Build to Survive [TESTING] vs Cage Fishing

Build to Survive [TESTING] currently leads with 4,769 concurrent players against 770, a 6.2Γ— advantage. On all-time peak the record belongs to Build to Survive [TESTING] at 7,729 concurrent players, versus 2,247. Momentum favours Cage Fishing: +51.4% week over week versus +16.0% for Build to Survive [TESTING]. Lifetime, Build to Survive [TESTING] has more visits (267.9M vs 88.5M). Full side-by-side history for Build to Survive [TESTING] and Cage Fishing is charted above.

Build to Survive πŸ› οΈ [TESTING]
4,769
playing now
6,224 24h peak Β· 267.9M visits
VS
Cage Fishing 🐟
770
playing now
1,169 24h peak Β· 88.5M visits

Player count history

Build to Survive [TESTING]Cage Fishing

Head to head

Metric Build to Survive [TESTING] Cage FishingDifference
Playing now4,7697703,999 (6.2Γ—)
24h peak6,2241,1695,055 (5.3Γ—)
24h average4,8937984,095 (6.1Γ—)
7-day peak7,5571,9265,631 (3.9Γ—)
7-day average5,1796724,507 (7.7Γ—)
30-day peak7,5571,9265,631 (3.9Γ—)
All-time peak7,7292,2475,482 (3.4Γ—)
24h changeβ–Ό 4.3%β–² 25.7%β€”
7d changeβ–² 16.0%β–² 51.4%β€”
Total visits267.9M88.5M179.4M (3.0Γ—)
Visits (24h)425.5K78.7K346.8K (5.4Γ—)
Visits (7d)3.3M500.2K2.8M (6.7Γ—)
Favorites5.6M558.1K5M (10.0Γ—)
Rating96.5%98.2%β€”
Global rank (players)#348#1,680of 7,662
Trending score-20.352.6β€”
CreatedAug 12, 2021May 2, 2025β€”
GenreSurvivalSimulationβ€”

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 β€” 11 days for Build to Survive [TESTING], 12 for Cage Fishing.

Build to Survive [TESTING] vs Cage Fishing β€” Player Count Comparison | RoVitals