Share.

14 Comments

  1. ChrisRollsDice on

    It seems irresponsible to label games with no players but live yet empty servers as “dead.” Those are still playable; the audience simply lost interest.

    Edit: Maybe I’m misunderstanding whether “dead” in the chart means the same thing as “dead” on the third slide.

  2. Zestyclose-Finding77 on

    Do I understand it right: At Risk == not Dead?

    If so, 313/738 is pretty good

    Fifa alone has over 6 Dead games and only one at Risk. Its really impressive how many games are still playable

  3. So who’s going to pay to keep the servers up, certificates renewed, security protocols up to date etc. for some old game that 10 people want to play but don’t pay a subscription for? I don’t see how this is an issue

  4. Why show two pie charts where one is just a subset of the other? It presents no new information and is just confusing.

  5. I feel like there have been more than 400 game titles that have been shut down but what do I know.

    Also the data source is an analysis of dead games, its gonna skew a particular way

  6. The third slide says that the “rendered unplayable” definition is “used on all videos on this channel”. This could be made more clear, after all this is not a video and we’re not on a YouTube channel.

    Also, listing multiple definitions in common use is fine for an hour-long discussion, but probably not the best idea for a few quick slides on Reddit.

  7. Dieinhell100 on

    I am only here to comment how I recognized the Warcraft 2 Paladin even though I haven’t touched the game in well over a decade.

  8. All the more reason why holding on to physical media is more important than ever

    Couldn’t be happier I gave away almost none of my old Gameboy, GBA, DS or 3DS games

  9. Meaningless data without showing the control. Maybe games not requiring a connection to the publisher do even worse?