Build to Survive vs [FPS] Flick
Build to Survive currently leads with 4,166 concurrent players against 2,055, a 2.0× advantage. On all-time peak the record belongs to Build to Survive at 7,252 concurrent players, versus 4,793. Momentum favours [FPS] Flick: -2.7% week over week versus -5.8% for Build to Survive. Lifetime, [FPS] Flick has more visits (467.9M vs 409.6M). Full side-by-side history for Build to Survive and [FPS] Flick is charted above.
Build to Survive 🛠️
4,166
playing now
6,972 24h peak · 409.6M visits
VS
[FPS] Flick
2,055
playing now
3,926 24h peak · 467.9M visits
Player count history
Build to Survive[FPS] Flick
Head to head
| Metric | Build to Survive | [FPS] Flick | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Playing now | 4,166 | 2,055 | 2,111 (2.0×) |
| 24h peak | 6,972 | 3,926 | 3,046 (1.8×) |
| 24h average | 5,404 | 2,814 | 2,590 (1.9×) |
| 7-day peak | 7,086 | 4,213 | 2,873 (1.7×) |
| 7-day average | 5,004 | 2,898 | 2,106 (1.7×) |
| 30-day peak | 7,086 | 4,213 | 2,873 (1.7×) |
| All-time peak | 7,252 | 4,793 | 2,459 (1.5×) |
| 24h change | ▼ 1.2% | ▼ 3.7% | — |
| 7d change | ▼ 5.8% | ▼ 2.7% | — |
| Total visits | 409.6M | 467.9M | 58.3M |
| Visits (24h) | 551K | 495.7K | 55.3K |
| Visits (7d) | 3.5M | 3.5M | 23.2K |
| Favorites | 10.9M | 377.6K | 10.6M (29.0×) |
| Rating | 96.2% | 92.9% | — |
| Global rank (players) | #368 | #756 | of 8,283 |
| Trending score | 29.7 | -9.9 | — |
| Created | Feb 12, 2021 | Sep 25, 2025 | — |
| Genre | Survival | Shooter | — |
Other comparisons
Both games are sampled on the same schedule and plotted on a shared time axis, so the comparison is like for like. Peaks, averages and growth come from RoVitals's own recorded history — 12 days for Build to Survive, 13 for [FPS] Flick.