
Enter the galactic gridiron field as a Sportsman to beat your opponents in the fast-paced sport of Asterball. Play in a PVP setting where two teams battle it out in the field to see who can win with the most touchdowns.
Revenue comes from in-game items and microtransactions, which our price-based model doesn't estimate. Copies below reflect the player base, not paid sales.
Media

About
Genres
Stats
Languages: English
Engagement
Reviews
[quote][b]Note: Dead PvP game[/b] This game contains no meaningful single player content. There's no viably populated servers/active player population. This game cannot be played as intended.[/quote] This is a definite contender for one of the worst games ever made. It's an online, third-person PvP sports brawler with a sci-fi theme where you play as a Sportsman on a team to score touchdowns against another team (there are no teams, or players)... and that's generous, this is really just a janky train wreck of a game that has more to do with platforming than American Football. So, "Asterball" is a dead PvP game. Why did it fail? It's video game autopsy time! [i]Almost every PvP exclusive game on Steam fails.[/i] Only a tiny proportion of them "go viral". This game failed for many of the same reasons those others fail. The chief of which is the developer thinking that their game will "go viral" without actually creating any reason for it do so. Competition amongst PvP centric games is extreme, and there's only a finite player base to appeal to. This game failed to reach any kind of critical mass and died as a result. Let's go into some of the reasons this particular game failed to appeal to gamers, despite the zero up front cost. First and foremost, there's no meaningful single player content. The developer gambled that other players would be an acceptable substitute for adding storytelling, level design etc to the Game. They lost that bet. Without a huge community of players or single player content to add a lasting value to the game, the game dies. Developers must learn that other players are not an acceptable substitute for adding content to a game. The technical execution of this game is shallow and simplistic, just enough to tick the boxes required to get something (anything) published on Steam, rather than investing the huge amount of effort and budget needed to create a fully fledged, comprehensive, high quality product. This feels like a tech demo more than a full game. Despite not being in Early Access, it's obvious this is an incomplete product. Developers have an obligation to deliver complete, not partially done products to gamers, that shouldn't be controversial. Whatever the excuses may be, it does no service to gamers for incomplete products polluting Steam like this. It makes it harder for gamers to find complete games, and it makes it harder for ethical developers who do the right thing to find their audience. The graphics here are particularly awful, so bad that it actually stands out as one of the worst looking games on Steam. Quite an accomplishment. It's a big contributor to the failure of the game to attract gamers despite having no up-front cost. Gaming is a primarily visual medium, and if developers want to succeed, they must understand that it's not an area for compromise. Even though the game looks pretty bad (and decent visuals are a minimum requirement for any game), we can be fairly sure this is not an asset flip. This is because the game assets look so bad, no self respecting asset creator would publish them. That's a fail. There's also the old adage that those who lack the budget and talent to make their own game assets of any level of quality usually lack the budget and talent to do the rest of the job of game development properly, too. Now on to pricing and value for gamers. This is "free" enough (not every "free" game in the "free" section is truly free, there's usually some hidden price tag), at least you won't be expected to spend any more money after you download this, but just because something is free doesn't mean it's good, and the cost of a game is more than just financial, your time is valuable too. In terms of public reception, this failed. There's over 130 million unique gamers visiting Steam every month. SteamDB showed the game peaked at [b]only 7 concurrent players[/b]... this is a dismal public reception. This was so bad they couldn't even give it away. All other issues aside (any of which would disqualify this from being worth your time), this is a game that relies on other players for it to be viable, and because there's not enough players, it's not viable. I can't recommend anyone downloads this, it's basically dead.
Related
Related
Trends
Concurrent players on Steam, sampled daily since tracking started.
Hours played at review time, across 34 reviews with recorded playtime.
looks like a cool game but sadly 0 players nobody plays it
frickin amazing, requires 2 people at least
This is a very fun and competitive game. This game reminds me of football but if it was digital
Momentum
Pace estimated from the game's recent review growth (our daily snapshots) at its own sales-per-review ratio — a momentum signal, not booked sales.
Audience
Estimated from the language of this game's reviews — a proxy for where players are, not official Steam demographics.
Related
| Drunken Wrestlers 2 | $2M | 18.7K | 87% | $3.99 |
| SEDAP! A Culinary Adventure | $341.2K | 638 | 70% | $14.99 |
| ❂ Hexaluga ❂ Weapon and Shield ☯ | $326.2K | 44 | 27% | $199.99 |
| Retail Company Simulator | $286.7K | 738 | 91% | $5.99 |
| First Person Tennis - The Real Tennis Simulator | $285.6K | 370 | 88% | $24.99 |
| Coffee Talk Tokyo | $277K | 480 | 90% | $14.99 |