Trending Games | ArcheAge | Firefall | Guild Wars 2 | WildStar

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,851,941 Users Online:0
Games:733  Posts:6,226,302
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
A-C
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodlines Champions Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Crusaders of Solaris Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Céiron Wars
D-F
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkest Dungeon Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Deco Online Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Edge of Space Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
G-L
GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall H1Z1 Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Haven & Hearth Hawken Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Phoenix Edition LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
M-Q
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Project Blackout Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Puzzle Pirates Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowrun Online Shaiya Shards Online Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian Space Heroes Universe Sparta: War of Empires Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Hammers End The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Total Domination Transformers Universe Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik

MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

World of Warcraft

World of Warcraft 

General Discussion  » MOP sales down?

9 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search
163 posts found
  VengeSunsoar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/10/04
Posts: 4784

Be Brief, Be Bright... Be Gone.

9/28/12 4:07:48 AM#41
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

edit - at best the only thing you could say is that the game is popular or unpopular among the people who are knowledgable enough about games and use X-fire.  This would increase the odds then of the game being popular among the general population just from the word of mouth the people who do use X-fire would generate. 

edit - however as with all case studies and data, ideas need to come from somewhere.  Anyone looking at the date should have doubts about the validity, but it does have enough numbers, people and games to say, "This is interesting, a closer look and further work should be done."

Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  Aeolron

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/24/11
Posts: 664

Everyones a mmo vet these days :P

9/28/12 4:08:25 AM#42
Originally posted by Nitth

 


Originally posted by Zeppelin4
While these figures don’t take digital market performance into account

 

So why are we throwing around accusations without complete statistics?

 LOL No idea :P

  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 4:09:18 AM#43
Originally posted by Netspook
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

 

You don't know much about statistics, either, it seems. Your argument is only valid if that 1% equals a random selection of MMO players. In my experience, it don't - XFire seems to mostly attract semi-experienced players, I've never heard anyone who consider him-/herself a vet claiming to use it.

Retail doesn't prove shit about the interest in the game. I have 7 friends who play WoW. When Cata released, at least 5 of them bought the retail (I didn't). None of them bought the MoP retail, we all bought digital. I'm pretty sure we're far from the only ones going completely digital.

Nice box? Well, I have bought quite a lot of games digitally, both on steam and others places. It suits me just fine NOT having 200+ boxes gathering dust in my shelves.

 How much do you actually know seriously. Anyone can state the other knows nothing about statistics (X fire threads are full of them), but how about you provide some of that indepth analysis, that isn't available to the average armchair analyst. Also stating university or job is worthless I want hard core stats and case studies, otherwise don't go stating someone else doesn't know much about statistics.

  Aeolron

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/24/11
Posts: 664

Everyones a mmo vet these days :P

9/28/12 4:12:33 AM#44
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by Netspook
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

 

You don't know much about statistics, either, it seems. Your argument is only valid if that 1% equals a random selection of MMO players. In my experience, it don't - XFire seems to mostly attract semi-experienced players, I've never heard anyone who consider him-/herself a vet claiming to use it.

Retail doesn't prove shit about the interest in the game. I have 7 friends who play WoW. When Cata released, at least 5 of them bought the retail (I didn't). None of them bought the MoP retail, we all bought digital. I'm pretty sure we're far from the only ones going completely digital.

Nice box? Well, I have bought quite a lot of games digitally, both on steam and others places. It suits me just fine NOT having 200+ boxes gathering dust in my shelves.

 How much do you actually know seriously. Anyone can state the other knows nothing about statistics (X fire threads are full of them), but how about you provide some of that indepth analyses, that isn't available to the average armchair analyse. Also stating university or job is worthless I want hard core stats and case studies, otherwise don't go stating someone else doesn't know much about statistics.

 K gonna go grab some popcorn and a drink , anyone else want some? Because this is going to be one HELL OF A SHOW!

  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 4:16:39 AM#45
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

Those polls of 1000 people if done properly randomly select people in the population they are looking at.  Again if it is random than anyone has a chance of being selected and so it can accurately reflect a representative cross-section of that population. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

 You don't disregard something like that there's something call past and trends margin's of error. Correlations etc. X fire maybe incorrect (most data achieved in science is) what's important is not simply whether it's incorrect or not it's how much and whether you know how much of a difference between the the accurate mean is and your results. If Xfire is wrong by roughly by most a specific each time. If you calculate that amount and use margins of error you can use that data. It's not worthless. It's only worthless when there is no trend with the accurate mean data.

So saying you should just disregard it, is displaying a narrow understanding of statistics. Statistics isn't a cut and dry game. It's all about complex mathematics and models. Models by definition through use are rarely accurate by themselves.

  Loke666

Elite Member

Joined: 10/29/07
Posts: 16620

9/28/12 4:16:44 AM#46
Originally posted by superniceguy
Originally posted by Deathenger

Last I checked xfire, they still havent recovered from the loss of players when GW2 released even after MoP.

I dont think that article can really accuratly represent digital sales from the WoW main site so I'm sure its much higher than that. On active subscribers alone, even if they only sold MoP to half their subscribers it should still outsell GW2

WOW is back up to the #2 spot on Xfire, and hours played is almost double of GW2

Duh, of course it is. It just released the new expansion and if you want to compare it with GW2 semi fairly (to be fair you would have to compare it with GW2s fourth expansion) you would have to check MOPs numbers today with GW2s a month ago, players play more the first 2 weeks after an expansion.

It is still pointless since Xfire numbers not fairly can compare numbers between 2 different games. Some games have a lot higher needed use of voice chat than others which will give some games an advantage, and some regions have a lot more Xfire users than other further distorting the numbers.

I am sure Wow still have higher number of players than GW2 and I think it had it all the time, the GW2 players just played more the first weeks. But I dont think MOP can turn Wow around to gaining players again and beating CATAs sales number.

If they want to do that they either need to revamp the graphics and probably add new classes and DEs as well or release Wow2.

  Icewhite

Made History

Joined: 7/11/11
Posts: 6495

Pink, it's like red but not quite.

9/28/12 4:20:21 AM#47
Originally posted by Aeolron

 K gonna go grab some popcorn and a drink , anyone else want some? Because this is going to be one HELL OF A SHOW!

Appeal to Authority + Condescension arguments always get ugly. 

Particularly on bluster-forums where volume and frequency often serve as substitutes for actual education or valid data.

But there've been two previous (massive) x-fire threads where people called each other stupid for literally hundreds of posts...couldn't ya'll use one of them?

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  VengeSunsoar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/10/04
Posts: 4784

Be Brief, Be Bright... Be Gone.

9/28/12 4:28:08 AM#48
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

Those polls of 1000 people if done properly randomly select people in the population they are looking at.  Again if it is random than anyone has a chance of being selected and so it can accurately reflect a representative cross-section of that population. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

 You don't disregard something like that there's something call past and trends margin's of error. Correlations etc. X fire maybe incorrect (most data achieved in science is) what's important is not simply whether it's incorrect or not it's how much and whether you know how much of a difference between the the accurate mean is and your results. If Xfire is wrong by roughly by most a specific each time. If you calculate that amount and use margins of error you can use that data. It's not worthless. It's only worthless when there is no trend with the accurate mean data.

So saying you should just disregard it, is displaying a narrow understanding of statistics. Statistics isn't a cut and dry game. It's all about complex mathematics and models. Models by definition through use are rarely accurate by themselves.

Yes you do and should disregard it until at the very least some information is given about the population of several games so a comparison can be made.  You cannot use this as valid data in any sense until the data is validated as representative of the popuatlion.  At best as I stated in the edit, all you would say it the numbers are interesting enough to warrant further study. 

Anyone using this data without first concluding it's validty, reliability and accurace of the population would themselves be considered uncredible.

Yes there are margins of error - they are commonly given when the accuracy of hte data compared to the population is known.  We do not even know if X-fire data is representative of populations in any game, therefore the margin of error is absolutely massive. 

Yes there are correlations but correlation have a strength indicator.  Again there is a very wide margine of error and a very low correlation strength becuase we do not have any idea how representative the data is. 

If you know that it is wrong by a specific percentage, that alone gives it validity and you can adjust your measures to reflect this but you still need to have the population data to compare it to.  Most games do not give out population data so there is nothing to compare X-fire too.  It is specuation about what X-fire means compared to speculation about the total number of players.   We can't take that level of guessing seriously at all.

Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 4:31:57 AM#49
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

Those polls of 1000 people if done properly randomly select people in the population they are looking at.  Again if it is random than anyone has a chance of being selected and so it can accurately reflect a representative cross-section of that population. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

 You don't disregard something like that there's something call past and trends margin's of error. Correlations etc. X fire maybe incorrect (most data achieved in science is) what's important is not simply whether it's incorrect or not it's how much and whether you know how much of a difference between the the accurate mean is and your results. If Xfire is wrong by roughly by most a specific each time. If you calculate that amount and use margins of error you can use that data. It's not worthless. It's only worthless when there is no trend with the accurate mean data.

So saying you should just disregard it, is displaying a narrow understanding of statistics. Statistics isn't a cut and dry game. It's all about complex mathematics and models. Models by definition through use are rarely accurate by themselves.

Yes you do and should disregard it until at the very least some information is given about the population of several games so a comparison can be made.  You cannot use this as valid data in any sense until the data is validated as representative of the popuatlion.  At best as I stated in the edit, all you would say it the numbers are interesting enough to warrant further study. 

Anyone using this data without first concluding it's validty, reliability and accurace of the population would themselves be considered uncredible.

Yes there are margins of error - they are commonly given when the accuracy of hte data compared to the population is known.  We do not even know if X-fire data is representative of populations in any game, therefore the margin of error is absolutely massive. 

Yes there are correlations but correlation is not causation.  Again there is a very wide margine of error and a very low correlation strength becuase we do not have any idea how representative the data is. 

If you know that it is wrong by a specific percentage, that alone gives it validity and you can adjust your measures to reflect this but you still need to have the population data to compare it to.  Most games do not give out population data so there is nothing to compare X-fire too.  It is specuation about what X-fire means compared to speculation about the total number of players.   We can't take that level of guessing seriously at all.

 I love this because you basically contradict what you said and agreed with me while stating you aren't. Warranting further study is not disregarding, finding more information is not disregard. I am right you shouldn't disregard this information, may not be useable right now but you shouldn't disregard it. It can still be useful, making disregarding it the last thing you should do as a competant statician

I would say that you should admit you were wrong but who cares, really.

  VengeSunsoar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/10/04
Posts: 4784

Be Brief, Be Bright... Be Gone.

9/28/12 4:36:01 AM#50
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

Those polls of 1000 people if done properly randomly select people in the population they are looking at.  Again if it is random than anyone has a chance of being selected and so it can accurately reflect a representative cross-section of that population. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

 You don't disregard something like that there's something call past and trends margin's of error. Correlations etc. X fire maybe incorrect (most data achieved in science is) what's important is not simply whether it's incorrect or not it's how much and whether you know how much of a difference between the the accurate mean is and your results. If Xfire is wrong by roughly by most a specific each time. If you calculate that amount and use margins of error you can use that data. It's not worthless. It's only worthless when there is no trend with the accurate mean data.

So saying you should just disregard it, is displaying a narrow understanding of statistics. Statistics isn't a cut and dry game. It's all about complex mathematics and models. Models by definition through use are rarely accurate by themselves.

Yes you do and should disregard it until at the very least some information is given about the population of several games so a comparison can be made.  You cannot use this as valid data in any sense until the data is validated as representative of the popuatlion.  At best as I stated in the edit, all you would say it the numbers are interesting enough to warrant further study. 

Anyone using this data without first concluding it's validty, reliability and accurace of the population would themselves be considered uncredible.

Yes there are margins of error - they are commonly given when the accuracy of hte data compared to the population is known.  We do not even know if X-fire data is representative of populations in any game, therefore the margin of error is absolutely massive. 

Yes there are correlations but correlation is not causation.  Again there is a very wide margine of error and a very low correlation strength becuase we do not have any idea how representative the data is. 

If you know that it is wrong by a specific percentage, that alone gives it validity and you can adjust your measures to reflect this but you still need to have the population data to compare it to.  Most games do not give out population data so there is nothing to compare X-fire too.  It is specuation about what X-fire means compared to speculation about the total number of players.   We can't take that level of guessing seriously at all.

 I love this you basically contradict what you said and agreed with me while stating you aren't. Warranting further study is not disregarding, finding more information is not disregard. I am right you shouldn't disregard this information, may not be useable right now but you shouldn't disregard it.

I would say that you should admit you were wrong but who cares, really.

Um no.  You disregard the current data until it can be validated.  But you don't ignore the idea.  There is enough numbers and interest to warrant a closer look.

Thats the way research works.  Out of millions of things to study, you choose one that 1. Seems to have some interest behind it,  and 2.  Has at least a rudimentary of numbers/logic/understanding.

You then do the work and get the real information.

edit - admit I'm wrong about what?

I"m wrong that they haven't released information on X-fire's representation of a population?

I'm wrong that most game companies dont' release player stats?

Without those 2 bits of information there really is nothing to discuss.

Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  TheIronLegion

Apprentice Member

Joined: 9/06/12
Posts: 270

Act with wisdom, but act.

9/28/12 4:36:13 AM#51
Originally posted by energized

I never post on the forums this might be my 3rd post in 6 years.

 

I had to say that your link was the most stupidest shit i have ever read.  600k-700k sales in 2 DAYS of MOP versus 3.3 million copies since Dec 2010 for Cataclysm = MOP not doing well? WTF hahaha stupid link.

Not you I repeat I am not calling you stupid or cussing at you. Just had to clear that up.

And I think it's best that you stay away. You obviously don't get the point and your sentences are poorly constructed so the point you're trying to make is lost. I'm sure you have a point, but somewhere between "the most stupidest" and "stupid link" the point seems to be diluded. That and your language is foul at best.

  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 4:44:18 AM#52
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Lobotomist

I see you guys dont understand much about statistics .

Even if 1% of MMO players use Xfire. That data could be used to gauge game activity and popularity rise / drops.

Same goes for digital vs retail sales. You know what is the ratio of digital vs retail buyers. Than you use this ratio on retail sales data.

If the retail had disappointing sales - it points out poor interest in the game.

 

BTW - As someone who bought D3. I can tell you that I went for retail. Because Blizzard charges same for both (?).

But if you buy retail you get a very nice box.

No it couldn't.  You would need to determine if that 1% is a true reflection of that particular MMO's playerbase and X-fire does not provide that explanation.

At best you could say that X-fire is a representative of people who know about games and play enough of them to have heard of X-fire.  It is a whole different ballgame to say that that group is the same as a true reflection of the random person in the said game. 

 There's common sense and mathematics that plays a large part you can't ignore or dismiss the data. It may not be a completely accuarate meausre but we just don't have that. 1% is pretty massive source. Consider typical statisctic polling 1000 particiapants with correct population representation. Consider how these 1000 people represent the opinions of millions. Also consider how two people with the same background ethnicty etc can have very different views. It's inherently flawed but it's about as accurate as we can get considering time and money constraints. Now consider a source of ten's/hundreds thousand's in comparison to a few million. It may not have ideal representation but the volume itself in comparison to the source does make up a fair bit of that. If you add in the correct margin's of error, and trends it's still a viable polling source.

True random sampling can correct as much as possible for true representation by giving everyone an equal shot at being selected.  It never completely eliminates the x-variable but it does reduce it by again increasing the odds of everyone/anyone being selected. 

Those polls of 1000 people if done properly randomly select people in the population they are looking at.  Again if it is random than anyone has a chance of being selected and so it can accurately reflect a representative cross-section of that population. 

X-fire is not random in any shape or form.  It is inheriently biased towards a specific target of people those being that are interested in many different games, discuss games, and research games on the net - this was necessary for them to even find X-fire.  Now if you take WoW for example, another common perception is that many WoW gamers are just Wow gamers, with no interest or even real knowledge of other games.

This alone makes the data flawed, and thus invalid.  You cannot make any reasonable conclusions about a population based on that data. 

 You don't disregard something like that there's something call past and trends margin's of error. Correlations etc. X fire maybe incorrect (most data achieved in science is) what's important is not simply whether it's incorrect or not it's how much and whether you know how much of a difference between the the accurate mean is and your results. If Xfire is wrong by roughly by most a specific each time. If you calculate that amount and use margins of error you can use that data. It's not worthless. It's only worthless when there is no trend with the accurate mean data.

So saying you should just disregard it, is displaying a narrow understanding of statistics. Statistics isn't a cut and dry game. It's all about complex mathematics and models. Models by definition through use are rarely accurate by themselves.

Yes you do and should disregard it until at the very least some information is given about the population of several games so a comparison can be made.  You cannot use this as valid data in any sense until the data is validated as representative of the popuatlion.  At best as I stated in the edit, all you would say it the numbers are interesting enough to warrant further study. 

Anyone using this data without first concluding it's validty, reliability and accurace of the population would themselves be considered uncredible.

Yes there are margins of error - they are commonly given when the accuracy of hte data compared to the population is known.  We do not even know if X-fire data is representative of populations in any game, therefore the margin of error is absolutely massive. 

Yes there are correlations but correlation is not causation.  Again there is a very wide margine of error and a very low correlation strength becuase we do not have any idea how representative the data is. 

If you know that it is wrong by a specific percentage, that alone gives it validity and you can adjust your measures to reflect this but you still need to have the population data to compare it to.  Most games do not give out population data so there is nothing to compare X-fire too.  It is specuation about what X-fire means compared to speculation about the total number of players.   We can't take that level of guessing seriously at all.

 I love this you basically contradict what you said and agreed with me while stating you aren't. Warranting further study is not disregarding, finding more information is not disregard. I am right you shouldn't disregard this information, may not be useable right now but you shouldn't disregard it.

I would say that you should admit you were wrong but who cares, really.

Um no.  You disregard the current data until it can be validated.  But you don't ignore the idea.  There is enough numbers and interest to warrant a closer look.

Thats the way research works.  Out of millions of things to study, you choose one that 1. Seems to have some interest behind it,  and 2.  Has at least a rudimentary of numbers/logic/understanding.

You then do the work and get the real information.

Umm no you look into current data to see if it can be validated, or not. If you make a scientific discovery you don't ignore it and says it false until someone else proves it. You look into it yourself to see if the data is correct/useable. You don't disregard something unless that data is empirically anomalous and has been proven as such over several instances/experiments. You don't disregard it when you have nothing else to compare it to. At that point it's simply raw data waiting to be analysed.

Also facts and case studies my friend your talking like your an authority without substantiating yourself I hate when people do that, I'm a mathematician and engineer, if you want me to substiant myself ask me, but you should also do the same. Either do it or stop acting as if your an authority.

  Icewhite

Made History

Joined: 7/11/11
Posts: 6495

Pink, it's like red but not quite.

9/28/12 4:46:23 AM#53

The sergeant-at-arms will be issuing a e-credentials check before this argument is allowed to proceed.  So do be sure to make up an impressive curriculum vitae.

I'm sorry, I shouldn't poke fun.  I'm just in awe (literally) of how readily x-fire arguments just keep Energizer Bunnying along.

Will stop now, promise.

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  VengeSunsoar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/10/04
Posts: 4784

Be Brief, Be Bright... Be Gone.

9/28/12 4:55:20 AM#54
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband

 

Umm no you look into current data to see if it can be validated, or not. If you make a scientific discovery you don't ignore it and says it false until someone else proves it. You look into it yourself to see if the data is correct/useable. You don't disregard something unless that data is empirically anomalous and has been proven as such over several instances/experiments. You don't disregard it when you have nothing else to compare it to. At that point it's simply raw data waiting to be analysed.

Also facts and case studies my friend your talking like your an authority without substanticanting yourself I hate when people do that, I'm a mathematician and engineer, if you want me to substiant myself ask me, but you should also do the same. Either do it or stop acting as if your an authority.

Looking into the data until it can be validated is exactly what I said.  The data should be ignored, as in not used in any research whatsoever until it can be validated. 

If you make a scientific discovery one of the first things you do is try and replicate it over and over and over and over and over again.  That is how you obtain reliability.  Many discoveries have bene discredited because others were unable to replicate the phenomenon. 

If there is nothing else to compare it to, there is no way to verify the data.  So once again you don't use it until there is something to compare it with.

Great, your a mathematician and an engineer.  I'm a physiotherapist, currently working on a PhD/MD  in Rehabilitative science at UBC.  Does that make us feel better.  Of course everyone here will think both of us are taking out our asses.

We've both taken stats classes and research classes.  You should know that until data is verified and replicated you don't dare use it in research. 

Basic principles

1. Collect the data being as methodical as possible in Qualititave research and as random as possible in descriptive research.

2.  Verify the data through comparison and replication. 

X-fire has done part of #1 but there are real questions on it's validity as it pertains to a games population. The data cannot be compared to the games population to get that margin of error and trends because the games don't release the stats.  Therefore there is nothing to compare it to, so we cant' get trends or margins of error, and we cannot verify it's representation. Therefore making any conclusion on it's validy is false at worse, and premature at best. 

This leaves us at a dead end. 

edit - actually X-fire could be the most wondeful, accurate peice of game statistical information out there but until we have those 2 questions answered the data is useless.  1.  Is it representative of the population in game.  2.  What is the actual game population to compare it with. 

Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 4:59:56 AM#55
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband

 

Umm no you look into current data to see if it can be validated, or not. If you make a scientific discovery you don't ignore it and says it false until someone else proves it. You look into it yourself to see if the data is correct/useable. You don't disregard something unless that data is empirically anomalous and has been proven as such over several instances/experiments. You don't disregard it when you have nothing else to compare it to. At that point it's simply raw data waiting to be analysed.

Also facts and case studies my friend your talking like your an authority without substanticanting yourself I hate when people do that, I'm a mathematician and engineer, if you want me to substiant myself ask me, but you should also do the same. Either do it or stop acting as if your an authority.

Looking into the data until it can be validated is exactly what I said.  The data should be ignored, as in not used in any research whatsoever until it can be validated. 

If you make a scientific discovery one of the first things you do is try and replicate it over and over and over and over and over again.  That is how you obtain reliability.  Many discoveries have bene discredited because others were unable to replicate the phenomenon. 

If there is nothing else to compare it to, there is no way to verify the data.  So once again you don't use it until there is something to compare it with.

Great, your a mathematician and an engineer.  I'm a physiotherapist, currently working on a PhD/MD  in Rehabilitative science at UBC.  Does that make us feel better.  Of course everyone here will think both of us are taking out our asses.

We've both taken stats classes and research classes.  You should know that until data is verified and replicated you don't dare use it in research. 

Basic principles

1. Collect the data being as methodical as possible in Qualititave research and as random as possible in descriptive research.

2.  Verify the data through comparison and replication. 

X-fire has done part of #1 but there are real questions on it's validity as it pertains to a games population. The data cannot be compared to the games population to get that margin of error and trends because the games don't release the stats.  Therefore there is nothing to compare it to, so we cant' get trends or margins of error, and we cannot verify it's representation. Therefore making any conclusion on it's validy is false at worse, and premature at best. 

This leaves us at a dead end. 

 Lol I see u didn't read what i said, I don't care what your title or degree is that shit can be lied or made up, the only way for to substantiate whether you actually have any background knowledge on this subject is through facts and case studies relevant to this discussion. Which should be fairly easy considering your education. It's fairly easy to determine if someone actually has revelant command over a subject through that.

 

I'm still waiting. You don't have to provide these things you may have them and just be lazy, but if that's the case don't expect people to assume you actually know what your talking about through appeal to authority.

And seriously i lol at your mental circles your going in. You don't disregard the data, fact of the matter is you may talk about a load of pointless stuff in regards to this arguement but you don't disregard it. You should not use it s it's foolish until properly verified but you don't disregard. it's a basic core principle of science as humans venture into things they don't quite understand.

  xmenty

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/22/10
Posts: 691

9/28/12 5:00:51 AM#56

Come on guys don't jump the gun.

Just wait for next week Blizzard sales announcement.

I predict they beat GW2 but they will sell less than Cata.

 

 

Pardon my English as it is not my 1st language :)

  VengeSunsoar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/10/04
Posts: 4784

Be Brief, Be Bright... Be Gone.

9/28/12 5:03:06 AM#57
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband

 

Umm no you look into current data to see if it can be validated, or not. If you make a scientific discovery you don't ignore it and says it false until someone else proves it. You look into it yourself to see if the data is correct/useable. You don't disregard something unless that data is empirically anomalous and has been proven as such over several instances/experiments. You don't disregard it when you have nothing else to compare it to. At that point it's simply raw data waiting to be analysed.

Also facts and case studies my friend your talking like your an authority without substanticanting yourself I hate when people do that, I'm a mathematician and engineer, if you want me to substiant myself ask me, but you should also do the same. Either do it or stop acting as if your an authority.

Looking into the data until it can be validated is exactly what I said.  The data should be ignored, as in not used in any research whatsoever until it can be validated. 

If you make a scientific discovery one of the first things you do is try and replicate it over and over and over and over and over again.  That is how you obtain reliability.  Many discoveries have bene discredited because others were unable to replicate the phenomenon. 

If there is nothing else to compare it to, there is no way to verify the data.  So once again you don't use it until there is something to compare it with.

Great, your a mathematician and an engineer.  I'm a physiotherapist, currently working on a PhD/MD  in Rehabilitative science at UBC.  Does that make us feel better.  Of course everyone here will think both of us are taking out our asses.

We've both taken stats classes and research classes.  You should know that until data is verified and replicated you don't dare use it in research. 

Basic principles

1. Collect the data being as methodical as possible in Qualititave research and as random as possible in descriptive research.

2.  Verify the data through comparison and replication. 

X-fire has done part of #1 but there are real questions on it's validity as it pertains to a games population. The data cannot be compared to the games population to get that margin of error and trends because the games don't release the stats.  Therefore there is nothing to compare it to, so we cant' get trends or margins of error, and we cannot verify it's representation. Therefore making any conclusion on it's validy is false at worse, and premature at best. 

This leaves us at a dead end. 

 Lol I see u didn't read what i said, I don't care what your title or degree is that shit can be lied or made up, the only way for to substantiate whether you actually have any background knowledge on this subject is through facts and case studies relevant to this discussion. Which should be fairly easy considering your education. It's fairly easy to determine if someone actually has revelant command over a subject through that.

 

I'm still waiting.

I read what you stated.  And I have stated the questions that need to be answered. 

Don't kid yourself, getting that information would not be easy unless the game developers released the information willingly - which so far they haven't. 

 All we need is those two questions answered, and all this x-fire crap and be put to rest. 

and what case studies are you wanting to see anyway?  Studies on statistical research methodologies?  Something specific to gaming populations.  Something specific to X-fire?  I highly doubt whether there actually has been studies comparing those two.

Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  theniffrig

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/18/07
Posts: 352

Ooh, they have the internet on computers now.

9/28/12 5:04:52 AM#58
Just my 2 cents here, but Mists for me was the 1st expansion I've bought digitally & not in box form from a retail shop. Will be interesting to see the digital sales figures.
  Warband

Novice Member

Joined: 5/02/10
Posts: 735

9/28/12 5:08:52 AM#59
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
Originally posted by Warband

 

Umm no you look into current data to see if it can be validated, or not. If you make a scientific discovery you don't ignore it and says it false until someone else proves it. You look into it yourself to see if the data is correct/useable. You don't disregard something unless that data is empirically anomalous and has been proven as such over several instances/experiments. You don't disregard it when you have nothing else to compare it to. At that point it's simply raw data waiting to be analysed.

Also facts and case studies my friend your talking like your an authority without substanticanting yourself I hate when people do that, I'm a mathematician and engineer, if you want me to substiant myself ask me, but you should also do the same. Either do it or stop acting as if your an authority.

Looking into the data until it can be validated is exactly what I said.  The data should be ignored, as in not used in any research whatsoever until it can be validated. 

If you make a scientific discovery one of the first things you do is try and replicate it over and over and over and over and over again.  That is how you obtain reliability.  Many discoveries have bene discredited because others were unable to replicate the phenomenon. 

If there is nothing else to compare it to, there is no way to verify the data.  So once again you don't use it until there is something to compare it with.

Great, your a mathematician and an engineer.  I'm a physiotherapist, currently working on a PhD/MD  in Rehabilitative science at UBC.  Does that make us feel better.  Of course everyone here will think both of us are taking out our asses.

We've both taken stats classes and research classes.  You should know that until data is verified and replicated you don't dare use it in research. 

Basic principles

1. Collect the data being as methodical as possible in Qualititave research and as random as possible in descriptive research.

2.  Verify the data through comparison and replication. 

X-fire has done part of #1 but there are real questions on it's validity as it pertains to a games population. The data cannot be compared to the games population to get that margin of error and trends because the games don't release the stats.  Therefore there is nothing to compare it to, so we cant' get trends or margins of error, and we cannot verify it's representation. Therefore making any conclusion on it's validy is false at worse, and premature at best. 

This leaves us at a dead end. 

 Lol I see u didn't read what i said, I don't care what your title or degree is that shit can be lied or made up, the only way for to substantiate whether you actually have any background knowledge on this subject is through facts and case studies relevant to this discussion. Which should be fairly easy considering your education. It's fairly easy to determine if someone actually has revelant command over a subject through that.

 

I'm still waiting.

I read what you stated.  And I have stated the questions that need to be answered. 

Don't kid yourself, getting that information would not be easy unless the game developers released the information willingly - which so far they haven't. 

 All we need is those two questions answered, and all this x-fire crap and be put to rest. 

 Concession accepted you can't substiante shit (most probably). I was talking about a simple statistical case study on modelling a non ideal representation source in comparison to the accurate mean. Basically anything remotely similar to this situation.

This is not about Xfire being right or not it's a bullshit arguement that'll never really be resolved due to lack of information. What I care about is supposed armchair analysts that plague these threads pretending to be an authority (with degree's to boot) and not substiating crap. I'm trying to determine whether your talking out of your ass with basic high school knowledge or whether you actually know what your talking about.

  User Deleted
9/28/12 5:19:45 AM#60
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

 


Originally posted by Zeppelin4
http://venturebeat.com/2012/09/27/world-of-warcraft-mists-of-pandaria-performance-disappointing/

 

 

Take it for what its worth.


 


That report is total sensationalism. It's counting retail sales since release. So it's not counting Digital sales or pre-purchases. Lets get all the numbers when we play with them huh?

No amount of "wishful" thinking willmake up the 60% loss. 20% maybe pushing it but still this and all other indicators point to pandaland being a dissapointment by Blizzard standards.

 

We also must not count out the lack of "official" blizzard media release that has came within days after every expansion and yet this one we havnt seen one.

9 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search