The game is set in a post-apocalyptic utopia where you rebuild society after a global collapse. A massive online multiplayer where everyone plays on an exact replica of planet earth. Grow your town, trade with other players, face challenges and discover the rich history of the planet.
Intriguing. I wonder after what length of time the world will “fill up” and it’ll be hard to find anywhere to start fresh? I guess this is something that the dev tries to tune consciously. In a similar vein, I wonder whether it will be best as a single player to start near someone else (to trade with
Basically never.
Using steamdb for concurrent steam users, there are currently 31M people online. Even if we take the peak for every day in October (assume it is about 40M each day), 40*31=1240 or 1.2 billion people.
The world population clock says we are at 8.2 billion with vast swathes of uninhabited and low population density land. Yes, we have some ridiculously dense population centers but much of that is based on resources and human interaction which would be similar constraints in a video game.
So the “meme” places and whatever is defined to have the best resources will be full up. But they will never run out of space even if this becomes a global phenomenon where everyone connects so they can wank about how pop culture in the 80s was the best.
Like the other comment says, players build cities. A quick search says there are 81 cities with over 5m people eachin the world. Most city builders we’re building at the scale of these large cities, so that means over 81 players would be over the population we have in the real world. If there are thousands of players, yeah, it’s going to get tight. If there are tens of thousands, there’s not enough space.
Basically never.
Using steamdb for concurrent steam users, there are currently 31M people online. Even if we take the peak for every day in October (assume it is about 40M each day),
40*31=1240or 1.2 billion people.The world population clock says we are at 8.2 billion with vast swathes of uninhabited and low population density land. Yes, we have some ridiculously dense population centers but much of that is based on resources and human interaction which would be similar constraints in a video game.
So the “meme” places and whatever is defined to have the best resources will be full up. But they will never run out of space even if this becomes a global phenomenon where everyone connects so they can wank about how pop culture in the 80s was the best.
I’m not sure what world population has to do with anything. It’s a city builder - players are building cities, not people.
Like the other comment says, players build cities. A quick search says there are 81 cities with over 5m people each in the world. Most city builders we’re building at the scale of these large cities, so that means over 81 players would be over the population we have in the real world. If there are thousands of players, yeah, it’s going to get tight. If there are tens of thousands, there’s not enough space.
But those 81 cities take up a tiny portion of global land area.
A quick Excel import of the table from Wikipedia suggests that the “urban area” for those 81 cities is 190 K KM(2).
Total land mass on early 148.94 M KM(2).
So the world land could hold ~63,400 such cities.
It would likely take many years to build a city like Guadalajara (#81 on the wikipedia list).