No DE, SotR was not "well received"

[Kuestenjung]

18 minutes ago, BPNPC said:

Look at the graph. When you go from 30k players to 60k players, that's a huge amount of hype. When you go from 60k players back to 30k players in a week, that's failed expectations.

Don´t know about the rest of the world, but in germany were vacations at the time SotR was released and that would explain alot and has nothing to do with failed expectations.

[cookieknife]

Just now, KJRenz said:

You're comparing a quest and a big huge update, to a update that only reworked stuff and brought at least, 2 new things.

major updates sir. Specters of the rail is U19. so is Lunaro.  the War within is not split into 3 parts, U 19 was. (ignoring how they're going to release titania earlier splitting the war within in two though)

[rockscl]

steam charts deletes detailed information and resumes it for whatever reasons, that smooth curve that you see after u18 and inaros werent smooth at all in their day

[cookieknife]

1 minute ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

People wanted to see the new systems. They did. Whether they liked them or not is not at all shown by your graph. You are twisting the meaning of the data.

its not necessarily that they liked them or not. but if they liked them they would have played more and the game play would have went up instead of way down

[PoopManZ]

2 minutes ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

People wanted to see the new systems. They did. Whether they liked them or not is not at all shown by your graph. You are twisting the meaning of the data.

Actually you can say that by calculating the retention curve (or this case looking at the slope) by measuring the slope from time of updates playerbase to what ever point in time you choose. The amount of concurrent players from present to the past IS the % of people who stayed. I mean people being online is as direct a data point for people liking a game as possible.

Edited August 6, 2016 by PoopManZ

[Omega-Shadowblade]

Just now, cookieknife said:

its not necessarily that they liked them or not. but if they liked them they would have played more and the game play would have went up instead of way down

Not necessarily. A person can like a change but still find it boring. Truthfully the thoughts behind the matter are too varied between individuals for any of us to really say for certain.

[BPNPC]

2 minutes ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

People wanted to see the new systems. They did. Whether they liked them or not is not at all shown by your graph. You are twisting the meaning of the data.

If half your playerbase stops playing within a week after the update, you can be sure they didn't like it.

 

2 minutes ago, rockscl said:

steam charts deletes detailed information and resumes it for whatever reasons, that smooth curve that you see after u18 and inaros werent smooth at all in their day

The "smoothing out" you describe would only mean that smaller jumps (like the Lunaro, Rathuum, and Shadow Debt jumps) would be smoothed out. The 30k playerbase jump from SotR will persist for years.

[Kuestenjung]

2 minutes ago, cookieknife said:

 (ignoring how they're going to release titania earlier splitting the war within in two though)

They aren´t releasing Titania earlier, they are releasing the other stuff later, that´s why it is delayed again.

[Omega-Shadowblade]

1 minute ago, PoopManZ said:

Actually you can say that by calculating the retention curve (or this case looking at the slope) by measuring the slope from time of updates playerbase to what ever point in time you choose. The amount of concurrent players from present to the past IS the % of people who stayed.

Not really sure what you are trying to say to me. What I meant was this, A group of attendance numbers does not accurately display the opinions of the people. (I.e. school attendence does not mean people like school).

[armedpoop]

18 minutes ago, KJRenz said:

If you're going to keep the Steam Chart up there, then your post has no credibility. Sorry

It's not a valid source, also sizable enough portion? How do you know that? You don't. What's the other non steam playerbase population? How big are those numbers compared to Steams? How far apart are the numbers? Do you know? No?

Again, all the update really did was rework old systems to new systems. There have been a few new features, but players/vets already blew through it.

This does not mean it failed expectations, where did you pull that out of?

Are you serious? You are gonna discredit the whole thing because the steam player base isnt the main player base? Dropping 30k players isnt significant to you? You cant put 2 and 2 together to understand that a massive drop in players (from the steam version alone) means that player retention has been diminished directly after SoTR dropped? You cant make the leap in logic that what the steam charts show can probably be easily replicated in the non steam user base to some extent? I think its ridiculous to assume that the non steam version didnt see some kind of significant drop as well. 

I wish I lived in the fantasy world you do. 

[PoopManZ]

3 minutes ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

Not really sure what you are trying to say to me. What I meant was this, A group of attendance numbers does not accurately display the opinions of the people. (I.e. school attendence does not mean people like school).

That logic would invalidate any trend tracking statistical analysis out there. Again another misnomer, people actually playing your update is reflection of reception. And it covers all sorts of opinions of the update too. And this is why you use the concurrent player base curve to eliminate player schedules. 

Edited August 6, 2016 by PoopManZ

[Jangkrik]

I think you forget the ones who are too lazy to say to DE that they like the new update (because you know, the negative ones are almost always the loudest ones while not always being the group with the largest number of members).

Edited August 6, 2016 by Jangkrik

[BPNPC]

Just now, Omega-Shadowblade said:

Not really sure what you are trying to say to me. What I meant was this, A group of attendance numbers does not accurately display the opinions of the people. (I.e. school attendence does not mean people like school).

Imagine a school who plans to change its curriculum, and it spends a good deal on advertising how great its new curriculum would be. When its curriculum launches, its student body doubles. A week after launch, parents begin pulling its students out of the school to such an extent that there are less students in the school now before the update, and meanwhile the school is bombarded with feedback regarding many of the decisions made in its new curriculum. It's no leap of logic to say that the new curriculum is poorly-received.

[Kai_Shiba]

4 minutes ago, armedpoop said:

Are you serious? You are gonna discredit the whole thing because the steam player base isnt the main player base? Dropping 30k players isnt significant to you? You cant put 2 and 2 together to understand that a massive drop in players (from the steam version alone) means that player retention has been diminished directly after SoTR dropped? You cant make the leap in logic that what the steam charts show can probably be easily replicated in the non steam user base to some extent? I think its ridiculous to assume that the non steam version didnt see some kind of significant drop as well. 

I wish I lived in the fantasy world you do. 

I never assumed that the non steam version didn't see a drop, we have zero info on the nonsteam playerbase. If there was a info on it, then yes, but there isn't.

Saying that half the population stopped playing because they didn't like it is dumb. How do they know that they didn't like it? How do they know it's half the population? Or is it just better to just jump to conclusions and twist things here and there to fit the point?

Edited August 6, 2016 by KJRenz

[cookieknife]

4 minutes ago, Kuestenjung said:

They aren´t releasing Titania earlier, they are releasing the other stuff later, that´s why it is delayed again.

they're releasing titania earlier. U19 was 3 parts

lunaro , specters of the rail, war within

they decided to split war within up so people would get titania earlier instead of keeping it whole and releasing it when ever everything was finished. they did this because they want to give people a reason to play again. burn out is strong since specters

[rockscl]

a

7 minutes ago, BPNPC said:

 

The "smoothing out" you describe would only mean that smaller jumps (like the Lunaro, Rathuum, and Shadow Debt jumps) would be smoothed out. The 30k playerbase jump from SotR will persist for years.

the 30k players you are talking about arent anywhere in the monthly averages, warframe has never had more than 33k consistent players in steam charts and now its not at the half of that, the scene is not the nightmare thatthis post makes it look like

Edited August 6, 2016 by rockscl

[cookieknife]

4 minutes ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

Not really sure what you are trying to say to me. What I meant was this, A group of attendance numbers does not accurately display the opinions of the people. (I.e. school attendence does not mean people like school).

school attendance is mandatory

this is a free game dude, no attachment at all. you play this out of choice. thats a very bad analogy . no offense though

[felixsylvaris]

Analyzing graph: There was no dropoff AFTER SOTR. There was increase in popularity during patch (testing out) but it does not increased popularity nor drop. Before and after SOTR steam popularity is 34-40k.

If you want to overestimate graphs then: INAROS is the root of evil!

But more seriously, steam does not represent total WF population (no free PC masterrace, no PS fellas) or other factors: hollidays, overheating cards from heatwave, other games etc.

Edited August 6, 2016 by felixsylvaris

[Omega-Shadowblade]

1 minute ago, cookieknife said:

school attendance is mandatory

this is a free game dude, no attachment at all. you play this out of choice. thats a very bad analogy . no offense though

Thats a good point, was a bad example.

[armedpoop]

3 minutes ago, KJRenz said:

I never assumed that the non steam version didn't see a drop, we have zero info on the nonsteam playerbase. If there was a info on it, then yes, but there isn't.

Saying that half the population stopped playing because they didn't like it is dumb. How do they know that they didn't like it? Or is it just better to just jump to conclusions?

So in other words, you cant make logical leaps based on factual statistics laid out in front of you, thats all you had to say. 

Im not going to bother spelling it out for you again, as others have already done so for you in the thread multiple times. 

[PoopManZ]

10 minutes ago, KJRenz said:

I never assumed that the non steam version didn't see a drop, we have zero info on the nonsteam playerbase. If there was a info on it, then yes, but there isn't.

Saying that half the population stopped playing because they didn't like it is dumb. How do they know that they didn't like it? How do they know it's half the population? Or is it just better to just jump to conclusions and twist things here and there to fit the point?

Again you are not realizing what statistical significance or the basics of statistics is for, your logic would make scientific sampling impossible. Steam chart is 100% acurate data pulling and has very significant numbers to extrapolate. Regardless if you use steam or not you are playing the same game so you are the same population. Much like people being polled and people of the same population not being polled. And in this case the bias against non-Steam users would not be any major cause for a difference in opinion of SOTR or gameplay stagnation

Edited August 6, 2016 by PoopManZ

[Omega-Shadowblade]

2 minutes ago, felixsylvaris said:

Analyzing graph: There was no dropoff AFTER SOTR. There was increase in popularity during patch (testing out) but it does not increased popularity nor drop. Before and after SOTR steam popularity is 34-40k.

I have to agree. Looking at some wider data plots of the steam, it is pretty much the same before and after for the most part.

[PoopManZ]

2 minutes ago, Omega-Shadowblade said:

I have to agree. Looking at some wider data plots of the steam, it is pretty much the same before and after for the most part.

Even with that conclusion the attempt to help void fatigue did not help if before and after retention has not changed. Although more time is needed to be more accurate, I wouldnt give 4 weeks enough time.

Edited August 6, 2016 by PoopManZ

[cookieknife]

6 minutes ago, felixsylvaris said:

Analyzing graph: There was no dropoff AFTER SOTR. There was increase in popularity during patch (testing out) but it does not increased popularity nor drop. Before and after SOTR steam popularity is 34-40k.

If you want to overestimate graphs then: INAROS is the root of evil!

But more seriously, steam does not represent total WF population (no free PC masterrace, no PS fellas) or other factors: hollidays, overheating cards from heatwave, other games etc.

look at how high the drops are though, thats why he made this thread

[Omega-Shadowblade]

Just now, PoopManZ said:

Even with that conclusion the attempt to help void fatigue did not help if before and after retention has not changed.

"shrug" Can't please everyone, and how many people actually cared? I personally didn't do a huge amount of prime grinding before, and I don't do a huge amount of grinding now. All I know is that I personally enjoy not having only gold plating to look at when I do find the time or desire to do some relic runs.