Have you ever upgraded bag or bank space?

Uriel_Nocturne · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

I've maxed all my characters' Bag spaces and maxed out available Bank Space upgrades.

Even after that, I have a couple of characters whose inventories are nothing more than overflow bank space.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

Elsonso · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

If anything, all this poll demonstrates is that the forum consists of people from the 50% that have upgraded. It cannot be used to "debunk" anything that ZOS has said.

Bastijer · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

WhiteCoatSyndrome wrote: »

Maxed out on all my characters. I'd buy more if I could.

Same here

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

lordrichter wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

If anything, all this poll demonstrates is that the forum consists of people from the 50% that have upgraded. It cannot be used to "debunk" anything that ZOS has said.

I disagree. The numbers have been manipulated to agree with a BS statement by them, and it is OBVIOUS to anyone without blinders on. I asked in all 5 of my guilds and got results that agree with the ones here.

They are intentionally using skewed data to justify their failure to implement something that almost everyone is asking for. They either couldn't figure out how to do it in time for the rollout, or they simply didn't care enough to do it. Either way, they should be honest about why and not use BS data to back it up.

C'mon Richter, you are WAY smarter than this. You and I both know it.

STEVIL · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

STEVIL · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

lordrichter wrote: »

Knootewoot wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

Where it the world did you come up with the stat that 50% of people haven't upgraded their bags or bank? That doesn't even seem possible.

I think ZOS is right about the 50% . Those are the people that started the game, created a character, played a few zones but didn't like it and never returned. They probably never upgraded their bags / banks also. Zos does not only look at ACTIVE accounts.

Edit: I pressed the wrong vote. I have not FULLY upgraded though.

They could be looking at people who have not logged in over the last 2.5 years, but I certainly would not do that, if I was them. It is not beneficial for Development to base decisions like this on the behavior of people who do not play the game. This 50% appears to be startling enough for them to question the numbers, rather than just accept them. This makes me believe that they are looking at active players, and if they looked at everyone, it would be larger than 50% .

Now, what do they consider active? That is a bigger question. Is this everyone who logged in over the last week? Month? Six months? Other questions are interesting, too. Is there a bias with multiple accounts because they are less likely to do a lot of upgrades? Is it necessary to take into account max account character levels, and how long they have been playing? Are all characters on an account considered together or separately? Is one maxed character on an account enough to be in the "3%" or do they all have to be maxed?

I know @ZOS_RichLambert loves numbers, so I do wish he would pop in and give us some insight into this.

i agree and they specifically said "active players" for the 50% figure.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

Grileenor · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Stormahawk wrote: »

ZOS said that 50% of players never upgraded bank or bag space and that is why there are no storage options with the housing update.

No single player I know of, never upgraded bank or bag space. I have serious trouble believing in ZOSs words any longer since I viewed that part of ESO live.

AlwaysOnFire · January 2017

i don't find it surprising that 50% of "players" have never upgraded bank space or bag space. Just like how the majority of social media accounts are dead, there are probably lots of inactive accounts or characters, especially when the game is now f2p! I wonder if they sampled accounts consistently active (as in: maybe log in once a week or more over the past few months? The kind of activity that would indicate a player would be interested in investing time into furnishing a house) or just accounts in general?

For every single facebook account, blog, or other register-able there are often a dozen inactive, blank, or dead accounts. I don't see why a MMO would be any different.

Elsonso · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

If anything, all this poll demonstrates is that the forum consists of people from the 50% that have upgraded. It cannot be used to "debunk" anything that ZOS has said.

I disagree. The numbers have been manipulated to agree with a BS statement by them, and it is OBVIOUS to anyone without blinders on. I asked in all 5 of my guilds and got results that agree with the ones here.

They are intentionally using skewed data to justify their failure to implement something that almost everyone is asking for. They either couldn't figure out how to do it in time for the rollout, or they simply didn't care enough to do it. Either way, they should be honest about why and not use BS data to back it up.

C'mon Richter, you are WAY smarter than this. You and I both know it.

That's lordrichter, to you, and yes, I am WAY smarter.

The statement you made presumes that they were deliberately deceptive. That is not going to be the case, no matter what the poll says. Like you said, these numbers obviously wrong, and the devs would have to have thought the same thing when they saw them. If these are the numbers they used to make their decision, it is actually unreasonable to assume that they did not go back to Business Intelligence and ask them what they were smoking.

More than that, they do not answer to use. They have no reason to lie. It does not matter, when they can just say nothing. Our opinion on the matter is not going to change anything. This is already done. Not enough people will cancel subscriptions to even be noticed, and whatever this thing coming up on Jan 31 is, it stands to generate more revenue than anything lost from house storage rage. It does not matter what we think about the reasons behind house storage, so there is no reason to be deceptive.

So, until they admit that the numbers released on ESO Live were a mistake, I have to go with what they said. It simply makes more sense that way, even in the face of numbers that don't.

Here's hoping that they will update us and release some numbers that are not so obviously wrong, or at least explain why they are accurate.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

AlwaysOnFire wrote: »

i don't find it surprising that 50% of "players" have never upgraded bank space or bag space. Just like how the majority of social media accounts are dead, there are probably lots of inactive accounts or characters, especially when the game is now f2p! I wonder if they sampled accounts consistently active (as in: maybe log in once a week or more over the past few months? The kind of activity that would indicate a player would be interested in investing time into furnishing a house) or just accounts in general?

For every single facebook account, blog, or other register-able there are often a dozen inactive, blank, or dead accounts. I don't see why a MMO would be any different.

Because if you did it that way, you could not manipulate the numbers to hide your failure.

Numbers don't lie, but people do and use false data and manipulated information all the time.

anitajoneb17_ESO · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

If anything, all this poll demonstrates is that the forum consists of people from the 50% that have upgraded. It cannot be used to "debunk" anything that ZOS has said.

I disagree. The numbers have been manipulated to agree with a BS statement by them, and it is OBVIOUS to anyone without blinders on. I asked in all 5 of my guilds and got results that agree with the ones here.

Lol. We're free to believe or not believe ZOS, but unless you can somehow demonstrate that your 5 guilds and this forum are statistically representative of the overall player population (and you can't), you're not "debunking" anything here.

Vonovosi · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Maxed bank inventory. Max inventory on 9/10 alts, working on the 10th, If '50%' of the player base has never upgraded inventory like you say, I have a feeling that is the segment of the community that played for a week and quit.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

psychotic13 wrote: »

Stupid poll is stupid, everyone has upgraded it somewhat

It's not a stupid poll when we are debunking the statistic that ZoS put out that a LARGE percentage of the population has not ever upgraded their packs and used that stat to justify not putting storage in the new housing update.

We are providing facts when we were blatantly lied to.

If anything, all this poll demonstrates is that the forum consists of people from the 50% that have upgraded. It cannot be used to "debunk" anything that ZOS has said.

I disagree. The numbers have been manipulated to agree with a BS statement by them, and it is OBVIOUS to anyone without blinders on. I asked in all 5 of my guilds and got results that agree with the ones here.

Lol. We're free to believe or not believe ZOS, but unless you can somehow demonstrate that your 5 guilds and this forum are statistically representative of the overall player population (and you can't), you're not "debunking" anything here.

Keep drinking the cool-aid. If you can't see what they have done to manipulate the data, it is because you CHOOSE not to.

I'm supposed to believe the trash data simply because I cannot take a large enough snapshot sample of the player base like they can?

Would you believe garbage statistics that I give you on the Automotive Industry simply because you cannot compile differing data? No you would not.

I really don't need to do a full statistical analysis to know that they are full of ***. I live in reality and I know how business really works.

anitajoneb17_ESO · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

I'm supposed to believe the trash data simply because I cannot take a large enough snapshot sample of the player base like they can?

Nope. You're not supposed to believe anything, and neither am I. All I'm saying is that you cannot *prove* anything, one way or the other. Not with this poll, not with your 5 guilds, not with anything at your disposal.

It's all belief or disbelief. But, like you, I don't believe that ZOS' statistics reflect any kind of relevant reality. But I cannot prove it either.

Stormahawk · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

On the topic of "active players" and how 50% of them don't upgrade inventory, there are a lot of bots in the game. And I mean a lot. I noticed over time from my bot reporting days that the bots farm for a week, disappear, and then get replaced with new bots that continue to do the same thing. That means there are thousands of active players that "join" the game every week who are actually bots. Each week those thousands get replaced by new ones. Over time that adds up. Depending what timeframe ZOS considers "active", these bots could very well be a significant portion of that 50%.

Additionally, a lot of players might have selling alt accounts that they have't bothered to upgrade storage on since they don't intend to play on those accounts. These may represent a much smaller amount of the population than the bots, but it is still something to take into consideration.

Try playing the game without upgrading bag or bank. It becomes unplayable pretty quickly. If anything, ZOS devs saying that "50% of players never upgrade bank or bag space" shows just how out of touch they are with reality and that they don't even bother playing their own game.

Maybe ZOS should run data instead on players over level 50 and see what they come up with. There is no way to level to 50 without bag upgrades. The inventory management would be so frustrating that the player would quit before then. This is why I think ZOS's 50% stat is garbage. It includes a lot of inactive accounts and bots, and thus does not accurately reflect the average player. From whatever data ZOS has, the average player just might in fact be a level 15 Chinese bot.

STEVIL · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

See tho there is a difference between accepting what they say while wearing wool and making explicit claims about how they did their counting.

it is perfectly reasonable to say "i dont think that stat is accurate" but not to say "they counted it this way" when you admit you have no data to make such a claim on.

there is a whole lot of room between "accepting a" and "claiming b is true instead" where "not accepting a" lives happy as a clam.

But the not so simple fact is according to the statements made:
For what "housing systems non-necessities" we will get day one of release, storage was not included and part of their reasoning for making it a lower priority to possibly come later was their metrics on storage in-game used by players and specifically active players.

But for me, i dont really care to get another umpteenth way to increase inventory slots. i got plenty in game now and even tho i need more spaces what i need more than that is a way to group and organize storage.

People who talk about how easy adding storage is may just want an unpteenth way to add slots but to do anything close to what i want takes more coding than that.

i wanna be able to create a chest and a locker and put all my spriggan stuff in it and have it read "Spriggan Chest" when i hover over it.

i want to create a table or a shelf where i can put a number of "stacks" of items and hover over the items and pick up the stack - seeing what it is when i hover over it. hover click grabbed and right click to see my inventory and... maybe already tied to the tabs in inventory.

i want armor stands i can put stuff on and then be able to "don" that whole setup swapping what i have on for that.

But another way to just add more slots to the disorganized set of slots spread around my characters and banks... sure no problem- add that after all the other things folks want that dont exist in multiple multiple ways now.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

STEVIL wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

See tho there is a difference between accepting what they say while wearing wool and making explicit claims about how they did their counting.

it is perfectly reasonable to say "i dont think that stat is accurate" but not to say "they counted it this way" when you admit you have no data to make such a claim on.

there is a whole lot of room between "accepting a" and "claiming b is true instead" where "not accepting a" lives happy as a clam.

But the not so simple fact is according to the statements made:
For what "housing systems non-necessities" we will get day one of release, storage was not included and part of their reasoning for making it a lower priority to possibly come later was their metrics on storage in-game used by players and specifically active players.

Bottom line in my opinion is that if they are unwilling to disclose their data source, than my data is just as valid.

None of my comments stated in any way HOW they counted their data - my claim is that they manipulated the data source so it would reflect the result that they wanted. I made no other claims beyond the fact that I believe their data has been manipulated and that the data that I collected differs greatly from what they are telling us.

Is my data source 100% an accurate depiction of the whole player base? No it is not.

Is theirs? Based on the data that I have collected - No it is not.

If someone can actually prove me wrong with real information, I welcome it. Until then my statement stands.

jedtb16_ESO · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

See tho there is a difference between accepting what they say while wearing wool and making explicit claims about how they did their counting.

it is perfectly reasonable to say "i dont think that stat is accurate" but not to say "they counted it this way" when you admit you have no data to make such a claim on.

there is a whole lot of room between "accepting a" and "claiming b is true instead" where "not accepting a" lives happy as a clam.

But the not so simple fact is according to the statements made:
For what "housing systems non-necessities" we will get day one of release, storage was not included and part of their reasoning for making it a lower priority to possibly come later was their metrics on storage in-game used by players and specifically active players.

Bottom line in my opinion is that if they are unwilling to disclose their data source, than my data is just as valid.

None of my comments stated in any way HOW they counted their data - my claim is that they manipulated the data source so it would reflect the result that they wanted. I made no other claims beyond the fact that I believe their data has been manipulated and that the data that I collected differs greatly from what they are telling us.

Is my data source 100% an accurate depiction of the whole player base? No it is not.

Is theirs? Based on the data that I have collected - No it is not.

If someone can actually prove me wrong with real information, I welcome it. Until then my statement stands.

their data source is the game metrics. would they disclose that?

no. because it is privileged information, to do so would be a breach of due diligence.

and no, your statement does not stand it is just a typical bit of interweb hysteria.

Easily_Lost · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

I know a lot of those that said they have maxed out all there slots. How many armour sets do you need? Are you an ESO+ subscriber? If not then most of your inventory space is probably taken up with crafting mats.
Just thought I would ask.

SquareSausage · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Going by some of the play you see in random dungeon groups, its not entirely unreasonable to agree with the concept of 50% of people havent upgraded a bag going on just how lacking in knowledge some of the player base is.

Bouldercleave · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

See tho there is a difference between accepting what they say while wearing wool and making explicit claims about how they did their counting.

it is perfectly reasonable to say "i dont think that stat is accurate" but not to say "they counted it this way" when you admit you have no data to make such a claim on.

there is a whole lot of room between "accepting a" and "claiming b is true instead" where "not accepting a" lives happy as a clam.

But the not so simple fact is according to the statements made:
For what "housing systems non-necessities" we will get day one of release, storage was not included and part of their reasoning for making it a lower priority to possibly come later was their metrics on storage in-game used by players and specifically active players.

Bottom line in my opinion is that if they are unwilling to disclose their data source, than my data is just as valid.

None of my comments stated in any way HOW they counted their data - my claim is that they manipulated the data source so it would reflect the result that they wanted. I made no other claims beyond the fact that I believe their data has been manipulated and that the data that I collected differs greatly from what they are telling us.

Is my data source 100% an accurate depiction of the whole player base? No it is not.

Is theirs? Based on the data that I have collected - No it is not.

If someone can actually prove me wrong with real information, I welcome it. Until then my statement stands.

their data source is the game metrics. would they disclose that?

no. because it is privileged information, to do so would be a breach of due diligence.

and no, your statement does not stand it is just a typical bit of interweb hysteria.

I think hysteria may be a bit overly dramatic. I simply don't accept their information at face value like many want to do.

I don't believe their numbers, I have my own data to back up my personal feelings about it based on the information that I have access to, and frankly that is enough for me.

Couldn't really give two furry *** what anyone else thinks about it. You can agree or disagree at will. I made my position clear and it is what it is. There are certain individuals here that feel the need to over dramatize and insult anyone that has a different opinion than their own.

There is no rant here, no drama, no matter how much that you want there to be. I will defend my opinion as this being an open forum is specifically designed for that though.

STEVIL · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

SanSan wrote: »

They looked at every character instead of every account. Meaning 1 account has upgraded their bank and their bag on 1 character. Could have 7 mules that didn't so ZOS counts that. Their "numbers" are complete bs. I've dealt with a game company like them before. They make up ridic lies and bs stories about why this isn't there or how they can't add this.
I left that company's game for this but it seems it happens with a lot of companies now.
Disgusting.

Any evidence or just you had a vision or seance?

There is the bigger problem right there. We have no evidence, and they won't disclose how they came up with a number that dos not match any data that we can come up with.

If you ask in game you get figures similar to the ones that WE came up with here. They will not disclose the source of their data, so I guess we will just have to take their word for it.....

It's simple - we didn't get storage in housing because most of us don't upgrade our current storage already. They have the data to prove it behind the scenes and we must accept this as fact.

(puts on best sheep costume)

See tho there is a difference between accepting what they say while wearing wool and making explicit claims about how they did their counting.

it is perfectly reasonable to say "i dont think that stat is accurate" but not to say "they counted it this way" when you admit you have no data to make such a claim on.

there is a whole lot of room between "accepting a" and "claiming b is true instead" where "not accepting a" lives happy as a clam.

But the not so simple fact is according to the statements made:
For what "housing systems non-necessities" we will get day one of release, storage was not included and part of their reasoning for making it a lower priority to possibly come later was their metrics on storage in-game used by players and specifically active players.

Bottom line in my opinion is that if they are unwilling to disclose their data source, than my data is just as valid.

None of my comments stated in any way HOW they counted their data - my claim is that they manipulated the data source so it would reflect the result that they wanted. I made no other claims beyond the fact that I believe their data has been manipulated and that the data that I collected differs greatly from what they are telling us.

Is my data source 100% an accurate depiction of the whole player base? No it is not.

Is theirs? Based on the data that I have collected - No it is not.

If someone can actually prove me wrong with real information, I welcome it. Until then my statement stands.

their data source is the game metrics. would they disclose that?

no. because it is privileged information, to do so would be a breach of due diligence.

and no, your statement does not stand it is just a typical bit of interweb hysteria.

nah just the typical "cant prove me wrong" type of thinking ot what passes for thinking these days in some places.

Seems somewhere along the line "disproving a negative" became the standard for some.

i cannot prove wrong the notion that an invisble guy inside the refrigerator materializes and makes passionate love to my mangos... so i gues that would stand too.

In some circles.

As long as they know there is good solid fiduciary reason info wont be made public, they can make any claim that "has to be refuted by full release" and follow it down their rabbit hole of "not disproof equal validity."

unfortunately, for many of us, this type of reasoning isn't limited to video game company prioritization for initial release but plays out in real life day in and day out on stuff that matters.

lonewolf26 · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Upgraded to max bank and max storage on 10 toons PC-NA. I wonder if they're counting storage across all mega servers and platforms. I don't play on EU on any platform. I've a PS4 copy, but elected to stick to PC, so that account's active, but largely unutilized.

SquareSausage · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Bouldercleave wrote: »

I think hysteria may be a bit overly dramatic. I simply don't accept their information at face value like many want to do.

I don't believe their numbers, I have my own data to back up my personal feelings about it based on the information that I have access to, and frankly that is enough for me.

Couldn't really give two furry *** what anyone else thinks about it. You can agree or disagree at will. I made my position clear and it is what it is. There are certain individuals here that feel the need to over dramatize and insult anyone that has a different opinion than their own.

There is no rant here, no drama, no matter how much that you want there to be. I will defend my opinion as this being an open forum is specifically designed for that though.

i haven't received your survey in the mail yet, your data can't be accurate.

AlnilamE · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

7 characters at 200 slots
1 character at default because she's my Iron Vestige

240 Bank slots.

ESO+

Need. More. Space.

STEVIL · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

SquareSausage wrote: »

Bouldercleave wrote: »

I think hysteria may be a bit overly dramatic. I simply don't accept their information at face value like many want to do.

I don't believe their numbers, I have my own data to back up my personal feelings about it based on the information that I have access to, and frankly that is enough for me.

Couldn't really give two furry *** what anyone else thinks about it. You can agree or disagree at will. I made my position clear and it is what it is. There are certain individuals here that feel the need to over dramatize and insult anyone that has a different opinion than their own.

There is no rant here, no drama, no matter how much that you want there to be. I will defend my opinion as this being an open forum is specifically designed for that though.

i haven't received your survey in the mail yet, your data can't be accurate.

Its as accurate or valid as any other "nobody i knows does..." is...

i mean nobody i know went to the moon, so...

:-)

Kodrac · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

I think we on the forums are more (god I hate to use this term) pro so we're more knowledgeable than your average player so this poll might be like asking who here wears pants. But I doubt their metrics take into account the number of alts that haven't been invested in yet.

VelociousLegend · January 2017

I have upgraded my bag or bank space at least once

Only maxed out my bank and my main slots. I still struggle with inventory; especially after overland set farming when One Tamerial dropped.