I was just explaining to a friend that doesn’t know much about the game ;
He was asking me “so how many people see that castle there?” I told him everyone.
His thinking was there was 100 people per server as in if there was a beckon … there was 1 beckon just for the people on that server. I had to explain that it was only 100 allowed on each planet but that there was only 1 planet per entire game.
Then I started thinking - There are less than 50 planets right? And i’ve never once been locked out of a world cause its full. (Maybe once for 10 seconds it was full).
So lets say 40 planets… thats 4,000 people if every planet is full which it mostly isnt. So lets call it 3000 concurrent players.
Is there a massive leniency in going past the cap or is the player population really that low?
Lets even bump it up to 9000 people to account for diff times.
I’m willing to do free advertising for you guys lol. I just want this game to last for years so I guess it’s just me worrying. I’m just hoping the player count keeps growing.
Edit: also didnt take into account that players dont play every day so I guess the population is pretty good for a new release.
Yes, concurrent player wise, it’s about 600-700 or so at its peak. Total people that own the game is much higher, but it’s still not a huge number. SteamSpy suggests the owner base is between 20,000 to 50,000 people.
Considering next patch is supposed to be a new content patch that the devs seem pretty excited about, hopefully that will bring back some of the older players as well as some new players as well
Bear in mind this game is PC and PS4, so worth doubling your assumptions. Even then, I’d urge caution about making assumptions regarding what’s needed for the game to survive/thrive.
Thinking about the structure of the game, as its publisher, I would rather it grow at a steady rate over a long period of time in a sustainable way, then welcome in 100,000 new players in a week and subsequently struggle to scale.
Because the game is entirely player-generated, growth is a balance - the economy, the planet map, the portal networks, everything in the game suits a long-term view. There’s a worrying tendency these days for people to look at concurrent users of games which are entirely unrepresentative and assume because this game doesn’t yet match them, it’s a terrible thing.
As things stand there are a good number of active players each day (hint: not ‘concurrents’ which is active players at any one time) and the engagement rates are very promising. The universe and its economy are in the process of stabilising after a wipe and fresh start. The nature of the game is such that if there were a million active players tomorrow, it wouldn’t make the game experience better for anybody.
So I totally understand your perspective here btw - but too much too soon isn’t our priority. I guess, in other words, no cause for concern at this point!
Yeah its definitely nice not having an overwhelming amount of people. Gleam club and cosmetics will also help the game keep servers mint. Its kinda nice having a smaller base too as sort of like a small hometown feel vs a big city vibe where players almost know most of the community
It took YouTuber’s posting tons of videos of people playing Minecraft for MC to become more popular.
Minecraft, when it was first released back in 2010, didn’t have a whole lot going for it. Over the course of the years, Mojang kept updating the game with more blocks, better redstone abilities, command block improvements, etc…
I would hope that Boundless now is like Minecraft in 2010 and Boundless’ developers are planning on adding all kinds of new blocks, hopefully automation possibilities, etc…
