Founders for Beta Players?

(Naralin) #21

@neverplayserious he is a moderator of a nexon forum so… He kind of work for them?
I didn’t say he get paid or anything.

(BerylRdm) #22

@Naralin Here, I’ll help you by quoting @Amerika 's signature:

My views and comments are entirely my own. I am a volunteer mod and I help with forum tasks. My word carries the same weight as anybody else posting…no more, no less. Think of me more as a forum janitor who cleans when needed as opposed to a cop who wants to bust you :slight_smile:

(Runeforce) #23

You seem to be misinterpreting your own evidence. You do not isolated say “number of instances launched in the last two week.” The exact wording, and the added ‘people’, makes a huge difference.

That is a generalization. It is also preemptively false.

I don’t know any one that does a twentyfour hour session exclusively every fourteen days, yet you asume all do.

No, we don’t. But it’s not relevant, see previous point.

Speculation, disregarding facts, and your own evidence (see first point.)

If people are explicit about it, its no problem. It’s an important distinction from the total playerbase.

While number magic is always entertaining, it does not prove dick. The facts talk for themselves, and they prove you wrong. Nice conspiracy theory though!

(goldenRacer) #24

3,940 players

24h peak

(Naralin) #25

@Runeforce

I don’t know here you get that quote from but go to http://steamspy.com/ and overlay the “players” column.
I don’t see where I am misinterpreting things here, I was just trying to check if that number was unique players as Amerika made reference to.

Also, I would love you to give me those “facts”. It’s a bit ironic to say someone is wrong without proving anything yourself.

EDIT: I have seen your edit. You seem to only read what fits you.
My first statement was an hypothesis, you didn’t quote the “maybe” on purpose.
About the numbers, it’s all the same thing. You didn’t read exaggerated.

(Runeforce) #26

That’s ironic, comming from the guy that refute the facts and makes up his own, through number magic.

I use SteamDB.

(Naralin) #27

I can be wrong, I’ve seen steamDB.
And I am asking you, how can Dirty Bomb have around 180.000 unique players for the last two weeks. As I said -if you didn’t read it- I deliberately rigged the numbers to max them out. When doing so I just noticed it was impossible to read this data as unique players.

You don’t seem to understand the nature of unique, do you?

PS: on SteamDB, the players data is coming from SteamSpy.
“SteamSpy data is used with explicit permission.” (bottom right - and no I didn’t make it all up either)

(Runeforce) #28

[quote=“Naralin;159193”]I can be wrong, I’ve seen steamDB.
And I am asking you, how can Dirty Bomb have around 180.000 unique players for the last two weeks.[/quote]

Beneath the game on Steamspy it says “Players in two weeks,” not “number of instances launched in two weeks.” The number to the right is the uncertainty, which (for today) gives an statistical uncertainty of 5,6%. Does it include smurf accounts? I would assume the uncertainty does reflect that, otherwise why even include an uncertainty?
As to the ‘uniqueness,’ I really don’t get why you need to be told explicitly. By the definition of the language, I implicitly read it as being unique, in the choice of word; ‘player.’ Of course this is all based on my faith that the developers of Steamspy (and SteamDB) use concise, instead of sloppy, language, to represent their stats.

(Naralin) #29

@Runeforce

That is why I asked you to go to http://steamspy.com/ and check the “players” column.
It explains a bit more what data is retrieved.

As I reminder, I was answering to Amerika who stated that number represented unique players.
You are right, I also took this information implicitly as unique player. That’s why I checked myself.

For the past 6 days, the highest players peak was 5305. Even if you consider this is an average amount and it’s new players everyday, you can’t reach the number of 177,887 ± 10,019.
If there is something I miss to considerate please tell me. But I do think players peaks are more relevant about the playerbase.

(Runeforce) #30

You are missing that there are a constant flux of players joining and leaving servers. Sure, as long as we can agree on the semantics.

(Jesus) #31

How was the obisidian phoenix RNG based ? they gave it to the people who had phoenix already no RNG in that.

(pumpkinmeerkat) #32

SteamDB

(Amerika) #33

[quote=“Naralin;159210”]@Runeforce

That is why I asked you to go to http://steamspy.com/ and check the “players” column.
It explains a bit more what data is retrieved.

As I reminder, I was answering to Amerika who stated that number represented unique players.
You are right, I also took this information implicitly as unique player. That’s why I checked myself.

For the past 6 days, the highest players peak was 5305. Even if you consider this is an average amount and it’s new players everyday, you can’t reach the number of 177,887 ± 10,019.
If there is something I miss to considerate please tell me. But I do think players peaks are more relevant about the playerbase.[/quote]

If you look at the API you can tell how it works. But it’s guestimating the amount of actual people are playing the game. I was under the impression that it was using information collected via Steam and it’s “last played” for public accounts and producing a number based on that. That is incorrect. However, it is using the amount of players on average and playtime to produce a guestimate of how many people are actually playing a game.

That’s how it produces the “players in the last two weeks” stat. So it is trying to say that they are unique players but it’s just a guess based on a formula Steamspy uses. And there is 3000-6000 players playing at any one time 24 hours a day. Considering many people only play long enough to do missions and then log out it’s safe to assume that the 3000-6000 from 1 hour ago aren’t the same 3000-6000 currently playing. People don’t play 24 hours a day so concurrent numbers is not even close to how many people are actually playing Dirty Bomb. So yes, it’s dumb to cite it as an example of how healthy DB is. I’m now not 100% positive about Steamspy’s formula for figuring out the amount of players playing since it’s not published and I don’t know how they account for people playing multiple times a day.

Also, concurrent numbers swing based on advertising, events and new content as all F2P titles live and die by. So the game might be dying one day and then extremely healthy another all depending on which day you look at.

And please, read my signature. I don’t work for Nexon or Splash Damage and everything I say here is my own thoughts. And you can ask pretty much anyone here…I am not a “company man”.

(grandioseCutlet) #34

How was the obisidian phoenix RNG based ? they gave it to the people who had phoenix already no RNG in that.[/quote]

I didn’t say it was. I knew my sentence was confusing, that’s why I added “that was great”, to make sure people would understand I was saying it was not RNG based.

(Naralin) #35

And there is 3000-6000 players playing at any one time 24 hours a day. Considering many people only play long enough to do missions and then log out it’s safe to assume that the 3000-6000 from 1 hour ago aren’t the same 3000-6000 currently playing.

And those 3000-6000 people could have played 2 days ago and still be counted as another 3000-6000 right? If I start Dirty Bomb 50 times I will be added as 50 “players” as well.

And please, read my signature. I don’t work for Nexon or Splash Damage and everything I say here is my own thoughts. And you can ask pretty much anyone here…I am not a “company man”.

Did I say you were speaking on behalf of SD or Nexon? Alright, you do not work for them but you are related to them by being a moderator on one of their forum. Thus, maybe your opinion is “biased”. It doesn’t seem like it, fair enough.

(Litego) #36

Why not? Let’s do some math. If we look at 5305 as the average instead of peak as you say for a second.

Total players / Concurrent players = Online Ratio
24 hours / Online Ratio = Average playtime (in hours)
60 minutes * Average playtime (in hours) = Average playtime (in minutes)
(My formula could be wrong here, not entirely sure, but the numbers make sense)

177,887 / 5305 = 33,53006597549482
24 / 33,53006597549482 = 0,715775507794712
60 * 0,715775507794712 = 42,94653046768272

So on average each player spends 43 minutes a day in this game. To me that sounds unreasonably high, but then again we are looking at the peak here and not the average concurrent players, so let’s say the average is 4000 concurrent players still with 177,887 unique players the last two weeks.

177,887 / 4000 = 44,47175
24 / 44,47175= 0,5396684412014369
60 * 0,5396684412014369= 32,38010647208621

32 minutes on average, now that sounds more reasonable. Remember the average gamer does not play 8 hours a day. I personally probably put in 2 sessions of 3 hours a week (on average atm), so on average I play less than an hour a day.

(Litego) #37

Of course not! You’re not inflating the concurrent player count, and you’re not seen as a unique player because you’re doing it from the same account. I don’t know how these numbers are pulled, but regardless how it’s done there’s no way it’s set up in such a retarded way that each login counts as a new player. If you log in once or 50 times in the last 2 weeks you count as a single unique player. The only way to inflate the number is using smurfs, which of course some people do, but it’s not gonna affect the result very much.

(Naralin) #38

@Litego I have to say I didn’t think about the playtime.
But on SteamDB it says that the average playtime for the last 2 weeks is a lot more: Playtime in last 2 weeks: 3.9h (average) 57m (median).

I am so intrigued about how this data is pulled off that I asked the SteamSpy developper directly. I hope to get an answer.

(Nail) #39

poor communication, grandioseCutlet is saying he wants no RNG , just like the Obsidian Phoenix event

(Amerika) #40

[quote=“Naralin;159265”]@Litego I have to say I didn’t think about the playtime.
But on SteamDB it says that the average playtime for the last 2 weeks is a lot more: Playtime in last 2 weeks: 3.9h (average) 57m (median).

I am so intrigued about how this data is pulled off that I asked the SteamSpy developper directly. I hope to get an answer.[/quote]

That’s why I said their formula is skeptical. It’s pretty basic and not using what I thought they were using to pull unique numbers. It’s just a big guestimate and I don’t think it’s accurate (despite their claims). But regardless of whether or not the numbers work out exactly, which isn’t the point, linking to concurrent players as if that is the whole population of DB and claiming that the day you cherry picked is proof that the population is super low/dying is just dumb and not representative of the playing populace. Especially during a time with no new content, no events and no advertising during a closed beta.

In short my point still stands. Don’t use concurrent numbers. Especially since a lot of people mistake that number as the whole populace even if the people here discussing it and others reading understand that it’s not.

Also, I asked specifically about being able to post like I always had even if my opinions do not line up with SD or Nexon. That was not only OK but it was encouraged. Nexon didn’t want biased mods so none of us here are. Read some of my or the other two mod posts if you don’t believe that. Just because my opinion is positive towards DB in this debate does not mean I’m doing it because I’m required to or get paid to or feel compelled to due to loyalty. Correlation does not imply causation.