Build to Survive [TESTING] vs [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death

[FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death currently leads with 7,217 concurrent players against 4,507, a 1.6× advantage. On all-time peak the record belongs to [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death at 10,397 concurrent players, versus 7,729. Momentum favours Build to Survive [TESTING]: +12.8% week over week versus -13.3% for [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death. Lifetime, [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death has more visits (326.1M vs 268.3M). Full side-by-side history for Build to Survive [TESTING] and [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death is charted above.

Build to Survive 🛠️ [TESTING]
4,507
playing now
6,297 24h peak · 268.3M visits
VS
[⏰FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death
7,217
playing now
10,142 24h peak · 326.1M visits

Player count history

Build to Survive [TESTING][FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death

Head to head

Metric Build to Survive [TESTING] [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of DeathDifference
Playing now4,5077,2172,710 (1.6×)
24h peak6,29710,1423,845 (1.6×)
24h average4,9156,7781,863
7-day peak7,55710,1422,585
7-day average5,1466,5501,404
30-day peak7,55710,1422,585
All-time peak7,72910,3972,668
24h change 1.2% 14.3%
7d change 12.8% 13.3%
Total visits268.3M326.1M57.7M
Visits (24h)433K514.5K81.4K
Visits (7d)3.3M3.8M474.1K
Favorites5.6M639.6K5M (8.8×)
Rating96.5%87.3%
Global rank (players)#368#231of 7,866
Trending score-16.513.3
CreatedAug 12, 2021Mar 8, 2025
GenreSurvivalSurvival

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 — 11 days for Build to Survive [TESTING], 12 for [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death.