he wasnt saying xfire data is unreliable, he said he used xfire to see trends because he doesnt have 'any other' reliable data sources. as in, xfire was his only reliable data source.

also too find it funny how/why many people put so much energy into putting a game down, like it's gonna englighten the people that enjoy playing it.

Originally posted by Vato26

What I have stated in another thread has nothing to do with this one. In this thread I am analyzing XFire trends and how I believe it shows the general trend. I have repeteadly, in this thread, said that the game seems to follow the same trends as other triple A themeparks, short of maybe Aion, and I still believe this to be true.

Now if that will be closer to LotrO or the WAR debacle remains to be seen. It all depends on when the population stabilises. For that to happen soon Bioware will have to start pushing out some high level content as more and more are hitting level 50 and realise that there isnt much to do at that level.

Actually, what you have stated in the past shows intent in your misuse of X-fire statistics.  You are using them in a way that verifies what you already want to be true.  When, in fact, X-fire statistics are only valid when applying them within the X-fire userbase.  You keep stating that X-fire shows the trends without providing one bit of evidence that isn't easily refuted.  Yet, even after your evidence has been refuted, you keep stating that X-fire shows trends.

That is your prejudice opinion of my intentions, one which I will not address. However I have said from the very beginning that XFire does not prove anything but due to lack of any other reliable data I use it too see trends. However the title of the thread is that the game has peaked on xfire which it seems to have. If you dont care about XFire then I dont know why you are even responding to this thread. 

Nope.  No prejudice involved what-so-ever.  Just stating the facts of your past statements.

As to your comments "from the very beginning", you did no such thing.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4647156

"No real change during the christmas holidays so it seems this game has reached its peak which is about the same like Aion had during its release. No the question is how it will retain its subscribers. My guess is that same day next month it will have dropped 10-20%."

Also, using unreliable data, which you just stated that you don't believe X-fire statistics are reliable (in blue), is unreliable.

As to the red, If you don't like SWTOR, then I don't know why you are even posting on these forums.  I mean, you have already stated that you want SWTOR to fail.  So, that means you hate the game.  Why are you even on these forums?  See... double-edged sword statements are always so much fun.

First of all nowhere in that statement did I say that XFire PROVES anything, this is your construct and I have repeteadly denied saying anything of the sort, if I did then please quote me on that. I BELIEVE the data is representative, that is different from proving it. You are twisting my words to make it sound the way you want them to.

I never said I dont like SW:TOR. I am playing it and will continue playing it for yet another month. I do however think that it is not innovative and that it brings the MMORPG genre backwards but I have in other threads said that the game is a good single player game with interesting storylines and that is why I am playing it. If you are so adamant to discredit me as a forum poster why are you not mentioning those parts? 

In any case I do not need to defend myself to you. This thread is about XFire stats, which are declining and I believe, due to lack of statistical realiable and provable data, to use them to see the general population trends of the games I play. If you have other more reliable data you are welcome to post them.

Originally posted by Sephiroso

he wasnt saying xfire data is unreliable, he said he used xfire to see trends because he doesnt have 'any other' reliable data sources. as in, xfire was his only reliable data source.

 Correct

also too find it funny how/why many people put so much energy into putting a game down, like it's gonna englighten the people that enjoy playing it.

It is not for the people that are currently enjoying it but rather for people who are thinking if they should buy it or not. In any case, I dont think saying that the game will lose 10-20% subscribers after a month is putting it down. It is merely saying that this game is not the second coming of WoW which many here believed it to be. It is just another Themepark with big budget studio behind it.

Originally posted by Yamota
 

EDIT:  NM... I'm not stooping to that level.

Fact remains, X-fire statistics used outside of X-fire are invalid due to no controls for sampling variables.

Fact remains, anyone who tries to use X-fire statistics outside of X-fire is using invalid data, therefore their evidence is invalid.

Fact remains, X-fire only measures people who currently use it and hours played.  It doesn't measure subscriptions.

Fact remains, SWTORarena measures server loads, not population.  It has also been officially stated that Bioware adjusts the server population maximums when needed.

Originally posted by Fratman

Originally posted by dubyahite

Originally posted by Fratman

Originally posted by Rasputin

Every single decline of games could be read on X-Fire, no matter how much both devs and fans whined. Soon after the stock price fell, and then the devs had to admit the truth.

It will be no different this time, where it looks like - as of writing - that SWTOR has dived by 1/4th of the population, from some 78.000 to some 59.000, on a still heftily declining curve.

It's not just xfire. There are other server tracking sites that show a clear decline.

The game is a dud, plain and simple. Bioware spent 200 million and people are barely making it through 1 month before becoming completely fed up and bored.

 

 

The game is hardly a dud.  That is just downright silly to say. 

200 million bucks spent. 5.9 player score on metacritic. You're silly for disagreeing.

Selective use of online user reviews??  Two can play it that game!!!!

Gamespot  (2300 user votes) - Average Score 8.6.

Metacritic (~1000 votes) - Average Score 5.9.

Now which one has a higher sample size??

Critical REviews from Respected Sources - Average Score 85 (8.5).

The critical reviews are in line with the higher sample size with gamespot.

Do you know what the average rating for the game is on MMORPG.com by users? 8.1.    Mmorpg.com is far the most negative mmorpg community on the net and yet their pessimistic and jaded subscribers give it a higher score than metacritic.

So your selective use of ONE websites user reviews to prove your point is poor form.  Step your game up!

For those of you arguing that the sub numbers are not going down are also delusional.  Of course they're going down.  All newly released mmorps' in the past 7 years have had their sub numbers decrease after the free month.  The operative question is by how much?  Before anyone brings up Eve... I don't consider a Microsoft Excell MMORPG to be the same as Aion, Rift, Wow, Aoc, Warhammer, LOTRO.... EVE is just something completely different.

If the subs for SWTOR are decreasing at a far lower rate than the industry average, than SWTOR is more successful than all the other mmo's that came before it (aside from WoW).  WoW created the mainstream industry for games that resemble its design.  It's also the same reason that people are burned out on the genre.

Originally posted by Vato26

As, has been stated a multitude of times, swtorarena, which mmo-junkies has the same data, is based off server loads, not server population.

As to the red, no, but you have stated on these very forums that you want the game to fail.

Server loads ARE server populations. Sure it isn't accurate to a single person level but it is accurate to a certain degree. Now you'll try to pull the card that Bioware changes the populations that represent high, low, heavy, etc. As I stated before this would be obvious on the graphs as you would see spikes up or down depending on how they adjust them, but we can easily draw lines from the peaks/valleys(besides the obvious server downtimes) and have it fit within the projected decline. So either Bioware is increasing population caps for High, standard, etc OR the populations are declining. Then you will say that it doesn't distinguish between subs and hours played, but once again I'll make the assertion that if a players hours played declines so do their chances of a resub. 

You keep demanding proof/facts that no person outside of Bioware/EA has. We need to use the data that is available to us which is currently Xfire, server trackers, and forums. Scientists use this all the time to figure out things that we don't have direct data on. They connect the dots with the data they have and make predictions based on that. Using imperfect data or unreliable data does have the risks of the prediciton being wrong, but unless you have another source of data thats the best you can do. So by all means give me a better source of data and I will be the first one to change my thoughts on SWTOR's future, but until then I gotta go with what we have and that is some servers are now ghost towns, people asking for merges, xfire numbers dropping, and server tracker populations dropping.

* nevermind.

Originally posted by Distaste

Originally posted by Vato26

As, has been stated a multitude of times, swtorarena, which mmo-junkies has the same data, is based off server loads, not server population.

As to the red, no, but you have stated on these very forums that you want the game to fail.

Server loads ARE server populations. Sure it isn't accurate to a single person level but it is accurate to a certain degree. Now you'll try to pull the card that Bioware changes the populations that represent high, low, heavy, etc. As I stated before this would be obvious on the graphs as you would see spikes up or down depending on how they adjust them, but we can easily draw lines from the peaks/valleys(besides the obvious server downtimes) and have it fit within the projected decline. So either Bioware is increasing population caps for High, standard, etc OR the populations are declining. Then you will say that it doesn't distinguish between subs and hours played, but once again I'll make the assertion that if a players hours played declines so do their chances of a resub. 

 

You keep demanding proof/facts that no person outside of Bioware/EA has. We need to use the data that is available to us which is currently Xfire, server trackers, and forums. Scientists use this all the time to figure out things that we don't have direct data on. They connect the dots with the data they have and make predictions based on that. Using imperfect data or unreliable data does have the risks of the prediciton being wrong, but unless you have another source of data thats the best you can do. So by all means give me a better source of data and I will be the first one to change my thoughts on SWTOR's future, but until then I gotta go with what we have and that is some servers are now ghost towns, people asking for merges, xfire numbers dropping, and server tracker populations dropping.

That is false.  Server loads =! server populations.  Server loads measure how full the servers are.  It doesn't measure the number of people on the server.  Thus, it doesn't measure server populations.

Scientists also focus on controlling extraneous variables so that their tests measure what they want to measure.  There are absolutely no controls set up outside of X-fire.  Thus, using X-fire statistics outside of X-fire means they are inherently invalid.  And, using invalid data means that your conclusion on that invalid data is invalid.  No matter how much you want it to be so, it's still completely invalid.

Also, thanks for proving your agenda via the red.  Keep on using your invalid data in any way you can so you can fulfill your self-serving agenda.

Originally posted by Vato26

That is false.  Server loads =! server populations.  Server loads measure how full the servers are.  It doesn't measure the number of people on the server.  Thus, it doesn't measure server populations.

Scientists also focus on controlling extraneous variables so that their tests measure what they want to measure.  There are absolutely no controls set up outside of X-fire.  Thus, using X-fire statistics outside of X-fire means they are inherently invalid.  And, using invalid data means that your conclusion on that invalid data is invalid.  No matter how much you want it to be so, it's still completely invalid.

Also, thanks for proving your agenda via the red.  Keep on using your invalid data in any way you can so you can fulfill your self-serving agenda.

Wrong part in red, ofc you can still be right even with faulty data. You can even be right without any kind of data to back you up. Its called coincidence. Its actually quite common, infact the less data you use to form your opinion, and the simpler your thesis, the greater the chance to be right by coincidence <-- hypothesis right there. One example of that would be old greeks postulating the existance of atoms, but there are probably hundreds more.

Thats also why a proper scientific approach always first and foremost focuses around creating a hypothesis and trying to disprove it by finding a case where it not applies. Exactly because discrediting the source is not proof of a hypothesis being wrong, after all it could still be right by coincidence! If you can find no way to disprove a hypothesis, then it stands. Doesn't mean its right, contrary to popular belief scientist are not so arrogant that they assume they are always right, but its still a valid thesis.

Its just pointless to ask for facts to prove someone right if you can't provide facts to prove them wrong. Xfire being not representative of general gamers doesn't disproof anything, unless you know how big the derivation between them is. Its not proof, its anecdotal evidence. There might be a derivation, or not ... it might make a difference, or not. We don't know, and thats half of science right there.

Sometimes i wonder where the idea comes from that science is based around cold hard facts and provable data ... i blame hollywood. The real number of actual scientific theories(often called laws) that are widely accepted as truth is actually quite low(Law of Thermodynamics, invariance of speed of light, conversation of mass-energy and of momentum, electrostatic laws ... that about sums it up i think). Otherwise scientists kinda go with the flow and simply change theories if they prove wrong later on.

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by zymurgeist

The tldr would be:

Ha Ha see the game is dying!

Bullshit.

Lather, rinse, repeat 250,000 times.

Who is saying the game is dying in this thread? Not me atleast.

 

You're taking away old mans Netz Kewl, let him have it

There's certainly a trend for high peaks declining and lows going lower. It's following the trend other games have had so far.

January 23rd 2012 the number of XFire users playing is 8,637. While Rift is 463, Aion is 924 and WoW is 19,115.

According hours are SW:ToR 44783 (5,2h per user), Rift 2280 (4,9h per user), Aion 3921 (4,2h per user), WoW 83313 (4,4h per user).

I think the question here should be how low will the graph and users number go?

Please show me statistical proof that shows the percentage that those players represent towards the total gaming population for their respective games.  Also, please show me statistical proof that shows that these decreased hours are attributable to decrease in subscriptions rather than a decrease in number of hours played.

Otherwise, you have proven that you are misusing statistics for your own self-serving agenda.

What agenda? I'm playing the game and am planning to get a sub for month once this included time is over. There is no hidden agenda, you should look at things more objectively.

What these numbers tell me, is SW:ToR has got past the launch-time over playing according to XFire. We will start seeing some kind of retention rate, but what it will really be will remain as a mystery until they release investors white papers.

You don't want any statistical proof, you're just activing like a ravenous fanboy that isn't open to any kind of discussion except when it includes words loving, WoW-killer, Game of the year.

I try to take it as a game, entertainment. A product I will consume for a while and pick the next flavor when I feel like a change. And part of that consuming is discussing about it and one of the most interesting aspects on MMOs (to me, at least), player base.

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by zymurgeist

The tldr would be:

Ha Ha see the game is dying!

Bullshit.

Lather, rinse, repeat 250,000 times.

Who is saying the game is dying in this thread? Not me atleast.

 

You're taking away old mans Netz Kewl, let him have it

There's certainly a trend for high peaks declining and lows going lower. It's following the trend other games have had so far.

January 23rd 2012 the number of XFire users playing is 8,637. While Rift is 463, Aion is 924 and WoW is 19,115.

According hours are SW:ToR 44783 (5,2h per user), Rift 2280 (4,9h per user), Aion 3921 (4,2h per user), WoW 83313 (4,4h per user).

I think the question here should be how low will the graph and users number go?

Please show me statistical proof that shows the percentage that those players represent towards the total gaming population for their respective games.  Also, please show me statistical proof that shows that these decreased hours are attributable to decrease in subscriptions rather than a decrease in number of hours played.

Otherwise, you have proven that you are misusing statistics for your own self-serving agenda.

What agenda? I'm playing the game and am planning to get a sub for month once this included time is over. There is no hidden agenda, you should look at things more objectively.

What these numbers tell me, is SW:ToR has got past the launch-time over playing according to XFire. We will start seeing some kind of retention rate, but what it will really be will remain as a mystery until they release investors white papers.

You don't want any statistical proof, you're just activing like a ravenous fanboy that isn't open to any kind of discussion except when it includes words loving, WoW-killer, Game of the year.

I try to take it as a game, entertainment. A product I will consume for a while and pick the next flavor when I feel like a change. And part of that consuming is discussing about it and one of the most interesting aspects on MMOs (to me, at least), player base.

im still having a laugh over the 'show me statistical proof' comment.. which is a complete mismatch in terminology if ever saw one, statistics are used to present information in a certain way, useful if your trying to sell something to someone, or persuade the bank manager your company is doing well when in fact, its on the skids.. but proof, well thats a whole different kettle of fish.. 

Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

Or maybe less people are using Xfire? I don't. I've always thought Xfire is the worst way of tracking MMO populations because not everyone uses it. It's irrelevant.

Agree

I deleted Xfire off my system.  It was kind buggering it up.  So I stopped using it.

Originally posted by Rocketeer

Originally posted by Vato26

That is false.  Server loads =! server populations.  Server loads measure how full the servers are.  It doesn't measure the number of people on the server.  Thus, it doesn't measure server populations.

Scientists also focus on controlling extraneous variables so that their tests measure what they want to measure.  There are absolutely no controls set up outside of X-fire.  Thus, using X-fire statistics outside of X-fire means they are inherently invalid.  And, using invalid data means that your conclusion on that invalid data is invalid.  No matter how much you want it to be so, it's still completely invalid.

Also, thanks for proving your agenda via the red.  Keep on using your invalid data in any way you can so you can fulfill your self-serving agenda.

Wrong part in red, ofc you can still be right even with faulty data. You can even be right without any kind of data to back you up. Its called coincidence. Its actually quite common, infact the less data you use to form your opinion, and the simpler your thesis, the greater the chance to be right by coincidence <-- hypothesis right there. One example of that would be old greeks postulating the existance of atoms, but there are probably hundreds more.  That is false.  If you gave that same statement to any form of the scientific community you would be laughed out of the room.

Thats also why a proper scientific approach always first and foremost focuses around creating a hypothesis and trying to disprove it by finding a case where it not applies. Exactly because discrediting the source is not proof of a hypothesis being wrong, after all it could still be right by coincidence! If you can find no way to disprove a hypothesis, then it stands. Doesn't mean its right, contrary to popular belief scientist are not so arrogant that they assume they are always right, but its still a valid thesis.

Thesis is also based on past scientific studies or the premise of the current study with controls in place to prevent as much extraneous variables as possible from preventing the scientists from measuring the results that they are aiming to measure.  When using X-fire statistics within X-fire, there are controls in place (required usage of X-fire to actually record the hours played).  However, there are absolutely no controls in place outside of X-fire when applying X-fire statistics outside of X-fire. 

Control is the prime part of measuring statistics.  Lack of those controls = lack of any form of validity as there's no controls in place to prevent extraneous variables from altering what the person is trying to measure.  That is something that the X-fire Fan brigade can't comprehend.

Its just pointless to ask for facts to prove someone right if you can't provide facts to prove them wrong.   Xfire being not representative of general gamers doesn't disproof anything, unless you know how big the derivation between them is. Its not proof, its anecdotal evidence. There might be a derivation, or not ... it might make a difference, or not. We don't know, and thats half of science right there.

Stop with your Strawman tactics.  They don't work.  You all made the statements and continue to use X-fire.  I, and many others have refuted them with actual scientific proceedures.  So, the burden is on you.

Sometimes i wonder where the idea comes from that science is based around cold hard facts and provable data ... i blame hollywood. The real number of actual scientific theories(often called laws) that are widely accepted as truth is actually quite low(Law of Thermodynamics, invariance of speed of light, conversation of mass-energy and of momentum, electrostatic laws ... that about sums it up i think). Otherwise scientists kinda go with the flow and simply change theories if they prove wrong later on.

Hollywood has nothing to do with it.  It's called textbooks, college courses, and actual participation in the scientific community.  Things that pretty much say that your version of nilly-willy statistical analysis is wrong.

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by zymurgeist

The tldr would be:

Ha Ha see the game is dying!

Bullshit.

Lather, rinse, repeat 250,000 times.

Who is saying the game is dying in this thread? Not me atleast.

 

You're taking away old mans Netz Kewl, let him have it

There's certainly a trend for high peaks declining and lows going lower. It's following the trend other games have had so far.

January 23rd 2012 the number of XFire users playing is 8,637. While Rift is 463, Aion is 924 and WoW is 19,115.

According hours are SW:ToR 44783 (5,2h per user), Rift 2280 (4,9h per user), Aion 3921 (4,2h per user), WoW 83313 (4,4h per user).

I think the question here should be how low will the graph and users number go?

Please show me statistical proof that shows the percentage that those players represent towards the total gaming population for their respective games.  Also, please show me statistical proof that shows that these decreased hours are attributable to decrease in subscriptions rather than a decrease in number of hours played.

Otherwise, you have proven that you are misusing statistics for your own self-serving agenda.

What agenda? I'm playing the game and am planning to get a sub for month once this included time is over. There is no hidden agenda, you should look at things more objectively.

What these numbers tell me, is SW:ToR has got past the launch-time over playing according to XFire. We will start seeing some kind of retention rate, but what it will really be will remain as a mystery until they release investors white papers.

[Removed Flaming attempt]

I try to take it as a game, entertainment. A product I will consume for a while and pick the next flavor when I feel like a change. And part of that consuming is discussing about it and one of the most interesting aspects on MMOs (to me, at least), player base.

I see that you ignored my requests for proof.  And, instead, just engaged in conjecture.

Facts that remain:

1. You do not know the percentage of the total SWTOR subscriber base that actually uses X-fire.  Therefore, using this outside of X-fire means jack squat as no one knows if the changes in hours played between the 8000-something that use X-fire and play SWTOR (very small percentage) are similar or not to the total SWTOR subscriber base.  That's what scientists call an extraneous variable that is messes with what the scientists want to measure.
2. X-fire measures hours played.  It does not measure subscription numbers.  Therefore, trying to use X-fire hours played to describe subscriber changes is completely false.

Ok, test time. 

Show of hands...how many people have paid for more than 30 days of game time on SW:TOR at this time?? (not counting multi month plans here).

Answer : NOBODY

Reason : game hasn't even been out long enough to charge for more than one month on ANYONE. 

Extrapilation from Data : Unable to determine ANY trend based on such a limited amount of data. All attempts to do so, no matter the outcome are based completely on speculation. I dont care if its a chart from him or a chart from her. We all know for a FACT that EVERY game loses people at the end of the free 30 days. WE ALL KNOW IT. So your charts, your data, ALL of it means about nothing right now. The free 30 days just ended. Now, if you want to come back with all this data in another month or two, when we can actually see a viable trend line, please feel free to do so. Until then, please stop with the guessing. 

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Pelaaja

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by zymurgeist

The tldr would be:

Ha Ha see the game is dying!

Bullshit.

Lather, rinse, repeat 250,000 times.

Who is saying the game is dying in this thread? Not me atleast.

 

You're taking away old mans Netz Kewl, let him have it

There's certainly a trend for high peaks declining and lows going lower. It's following the trend other games have had so far.

January 23rd 2012 the number of XFire users playing is 8,637. While Rift is 463, Aion is 924 and WoW is 19,115.

According hours are SW:ToR 44783 (5,2h per user), Rift 2280 (4,9h per user), Aion 3921 (4,2h per user), WoW 83313 (4,4h per user).

I think the question here should be how low will the graph and users number go?

Please show me statistical proof that shows the percentage that those players represent towards the total gaming population for their respective games.  Also, please show me statistical proof that shows that these decreased hours are attributable to decrease in subscriptions rather than a decrease in number of hours played.

Otherwise, you have proven that you are misusing statistics for your own self-serving agenda.

What agenda? I'm playing the game and am planning to get a sub for month once this included time is over. There is no hidden agenda, you should look at things more objectively.

What these numbers tell me, is SW:ToR has got past the launch-time over playing according to XFire. We will start seeing some kind of retention rate, but what it will really be will remain as a mystery until they release investors white papers.

[Removed Flaming attempt]

I try to take it as a game, entertainment. A product I will consume for a while and pick the next flavor when I feel like a change. And part of that consuming is discussing about it and one of the most interesting aspects on MMOs (to me, at least), player base.

I see that you ignored my requests for proof.  And, instead, just engaged in conjecture.

Facts that remain:

1. You do not know the percentage of the total SWTOR subscriber base that actually uses X-fire.  Therefore, using this outside of X-fire means jack squat as no one knows if the changes in hours played between the 8000-something that use X-fire and play SWTOR (very small percentage) are similar or not to the total SWTOR subscriber base.  That's what scientists call an extraneous variable that is messes with what the scientists want to measure.
2. X-fire measures hours played.  It does not measure subscription numbers.  Therefore, trying to use X-fire hours played to describe subscriber changes is completely false.

Of course I ignored your request for proof, because you aren't discussing the same thing I am.

I'm discussing about how SW:ToR is doing according to XFire. You're like a broken record insisting how XFire isn't a good measurement. All right, you're heard. Let's get back to the subject at hand, shall we?

We get to know the retention rate once they release investors papers, as I said earlier. Now we have an opportutiny to see how the game is doing among XFire players. If that's not ok with you, no one is forcing you to read and post to this thread.

SW:ToR 24th number is 8240 users, 38211 hours played. 4,6h per user. It's a little lower than day before, but that might just be because of the downtime they had.

SWTOR vs. WoW time played on XFire:

SWTOR got only 41% of WoW's gametime this Saturday, compared to 58% of WoW's gametime Saturday last week, but because SWTOR's servers were down due to patch it would be unfair to draw any conclusions from this weeks data.

well apart from the fact Bioware were dumb enough to take their servers offline on a Friday night, good job guys you really are learning this the hard way.

how to check top 10 games in xfire?

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Rocketeer

Originally posted by Vato26

That is false.  Server loads =! server populations.  Server loads measure how full the servers are.  It doesn't measure the number of people on the server.  Thus, it doesn't measure server populations.

Scientists also focus on controlling extraneous variables so that their tests measure what they want to measure.  There are absolutely no controls set up outside of X-fire.  Thus, using X-fire statistics outside of X-fire means they are inherently invalid.  And, using invalid data means that your conclusion on that invalid data is invalid.  No matter how much you want it to be so, it's still completely invalid.

Also, thanks for proving your agenda via the red.  Keep on using your invalid data in any way you can so you can fulfill your self-serving agenda.

Wrong part in red, ofc you can still be right even with faulty data. You can even be right without any kind of data to back you up. Its called coincidence. Its actually quite common, infact the less data you use to form your opinion, and the simpler your thesis, the greater the chance to be right by coincidence <-- hypothesis right there. One example of that would be old greeks postulating the existance of atoms, but there are probably hundreds more.  That is false.  If you gave that same statement to any form of the scientific community you would be laughed out of the room.

That is your opinion, proof?

Thats also why a proper scientific approach always first and foremost focuses around creating a hypothesis and trying to disprove it by finding a case where it not applies. Exactly because discrediting the source is not proof of a hypothesis being wrong, after all it could still be right by coincidence! If you can find no way to disprove a hypothesis, then it stands. Doesn't mean its right, contrary to popular belief scientist are not so arrogant that they assume they are always right, but its still a valid thesis.

Thesis is also based on past scientific studies or the premise of the current study with controls in place to prevent as much extraneous variables as possible from preventing the scientists from measuring the results that they are aiming to measure.  When using X-fire statistics within X-fire, there are controls in place (required usage of X-fire to actually record the hours played).  However, there are absolutely no controls in place outside of X-fire when applying X-fire statistics outside of X-fire. 

You are confusing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis_%28academic_document%29 with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis. Here is a quote for you:

"People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis, often called an "educated guess"^[7][8] because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem."

Sounds exactly like what im talking about, the experimental part is where we just see how it goes by comparing the data from xfire with actual changes like new servers opening/old closing, official numbers etc.

Control is the prime part of measuring statistics.  Lack of those controls = lack of any form of validity as there's no controls in place to prevent extraneous variables from altering what the person is trying to measure.  That is something that the X-fire Fan brigade can't comprehend.

Ofc having full control helps immensely with the accuracy of statistics, nobody denies that. But if full control is impossible you make do with the next best thing and simply append a proper +- derivation to your data to make people aware of its limitations. If you don't know the derivation you guess it based on the information available, an example would be archelogist judging the age of very old fossilised organic materials, the derivation can be millions of years. And yeah sometimes you can be totally wrong because there where extraneous variables you didn't know about, but that shouldn't prevent you from trying anyway.

Its just pointless to ask for facts to prove someone right if you can't provide facts to prove them wrong.   Xfire being not representative of general gamers doesn't disproof anything, unless you know how big the derivation between them is. Its not proof, its anecdotal evidence. There might be a derivation, or not ... it might make a difference, or not. We don't know, and thats half of science right there.

Stop with your Strawman tactics.  They don't work.  You all made the statements and continue to use X-fire.  I, and many others have refuted them with actual scientific proceedures.  So, the burden is on you.

What kind of scientific procedures are this? And what exactly did you prove? Fact is you don't know wether/how accurate xfire is in any particular case, noone of us does. Claiming that a sample size of many thousands of gamers would be wildly inaccurate is just as unlikely as them being(nearly) completely right. Both could happen to be, but i just consider it unlikely based on past experiences with xfire and gametrends.

Sometimes i wonder where the idea comes from that science is based around cold hard facts and provable data ... i blame hollywood. The real number of actual scientific theories(often called laws) that are widely accepted as truth is actually quite low(Law of Thermodynamics, invariance of speed of light, conversation of mass-energy and of momentum, electrostatic laws ... that about sums it up i think). Otherwise scientists kinda go with the flow and simply change theories if they prove wrong later on.

Hollywood has nothing to do with it.  It's called textbooks, college courses, and actual participation in the scientific community.  Things that pretty much say that your version of nilly-willy statistical analysis is wrong.

Its not my version, and its not for you to decide whats wrong or right. Like so often history will tell who was right and who was wrong, that being said both of us lack hard data.

If it makes you feel any better though, i would never settle for a measurement system like xfire if there was any other solution. But fact is the onlyones with hard data are guarding it closely, and we only have secondary resources like these. Of all the secondary resources available to us i feel xfire is the most accurate for shortterm developements, and there is no shame on basing your hypothesis on the best data available to you, even if its no completely accurate.

Like i said, its perfectly fine to do statistics like this, you just need to make people aware of the limitations your statistical data is based upon. For example it would be a perfectly fine to only ask only women between 18-21 about who they will vote for before an election and base an statistic analysis on that data. However if you try to extrapolate general election results the accuracy would be naturally alot less than asking a proper samplesize of men and women of all ages. That being said, if for some reason you could only ask those women, the result would still be more accurate than no statistic at all.

TL;DR: Xfire might be inaccurate, but its still better than no data at all which is what we have without it. And the absence of data never proves anything, apart from data for an analysis being missing.

P.S.: Inability to argue an hypothesis without personal attacks, or replacing arguments with the same, is not science.