Build to Survive [TESTING] vs Better Avatar?

Build to Survive [TESTING] currently leads with 4,709 concurrent players against 592, a 8.0Γ— advantage. On all-time peak the record belongs to Build to Survive [TESTING] at 7,729 concurrent players, versus 2,110. Momentum favours Build to Survive [TESTING]: +15.7% week over week versus -12.6% for Better Avatar?. Lifetime, Build to Survive [TESTING] has more visits (267.9M vs 73.7M). Full side-by-side history for Build to Survive [TESTING] and Better Avatar? is charted above.

Build to Survive πŸ› οΈ [TESTING]
4,709
playing now
6,224 24h peak Β· 267.9M visits
VS
Better Avatar? πŸ‘•
592
playing now
1,261 24h peak Β· 73.7M visits

Player count history

Build to Survive [TESTING]Better Avatar?

Head to head

Metric Build to Survive [TESTING] Better Avatar?Difference
Playing now4,7095924,117 (8.0Γ—)
24h peak6,2241,2614,963 (4.9Γ—)
24h average4,8307904,040 (6.1Γ—)
7-day peak7,5571,9265,631 (3.9Γ—)
7-day average5,1671,0244,143 (5.0Γ—)
30-day peak7,5571,9265,631 (3.9Γ—)
All-time peak7,7292,1105,619 (3.7Γ—)
24h changeβ–Ό 5.7%β–Ό 15.0%β€”
7d changeβ–² 15.7%β–Ό 12.6%β€”
Total visits267.9M73.7M194.2M (3.6Γ—)
Visits (24h)420.7K130.2K290.5K (3.2Γ—)
Visits (7d)3.3M1.1M2.2M (3.0Γ—)
Favorites5.6M3.1M2.5M (1.8Γ—)
Rating96.5%95.2%β€”
Global rank (players)#343#1,861of 7,662
Trending score-23.9-64.8β€”
CreatedAug 12, 2021Jun 6, 2025β€”
GenreSurvivalParty & Casualβ€”

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], 11 for Better Avatar?.

Build to Survive [TESTING] vs Better Avatar? β€” Player Count Comparison | RoVitals