What happened?

Elsonso · August 2014

I am seeing a lot of "my guild died" comments and, like the 30 day free trial retention, this is not something that is even an interesting metric.

I joined a guild that was founded on March 31, mostly to see what guilds do. This guild started to die shortly after it was created. I think a lot of people were like me and were just trying things out. I subsequently quit that guild but later rejoined it.

Today, out of 200 members, generally the people online are in the single digits. A quick investigation reveals that 8% have been online in the last week. That does not include me because I am "Offline". I show up in the "three weeks or more" list. No officer has been "online" in the last month and the guild master has not been "online" in 2 months.

Is this a dead guild? I would classify it as such. There is stuff in the guild bank, but the guild store has only two items in it. The guild master is MIA, presumed eaten.

Is this something I am worried about? Not really. I honestly expect early guilds to be largely vacant because there is no down side to joining a guild for a game you have no intention of playing long term. The 30 day free trial attracted so many non-subscribers that it is inevitable that something like a guild would fail. On top of that, guilds have been in an infancy stage for the last four months and I think that guilds are only now becoming something to start being interested in.

My Horde WoW guild has 303 members, down from 350, and typically there will be 1-3 people from that guild online at any one time. Quite often, I am the only one. About 18% of this guild has been online in the last week. The guild master has been online in the last two weeks but his "staff" has been absent for the last month. Is this guild dead? Yeah, I would say it is.

Why do I bring this WoW guild up? Well, obviously I am terrible at picking guilds.

I don't judge a game's success based on the activity of guilds. Too small of a sample size and it may not reflect the larger population.

Elsonso · August 2014

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

Holy crow his name is LordRichter! I don't know why, but that is just an awesome name.

"Richter" means Judge. It is not only a name, but a way of life.

Vizier · August 2014

LOL. I think i recall hearing that ESO was topping the charts in revenue from sales and subs.

I want some of what your smoking. Techage... Lols

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

I am seeing a lot of "my guild died" comments and, like the 30 day free trial retention, this is not something that is even an interesting metric.

I joined a guild that was founded on March 31, mostly to see what guilds do. This guild started to die shortly after it was created. I think a lot of people were like me and were just trying things out. I subsequently quit that guild but later rejoined it.

Today, out of 200 members, generally the people online are in the single digits. A quick investigation reveals that 8% have been online in the last week. That does not include me because I am "Offline". I show up in the "three weeks or more" list. No officer has been "online" in the last month and the guild master has not been "online" in 2 months.

Is this a dead guild? I would classify it as such. There is stuff in the guild bank, but the guild store has only two items in it. The guild master is MIA, presumed eaten.

Is this something I am worried about? Not really. I honestly expect early guilds to be largely vacant because there is no down side to joining a guild for a game you have no intention of playing long term. The 30 day free trial attracted so many non-subscribers that it is inevitable that something like a guild would fail. On top of that, guilds have been in an infancy stage for the last four months and I think that guilds are only now becoming something to start being interested in.

My Horde WoW guild has 303 members, down from 350, and typically there will be 1-3 people from that guild online at any one time. Quite often, I am the only one. About 18% of this guild has been online in the last week. The guild master has been online in the last two weeks but his "staff" has been absent for the last month. Is this guild dead? Yeah, I would say it is.

Why do I bring this WoW guild up? Well, obviously I am terrible at picking guilds.

I don't judge a game's success based on the activity of guilds. Too small of a sample size and it may not reflect the larger population.

You misunderstand. This is a large permanent multi-game guild that did not seek to recruit nor did recruit until a few weeks after the game launched. We have been around for years and many of us have played in multiple games together. There application process alone usually takes week. We are what you would call hardcore gamers.

And now, out of over 100 people that were active during early access, I have yet to see more than one other person on in over 2 weeks.

My guild, however, is not dead. Indeed, when I hopped onto Mumble, I found 11 people on comms playing Neverwinter. I loaded it up, and 20 people were playing--at a time when I was the only guildie in ESO. Even Final Fantasy and DDO had more players than ESO.

This game was MASSIVE at launch. HUGE.

Now... ain't no problem trying to farm mats any more.

Heck, even the gold farmers have moved on...

Nocturnalis · August 2014

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

This is one of those websites that takes a very specific data set and attempts to generalize it to a larger community based on the premise that (1) they have enough of a sample size to represent a larger community and (2) that their community has the same cross-section as the larger community.

Specifically, this is all about people who run the Raptr spyware and what games they play.

It is very accurate in how it portrays Raptr users but not so much when it comes to everyone else.

It might be worth noting that Elder Scrolls Online is down in the bottom 50 of the current Top 100 on Steam and is at 2000 players today. While it is below Rift (2500 players today) it is well above World of Warcraft and Wildstar, which apparently no one is playing anymore.

I do hope that was an attempt at humor. Steam can only measures games played that were sold via Steam. As such, it isn't a very good indicator unless compared to its own numbers over time--i.e. if you were to look at 3,000 Steam users last month, and 2,000 this month, that would be an indicator one could extrapolate to overall trends.

However, the problem with that would be a lot of people will be leaving at the end of the their one month after purchasing via Steam.

I think LordRichter's point went over your head. Public school much?

based upon the fact that Lord Richter and I are actually engaged in debating actual issues, it looks like you were the one who had a fly-over.

Fact, I posted my (on topic) reply a page or so back... Keep up, keep up.

Moonglum83 · August 2014

Morostyle wrote: »

Q: What happend?
A: Worst programmers in the history of MMORPG. They litterly added more bugs/exploits when trying to fix current issues.

I already unsubscriped today - I might be back @ ESO in half a year or so (if it still exists)

GL HF

Aren't you that guy that steamrolled through content to get to the top of VR as quickly as possible and told everyone what an über-l33t player you are by using certain exploits (as an example)?

Q: What is the possible reason for your disdain of ESO?
A: You are a blowhard and elitist, nothing ever pleases his highness Morostyle the Obnoxious.

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Vizier wrote: »

LOL. I think i recall hearing that ESO was topping the charts in revenue from sales and subs.

I want some of what your smoking. Techage... Lols

I would love to see your references.

But to be fair, there were reports of that when the game was released. I have seen credible reports of up to 1.5 million sales.

Trouble is, Steam quickly marked it down to half price to generate some sales. Walmart marked it down 75% within 2 months of release.

Look at the Steam metascores: Final Fantasy XIV has an 83. Rift--84. Eve--88. Everquest 2--83.

ESO? 71.

Pathetic numbers. People just don't like this game.

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

This is one of those websites that takes a very specific data set and attempts to generalize it to a larger community based on the premise that (1) they have enough of a sample size to represent a larger community and (2) that their community has the same cross-section as the larger community.

Specifically, this is all about people who run the Raptr spyware and what games they play.

It is very accurate in how it portrays Raptr users but not so much when it comes to everyone else.

It might be worth noting that Elder Scrolls Online is down in the bottom 50 of the current Top 100 on Steam and is at 2000 players today. While it is below Rift (2500 players today) it is well above World of Warcraft and Wildstar, which apparently no one is playing anymore.

I do hope that was an attempt at humor. Steam can only measures games played that were sold via Steam. As such, it isn't a very good indicator unless compared to its own numbers over time--i.e. if you were to look at 3,000 Steam users last month, and 2,000 this month, that would be an indicator one could extrapolate to overall trends.

However, the problem with that would be a lot of people will be leaving at the end of the their one month after purchasing via Steam.

I think LordRichter's point went over your head. Public school much?

based upon the fact that Lord Richter and I are actually engaged in debating actual issues, it looks like you were the one who had a fly-over.

Fact, I posted my (on topic) reply a page or so back... Keep up, keep up.

Stay relevant if you want to be read and brought into the conversation.

epoling · August 2014

I don't understand why anybody would give credence to a set of numbers from something as self-selective as Raptr. First, it claims a lot of users, but what does that really mean? People who actively use it, people who have it on their computer and it sits in the background tracking them, people who have signed up and some point in time, whether or not they currently use it? For the most part, this is something you have to actively seek out and activate. That automatically means it isn't a broad subset of people playing MMOs. It also undoubtedly leaves out a lot of Steam users, who would see Raptr as just duplication of what they already have.

MMO players are, for the most part, in their 30's and older. (That is not just ESO. That is most MMOs. More disposable income for subs plus more patience for the long haul needed for this type of game. Plus, there are just more people over 30 than under - a fact of actual demographics.) According to their own published demographics, Raptr's user base is overwhelmingly under 35 (approximately 1/3 are 18-24 and 1/3 are 25-34). That will skew their numbers in such a way as to be meaningless in a genre that tends to be played more by the group that makes up 1/3 of their users.

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

epoling wrote: »

I don't understand why anybody would give credence to a set of numbers from something as self-selective as Raptr. First, it claims a lot of users, but what does that really mean? People who actively use it, people who have it on their computer and it sits in the background tracking them, people who have signed up and some point in time, whether or not they currently use it? For the most part, this is something you have to actively seek out and activate. That automatically means it isn't a broad subset of people playing MMOs. It also undoubtedly leaves out a lot of Steam users, who would see Raptr as just duplication of what they already have.

MMO players are, for the most part, in their 30's and older. (That is not just ESO. That is most MMOs. More disposable income for subs plus more patience for the long haul needed for this type of game. Plus, there are just more people over 30 than under - a fact of actual demographics.) According to their own published demographics, Raptr's user base is overwhelmingly under 35 (approximately 1/3 are 18-24 and 1/3 are 25-34). That will skew their numbers in such a way as to be meaningless in a genre that tends to be played more by the group that makes up 1/3 of their users.

Because less than perfect numbers are better than no numbers, and while they were crowing about the success of ESO when it launched, Zenimax is being very tight-lipped right now. Thus we have to go by the best available data from wherever it comes from. Thus, we look at Raptr numbers, and pricing patterns, and the number of Steam users, and the one I did not know about until 40 minutes ago, the abysmal Steam metascore--71.

71.

Let me explain how low that score is. There are only 3 ranked MMOs on Steam that have scored lower than ESO. They are: Raiderz, Spiral Knights, and Forsaken World. I had not heard of those nuggets, but I noticed all 3 of them are free to play.

That is how popular and well received ESO is.

Holycannoli · August 2014

A lot of the Steam metascore is from people who say to buy it from ZOS not Steam. It's not all a disklike of the game itself. Read the reviews and you'll see.

Nocturnalis · August 2014

Because less than perfect numbers are better than no numbers

Bad data is bad data. End of story.

Stay relevant if you want to be read and brought into the conversation.

Read and reply to my original post. It is relevant. I hit on all the recent points a couple pages ago. Keep dodging.

DieAlteHexe · August 2014

Bridge...missing its denizen.

Nocturnalis · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

Because less than perfect numbers are better than no numbers

Bad data is bad data. End of story.

Stay relevant if you want to be read and brought into the conversation.

Read and reply to my original post. It is relevant. I hit on all the recent points a couple pages ago. Keep dodging.

I think it is ignorant to take these sources that you have cited at face value, when they could be very skewed. 17 million install base for Raptr, we don't know the demographics, which most likely are a younger crowd that is into titles like LoL, Dota, WoW, and CoD. ESO seems to have an older core audience.

Long and sort of it is that June was the first whole month after all the initial free trial time ran out for those who played at launch. So it isn't a surprise that there was a drop off. ZOS also didn't handle the first month very well either, so that is contributing factor.

I am not sure being on the low end of the top 20 list of Raptr really indicates failure, as seems to be what you are implying.

16.76%, 8.15%, 6.13% of play time for LoL, Dota, and WoW, seem on the low side for games that claim to have millions upon millions of players. But this is probably another flaw in using Raptr for metrics.

Elsonso · August 2014

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

You misunderstand. This is a large permanent multi-game guild that did not seek to recruit nor did recruit until a few weeks after the game launched. We have been around for years and many of us have played in multiple games together. There application process alone usually takes week. We are what you would call hardcore gamers.

Yeah, I did not get that this was a multi-game guild, but it may surprise you to know that it does not matter, other than such a group is more likely to fail on ESO.

A homogeneous guild will have a better success rate than an established guild testing the ESO waters.

I think that ESO is a niche game that is aspiring to be mainstream. All of the Elder Scrolls games are niche games with aspirations of mainstream life. I think this is part of the Zenimax culture since they seemed to be inspired to make niche games.

ESO is not for everyone. They made significant design decisions that separate them from the mainstream of MMOs and we hear about them in the forums quite frequently. Most of the people who remind us of this are long gone, but a few remain. I expect that all but of few of these tortured souls will be gone at or before the start of November.

ESO will be a success because of their differences, not because of how well they emulated and improved on the time honored MMO principles. They will never win over the types that play for reasons that ESO does not support, and some of them will continue to rally against the game whenever they can. However, I expect that as things settle down there will exist a growing fan base for the game.

There are a certain number of people who are interested in the game but are unwilling to be early adopters. Life is always hard on the early adopters (frequently called post-release beta testers). As the game matures, these people will enter the game. As word gets out about the game and it becomes harder to find non-subscribers (former players and bloggers) complaining, new players that join will have a better idea of what to expect and will be more likely to stick around.

I don't agree with the whole ESO package, but what I do agree with outweighs the disagreement. There is plenty for me to disagree with, trust me. Still, I see improvements in the areas of the game that interest me. Zenimax seems to be on a predefined track that extends into 2015. It will be interesting to see where they are when that initial track runs out.

Rosveen · August 2014

You know that Metascore is a weighted average of professional reviews, not regular players' opinions, right? And most of those were written in April-May?

Admittedly, ESO user score on Metacritic is even worse. :P

Deathspawner · August 2014

Hi all. I wrote the Techgage pieces linked here.

I should clear up that Raptr isn't -just- for PC, but since Techgage is a PC-focused site, that was likewise the focus of that post. Console users can tie their respective XBL/PSN accounts to Raptr, and it will track gameplay for that platform. Raptr used to have a top-list of most-played games per-platform, but it seems to be hidden now. I had the results for the PC because they were directly mailed to me.

In the end, it's truly hard to have a proper "top 10" based on game subscriptions alone, because it's rare that a developer will tell you what those numbers are right there and then. And we need ALL of them to disclose that information for an accurate list - unless we're just dealing with revenue of public companies, perhaps.

Nonetheless, there's been a lot of great insight in this thread.

Nocturnalis wrote: »

The author of this article seems slightly biased...

Not biased - I just don't like seeing brand-new MMOs hit a decline so fast. I have nothing at all against ESO, nor have interest in WildStar (I don't even know what it looks like). For that matter, I wouldn't play WildStar simply because it's an NCsoft game, and I can't excuse it for what it's turned Lineage II into. The same could be said about Trion and Defiance...

I know extremely little about ESO, but I'd have to guess (or at least hope) that Bethesda is handing the game a lot better than those two companies handle theirs (I have a feeling I'll be told otherwise ;-)).

Nocturnalis wrote: »

I would also ask what is the install base and demographics of Raptr? The company claims 17 million users. Is this 13 - 18 year olds? ...18-24 year olds?

It has no target audience. I discovered the service a number of years ago, and since XFire (a similar service) went downhill, I moved over to it. It's great for those who like to track all of their gameplay and achievements.

sm00nieb16_ESO wrote: »

jambam817_ESO wrote: »

I can make lists too! And 1999 Everquest is still on top

Asheron's Call better be on that list too!

I concur ;-) I've been playing AC since 2002 (it's still around!).

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Rosveen wrote: »

You know that Metascore is a weighted average of professional reviews, not regular players' opinions, right? And most of those were written in April-May?

Admittedly, ESO user score on Metacritic is even worse. :P

I see it as 71--same as on Steam.

Oh, wait, I just found the user score--5.1 out of 10.

That is BRUTAL hard.

TY for informing me about Metacritic. It is a new resource.

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Deathspawner wrote: »

Hi all. I wrote the Techgage pieces linked here.

...

Sort of clears THAT up!

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

You misunderstand. This is a large permanent multi-game guild that did not seek to recruit nor did recruit until a few weeks after the game launched. We have been around for years and many of us have played in multiple games together. There application process alone usually takes week. We are what you would call hardcore gamers.

Yeah, I did not get that this was a multi-game guild, but it may surprise you to know that it does not matter, other than such a group is more likely to fail on ESO.

A homogeneous guild will have a better success rate than an established guild testing the ESO waters.

I think that ESO is a niche game that is aspiring to be mainstream...

I think you are correct. It wanted to do something which it could not pull off.

No, which it DID NOT pull off. It could have, but didn't. And I think the major reason is the game does not encourage team play. Almost everyone does DPS and that is that. We may use different spells, but the pressure is on everyone to focus on AOE DPS.

And, while I don't like the lack of an AH, for me that was not a big deal. I tend to be self-sufficient with my toons.

But, overall, while I can't quite figure out why, ESO never installed a sense of community. Maybe it was the lack of tags over our heads. Maybe it was the lack of dungeons for groups. Maybe it was the fact that the DAoC-style RvRvR was little more than a Rift-style zergfest.

Maybe the game was just more fun to play solo.

No, not fun. The game is not fun. It is more a light adventure of sorts, but I never got a sense of fun from playing. I've had more fun dying getting to Rags than I did in all of ESO.

I dunno...

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

Because less than perfect numbers are better than no numbers

Bad data is bad data. End of story.

Stay relevant if you want to be read and brought into the conversation.

Read and reply to my original post. It is relevant. I hit on all the recent points a couple pages ago. Keep dodging.

Believe whatever you like. Raptr, Walmart, Steam, and Metacritic are all wrong, while you are correct.

Now shoo, the adults want to talk.

Nocturnalis · August 2014

Deathspawner wrote: »

I should clear up that Raptr isn't -just- for PC, but since Techgage is a PC-focused site, that was likewise the focus of that post. Console users can tie their respective XBL/PSN accounts to Raptr, and it will track gameplay for that platform.

I think that point made was that there isn't a Raptr client for Mac (it was discontinued in 2009). So Raptr is unable to measure ESO play time on that platform.

Admittedly, the Mac user number is probably not that high of a ratio compared to the total number of ESO subscriptions.

In April’s look, we saw Bethesda’s The Elder Scrolls Online enter the charts at number 5, and I quipped, “We’ll see how long it’ll last there.” Well, as it happens, it didn’t last too long at the top. It placed 8 in May, and then dropped to 20 in June. Unless there’s a bit of a resurgence of players, it looks like July’s report will see it drop off of the chart.

Deathspawner wrote: »

Not biased - I just don't like seeing brand-new MMOs hit a decline so fast. I have nothing at all against ESO.

Well, if you quip the same about WildStar, we can call it even.

---

In the end, it's truly hard to have a proper "top 10" based on game subscriptions alone, because it's rare that a developer will tell you what those numbers are right there and then. And we need ALL of them to disclose that information for an accurate list - unless we're just dealing with revenue of public companies, perhaps.

This only clears things up as far as saying the only way for an accurate list would be direct reports from the publishers. Which we don't have. However, that does not give the okay to use inaccurate data as a measuring stick.

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

Deathspawner wrote: »

In the end, it's truly hard to have a proper "top 10" based on game subscriptions alone, because it's rare that a developer will tell you what those numbers are right there and then. And we need ALL of them to disclose that information for an accurate list - unless we're just dealing with revenue of public companies, perhaps.

This only clears things up as far as saying the only way for an accurate list would be direct reports from the publishers. Which we don't have. However, that does not give the okay to use inaccurate data as a measuring stick.

You really don't understand science or statistical analysis, do you? The only sampling which is ever 100% accurate is when every member of the population is tested/studied. That happens virtually none of the time because it is either impossible or cost prohibitive. To you, all this yields is "inaccurate data".

To the rest of us, we understand that almost all data is imperfect, but it is better than no data. We also understand that when every metric of imperfect data is put together and none of them individually or combined indicate anything to the contrary of any of the individual data sets, we are probably good out to 2-3 standard deviations.

Yeah, I know you have no idea what that last sentence really means, but that is your problem.

Deathspawner · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

I think that point made was that there isn't a Raptr client for Mac (it was discontinued in 2009). So Raptr is unable to measure ESO play time on that platform.

Great point, and one I missed. In a way, it's kind of pathetic that there's no Raptr client for Mac. I plan to ask the company about that tomorrow. I'm a Linux fan, and had been wondering when Raptr might come to that platform, but it might be quite some time if a Mac version is not even available yet.

Deathspawner wrote: »

Not biased - I just don't like seeing brand-new MMOs hit a decline so fast. I have nothing at all against ESO.

Nocturnalis wrote: »

Well, if you quip the same about WildStar, we can call it even.

That'll be the case, the next time I write this kind of post (if it places in the top 20, that is). That's just the way it goes; I'm totally detached to these MMOs, so I write based on the facts I'm given. I didn't say "we'll see how long it lasts there" as some sort of jeer; it was a simple statement.

Nocturnalis wrote: »

However, that does not give the okay to use inaccurate data as a measuring stick.

The first post referred to revenue; so that's fair. I mean, Lineage 1, which came out in 1998, ranked second. No one in their right mind would call that the second-best MMO of all time, though.

The second post referred to the top 20 list on Raptr, which is also fair because it was made clear that that was where the top 20 came from (especially clear given the screenshot). A Raptr top 20 is not definitive by any means, but I am not sure how anything can be on the PC. Millions use Raptr though, so it's not totally worthless. We don't have a better gauge to go by, as far as I can tell, so it's at least interesting to look at. It doesn't have to be treated as gospel.

Soothy · August 2014

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

You know that Metascore is a weighted average of professional reviews, not regular players' opinions, right? And most of those were written in April-May?

Admittedly, ESO user score on Metacritic is even worse. :P

I see it as 71--same as on Steam.

Oh, wait, I just found the user score--5.1 out of 10.

That is BRUTAL hard.

TY for informing me about Metacritic. It is a new resource.

Whilst I do not disagree with anything else you have mentioned statistically, the difference between the critics average versus the user score on Metacritic is often quite different. WoW experienced a similar difference in opinion (albeit a higher score).

Nocturnalis · August 2014

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

You really don't understand science or statistical analysis, do you? The only sampling which is ever 100% accurate is when every member of the population is tested/studied. That happens virtually none of the time because it is either impossible or cost prohibitive. To you, all this yields is "inaccurate data".

To the rest of us, we understand that almost all data is imperfect, but it is better than no data. We also understand that when every metric of imperfect data is put together and none of them individually or combined indicate anything to the contrary of any of the individual data sets, we are probably good out to 2-3 standard deviations.

Yeah, I know you have no idea what that last sentence really means, but that is your problem.

This Raptr top 20 list is hardly scientific data.

I am arguing that we don't know the method and the demographics that Raptr uses other than they sample their users (which the author of the article that you cited admits that we don't know what Raptr's target audience is). Demographics and sample data are missing... Without that information we cannot really gauge the accuracy of Raptr's top 20 list. We can't form a concrete opinion at how it pertains to ESO, the best that it provides is conjecture.

And I am not arguing that all statical data is inaccurate... your point on that is a straw man.

Statistics plus sampling information is good and gives us insight on judging the accuracy of the statistics. Nielsen Ratings has things down to a science when measuring their sample audience when TV content is viewed through their "Set Meters". However, even they are starting to face issues with data accuracy as people are moving from watching TV on the couch to watching it on tablets, computers and smartphones. And rightly so it is starting to face criticism. Advertisers need good data to target their markets, I don't see them wanting to drop 250k on an ad spot based on bad or no data. They want good/ better data, they don't call it a day at "bad data is better than no data".

zhevon · August 2014

Well, I have personal observation that (as well as why) its not doing well ... but its very subjective. Well I looked up raptr (which I had never heard of before) and I don't know how reliable their numbers are.

Grunim · August 2014

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

LOL. I think i recall hearing that ESO was topping the charts in revenue from sales and subs.

I want some of what your smoking. Techage... Lols

I would love to see your references.

But to be fair, there were reports of that when the game was released. I have seen credible reports of up to 1.5 million sales.

Trouble is, Steam quickly marked it down to half price to generate some sales. Walmart marked it down 75% within 2 months of release.

Look at the Steam metascores: Final Fantasy XIV has an 83. Rift--84. Eve--88. Everquest 2--83.

ESO? 71.

Pathetic numbers. People just don't like this game.

Funny you mention rating numbers. Today I noticed that the User Rating score for ESO on MMORPG.com recently increased to 7.9 where it had been holding steady at 7.8 for a couple of months.

It's a small approval increase, but MMORPG.com is known for a having critical users and ESO is trending in a more favorable direction.

KitLightning · August 2014

Grunim wrote: »

Funny you mention rating numbers. Today I noticed that the User Rating score for ESO on MMORPG.com recently increased to 7.9 where it had been holding steady at 7.8 for a couple of months...

Oh noos the bots got the User Ratings too...

d.crosgrove_ESO · August 2014

Nocturnalis wrote: »

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

You really don't understand science or statistical analysis, do you? The only sampling which is ever 100% accurate is when every member of the population is tested/studied. That happens virtually none of the time because it is either impossible or cost prohibitive. To you, all this yields is "inaccurate data".

To the rest of us, we understand that almost all data is imperfect, but it is better than no data. We also understand that when every metric of imperfect data is put together and none of them individually or combined indicate anything to the contrary of any of the individual data sets, we are probably good out to 2-3 standard deviations.

Yeah, I know you have no idea what that last sentence really means, but that is your problem.

This Raptr top 20 list is hardly scientific data.

I am arguing that we don't know the method and the demographics that Raptr uses other than they sample their users (which the author of the article that you cited admits that we don't know what Raptr's target audience is). Demographics and sample data are missing... Without that information we cannot really gauge the accuracy of Raptr's top 20 list. We can't form a concrete opinion at how it pertains to ESO, the best that it provides is conjecture.

And I am not arguing that all statical data is inaccurate... your point on that is a straw man.

Statistics plus sampling information is good and gives us insight on judging the accuracy of the statistics. Nielsen Ratings has things down to a science when measuring their sample audience when TV content is viewed through their "Set Meters". However, even they are starting to face issues with data accuracy as people are moving from watching TV on the couch to watching it on tablets, computers and smartphones. And rightly so it is starting to face criticism. Advertisers need good data to target their markets, I don't see them wanting to drop 250k on an ad spot based on bad or no data. They want good/ better data, they don't call it a day at "bad data is better than no data".

ALL of the metrics point to exactly the same thing--a game with a dwindling amount of users. A niche game that strived for more, and in just a few months, is heading towards Eve levels of play. (Not that I don't like Eve--I quit because it was consuming WAY too much of my time.)

And you are free to believe that the Raptr data is useless. However, I would remind you that Raptr is a business that has people and companies in the industry paying their dollars for it. You may not believe it provides good data, but the industry people who study it and base their organizational development decisions upon its data know it is an invaluable service.

You see Raptr as a GameSpy wannabe because you have never studied the company. You know zero about their business model, and it obvious you know zero about statistics*.

Your arguments are as impressive as saying, "Statistics pulled from Facebook use are worthless because we don't know the Facebook user demographics."

The people in the industry follow Raptr's data trends with a keen eye know that Raptr had 1 million users 4 years ago, has 22 million now, and is adding 1.5 million per month.

That is a LOT of data. And people far smarter than you who work in the industry base their business decisions upon it.

Now, you can continue to claim you know more than they do. Such is your right. Thankfully, this is still a free country where cranks are allowed (and to be valued!) You can even come in here and claim that Raptr and Walmart and Steam and Metacritic and everyone else in the world is wrong and you know ESO is doing well because your garden gnome told you.

Just, do yourself a favor, don't expect anyone else to believe your garden gnome--he isn't very smart.

Cheers

*Hint, it doesn't take much data to get to 95% reliability of plus or minus 3%. (And do NOT for a second think that means 92% to 98%, as it does NOT!)