M76 said:
You think, or you know? I searched but found no articles mentioning 17% or even comparisons between games pass and steam for FM. I'm not saying it can't be true, but I'd need more than a "I think" as proof.

Of course they are player numbers, do you think I am a retard? Nobody is suggesting that it sold 30k copies. But surely you can accept that less players mean less sales. There is some fluctuation, and the most representative is the first weekend after release. I'm not saying this tells us the total copies sold down to the last digit, but surely a game with 100k peak will have outsold a game with 30k peak by at least 2:1, at least on steam, or you want to deny that?
Click to expand...
Yeah, saying steam numbers don't matter is like saying AMC numbers don't matter for ticket sales, as there are other theatres.

But if a movie sold fuck-all tickets at AMC, there is a very low chance it sold elsewhere.

Or saying Spotify numbers don't matter because YouTube Music exists. I can tell you, if an album isn't very popular on Spotify, it's probably the same story on YouTube Music.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
3 million players, guessing game pass is doing some numbers, people don't want to pay full price for a 20 hour campaign.
1747775119587.png
 
Still haven't bought Dark Ages yet, $70 for a game I'll finish in a couple weekends seems kinda steep. Most say this game is 18 to 20 hours long? Ugh, I remember when games were 30 to 40 hours long.
 
Zorachus said:
Still haven't bought Dark Ages yet, $70 for a game I'll finish in a couple weekends seems kinda steep. Most say this game is 18 to 20 hours long? Ugh, I remember when games were 30 to 40 hours long.
Click to expand...
Most single-player games back in the day weren't 30 to 40 hours long. That's the length of RPG's back in the day. It wasn't until we got the large open world monsters that they hit 100+ hours long to complete. I can't recall seeing a shooter that actually lasted for 30-40 hours.
 
M76 said:
You never have all the numbers, publishers often hide them even from investors. SteamDB is the best you'll ever get. Give me one good reason why steam charts shouldn't be used as an indicator of a game's popularity and through that sales performance.

That's projection. I was shocked and disappointed by the lackluster numbers too. I don't want Doom Dark Ages to be a failure, I think it actually seems better than both eternal and 2016, I was on the fence about buying it, and only put it off due to having numerous unfinished games I want to play first.

Have you heard about the term representative sample size? If steam is not a good representation of the whole gaming community then nothing is. Exit polling is usually sampled on just a few thousand people and it's very rarely more than 5% off when extrapolated to the whole voting base.
Click to expand...
So now Bethesda is saying it is the "biggest launch" and that player numbers are way ahead of Eternal, but feel free to keep creating your strawman out of steam player numbers.

M76 said:
If I was a betting man I'd bet that it is actually you who want it desperately to be a success, because you like it. I'm just a realist, I accept that some games I like aren't popular. And some games I hate are popular. I don't need to invent narratives to dismiss steam charts just because it doesn't match how I feel about a game. I think even double of this performance would be disappointing for Doom, given that Eternal had a 100k peak.
Click to expand...
You are making the assumption that a game is a success for me if it is popular. If I have fun in a game then it is a success, not because a lot of others play it. Just tired of seeing the same old argument about steam charts dictating how many people actually play a game that is out on several web stores and consoles.
 
Dan_D said:
Most single-player games back in the day weren't 30 to 40 hours long. That's the length of RPG's back in the day. It wasn't until we got the large open world monsters that they hit 100+ hours long to complete. I can't recall seeing a shooter that actually lasted for 30-40 hours.
Click to expand...
Goes back to our old discussion of quality vs quantity. Give me 20 hours of greatness vs. 30-40 hours of good. Most people just don't see things that way unfortunately.
 
Zorachus said:
Still haven't bought Dark Ages yet, $70 for a game I'll finish in a couple weekends seems kinda steep. Most say this game is 18 to 20 hours long? Ugh, I remember when games were 30 to 40 hours long.
Click to expand...
FPS games used to be 8-12 hours way back in the day, but then a lot become much shorter after CoD came out. Suddenly 6-8 hour FPS games were the norm and only a few went past the 10 hour mark. The games that were 20+ were usually RPGs until they started making shooters like Far Cry 2 in large open worlds. It is still rare for a linear FPS game to surpass the 20 hour mark as most still clock in at or below 12 hours at normal progression.

I'm close to half way and I've spent around 8.5 hours, but I also grab most secrets so 16-20 hours is probably on the mark for the majority of players. One could probably rush through it quite a bit faster than that by only doing objectives. The good thing about the newer Doom games is that your skill level and perception of how to play the game changes a lot with time spent in the game. This gives them pretty good replay value for me, so I can easily spend way more time in them than the first play through.
 
Decko said:
3 million players, guessing game pass is doing some numbers, people don't want to pay full price for a 20 hour campaign.
Click to expand...
yup. im not paying $90CAN for the base game, so i went to gamepass...
 
Decko said:
Goes back to our old discussion of quality vs quantity. Give me 20 hours of greatness vs. 30-40 hours of good. Most people just don't see things that way unfortunately.
Click to expand...

100% agreed. And there is such a thing as too much. Not everything needs a sequel, and too much of anything can lower the experience. Be it a movies run time, a games run time, or too much food.

evhvis said:
FPS games used to be 8-12 hours way back in the day, but then a lot become much shorter after CoD came out. Suddenly 6-8 hour FPS games were the norm and only a few went past the 10 hour mark. The games that were 20+ were usually RPGs until they started making shooters like Far Cry 2 in large open worlds. It is still rare for a linear FPS game to surpass the 20 hour mark as most still clock in at or below 12 hours at normal progression.
Click to expand...

8-12 hours was the norm though I don't really recall 6-8 becoming the norm. I think that was mainly a CoD thing. I know the most recent MoH games were around 6-7 hours and those were copying CoD, but Pacific Assault was 12 hours. Far Cry, Half Life 2, Metro 2033, Metro Last Light, the recent Wolfenstein games, Halo, Gears of War, Crysis games, all sub 20 hour play times but averaged around 12-16 hours.

For some reason people seem to want their shooters to be turned into RPG games which is something I don't understand.
 
I don't do this very often but I think I might refund this on Steam. I played through the first 3 missions in <3 hours and am just not that into it.. I'm ok with the shield throw and the parries are ok, but it's super weird to me to have some things breakable only by shield throw or shield bash, not into the power glove stuff with the pickups, not into the mech stuff at all, highly doubt I'd enjoy whatever happens with the dragon.. Hell even the gold pickups for upgrades.. When it comes to some of the character models posted earlier I find most of them laughable. I might be alone on this but I really don't like the plethora of difficulty slider options, it's crazy how much you can tailor it. I don't hate the game but don't like it enough to be comfortable with having $70 in it, it's really just not scratching that itch like I'd hoped, plus if this isn't selling as well as everyone expected a decent sale might not be too far off.
 
w35t said:
I don't do this very often but I think I might refund this on Steam. I played through the first 3 missions in <3 hours and am just not that into it.. I'm ok with the shield throw and the parries are ok, but it's super weird to me to have some things breakable only by shield throw or shield bash, not into the power glove stuff with the pickups, not into the mech stuff at all, highly doubt I'd enjoy whatever happens with the dragon.. Hell even the gold pickups for upgrades.. When it comes to some of the character models posted earlier I find most of them laughable. I might be alone on this but I really don't like the plethora of difficulty slider options, it's crazy how much you can tailor it. I don't hate the game but don't like it enough to be comfortable with having $70 in it, it's really just not scratching that itch like I'd hoped, plus if this isn't selling as well as everyone expected a decent sale might not be too far off.
Click to expand...
3 missions in you have not seen anything yet. Game gets much better later, with much better weapons, upgrades and battles.

I was not a big fan of first few missions either, but it all started to click for me later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: w35t
like this
KickAssCop said:
Not going to play any games until I see steam numbers.
Click to expand...
I will explain this once for you and the cadre of shit posters who lack basic reading comprehension skills.

The game looks good and I have every intention of playing it. The observations about Steam numbers are simple postulations about apparent under performance and that this may be related to pricing. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
3 mil almost a week after release sounds like a disappointment for sure. Especially with all the trannies in the game.
 
Just as disappointing as the 3 million players for Slop Creed Shadows which featured actual trannies.
 
KickAssCop said:
3 mil almost a week after release sounds like a disappointment for sure. Especially with all the trannies in the game.
Click to expand...

Blade-Runner said:
Just as disappointing as the 3 million players for Slop Creed Shadows which featured actual trannies.
Click to expand...
Given the actual sales are probably only half that if Bethesda/id are lucky, its disappointing in terms of revenue. For whatever reason, this game looks like a financial flop. (Though that ultimately depends on its actual development budget.)
 
Genre: I think the low sales are mainly just because it's a tradditional single player action FPS. That kind of game just isn't very popular anymore. The genre has it's fans but it's small compared to others.

Price: $70. A very steep price to pay for a couple days worth of gameplay for most people. It may be a super high quality experience, but that's just not how most people think about it. They think price for gameplay hours.

Graphics: The graphics are impressive in many ways, but they're also not. They targetted a very fast frame rate, whereas most games target a super high quality screen shot. Most people get impressed by a super high quality screen shot or watching a 30 fps trailer on youtube. You can't expereince the smoothness and responsiveness of the game unless you get to see it in person. The graphical quality for the performance is great in Dark Ages but it's max quality is not impressive compared to other games.
 
Dan_D said:
Most single-player games back in the day weren't 30 to 40 hours long. That's the length of RPG's back in the day. It wasn't until we got the large open world monsters that they hit 100+ hours long to complete. I can't recall seeing a shooter that actually lasted for 30-40 hours.
Click to expand...
Yes, most single player games used to be 10-15 hours long at best. Saying that people don't want to pay for a game that is not 100 hours long is pure cope. 30k peak on Steam is clearly in the flop realm for an AAA title. This doesn't mean the game is necessarily low quality, but something definitely went wrong either in marketing or with the timing of the release. Dropping right when everyone is still playing Oblivion Remastered and Expedition 33 is I think what did it in.
evhvis said:
So now Bethesda is saying it is the "biggest launch" and that player numbers are way ahead of Eternal, but feel free to keep creating your strawman out of steam player numbers.
Click to expand...
It's not hard to read between the lines of corporate speak. You'll note they didn't say fastest to sell 3 million copies. IDK why are you so desperate to believe that this is actually a great a success.
Also a strawman is attributing things to people that they didn't say, not whatever you're trying to imply here. Drawing logical and reasoned conclusions from player data is definitely not a strawman argument.
evhvis said:
You are making the assumption that a game is a success for me if it is popular. If I have fun in a game then it is a success, not because a lot of others play it. Just tired of seeing the same old argument about steam charts dictating how many people actually play a game that is out on several web stores and consoles.
Click to expand...
C'mon, you honestly want me to believe that your definition of a "success" is whether you personally like a game or not? So then why would you even care about the numbers?
 
Flogger23m said:
For some reason people seem to want their shooters to be turned into RPG games which is something I don't understand.
Click to expand...
I don't think people want that. It's corporate bobbleheads demanding developers to add RPG elements into every game cuz they think that will surely give them BG3 success.

When in reality that makes them fall on their assess between two chairs. People who want a shooter don't like the RPG elements forced on them, and actual RPG fans won't care about a shooter just because it has some very basic ultimately redundant RPG mechanics.
 
Got the pet dragon. Game has good pacing etc. sometimes I feel cheated a bit as I missed like one secret in level 2 and now will have to replay it to 100% the damn thing.

Overall, it is a solid romp thus far. I think 22 chapters should be decent length. I am playing on ultra violence and feel that I die atleast once or twice if I am not careful. Still haven’t gotten into the rhythm of things as too many buttons to press.
 
KickAssCop said:
Still haven’t gotten into the rhythm of things as too many buttons to press.
Click to expand...
I think that what would be a concern with me. A good example of adding too much "bloat" to a game would be Horizon Forbidden West. The first game Horizon Zero Dawn was great with minimal buttons to know and press. I've been watching Doom the Dark Ages being played, and it seems that has too many button options for selecting your weapon that you want to use.
 
Executioner said:
I think that what would be a concern with me. A good example of adding too much "bloat" to a game would be Horizon Forbidden West. The first game Horizon Zero Dawn was great with minimal buttons to know and press. I've been watching Doom the Dark Ages being played, and it seems that has too many button options for selecting your weapon that you want to use.
Click to expand...
It's the same as the last two games with the added weapon class. The only one I actively switch between is the shotgun/super shotgun. The Super Shotgun fully upgraded melts everything while the regular shotgun feeds you armor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top