A Message to GGG: Don’t Let the Negativity Distract You

"

MarcoBezzecchi#3752 a écrit :

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

PoE1:
Player count max - 230k
PoE2:
Player count max - 578k

PoE1:
Player count day 30 - 81k
PoE2:
Player count day 30 - 340k

PoE1:
Player count day 60 - 30k
PoE2:
Player count day 60 - 150k

PoE1:
Player count day 100 - 10k
PoE2:
Player count day 100 - 40k

LOL, what are you saying here POE 1 and POE 2 player based are different. Stop comparing it. Also your chart is misleading because POE 2 has no league yet, and still I repeat on early access stage.

Dude... it's not that hard to understand, actually.

With PoE2 many new ppl joined the PoE community, that's why the total numbers are higher.
But you can clearly see that the behaviour of the population (the decrease over a few months) follows the same pattern. Even better for PoE2 because the player count decreased more slowly and had on day 100 four times the population.

And your "argument" that "PoE2 has no league" doesn't matter at all.
A "league" in PoE1 is an economy reset, with new content and fresh characters.
We are atm in "league 1" of PoE2 and get our second "league" (economy reset, new content and fresh characters) on April the 4th.
Thus, the "league charts" are totally comparable. While it doesn't matter in reality if it is called a "league" or "phase" or "status" or "circle" or whatever.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

"

tarloch#1873 a écrit :

OP you do realize that negative feedback is very important and far more valuable than someone praising something to high heaven

When buying a product its wise to search for the negative reviews to get a true sense of what you are buying and any issues there may be that is glossed over by starry eyed fans or missed by people with limited playtime

That's not entirely true. It only is useful IF the feedback is valid.

If you say "the game is not good and/or will fail because the current player numbers are proof of it" - you make a false-true claim and thus it doesn't help anybody.
If someone provides actual constructive feedback, based on objective information or presented as subjective views, THAN it can be useful.

Who decides what is valid and what is not?
Sure rants/trolls etc can be ignored but you can apply that principle to both negative and positive you know "game is best ever" blah blah
it should be plainly obvious by what is written.... QED

I never mentioned player numbers but its obvious a game will lose players over time if players are unhappy/bored/did what they wanted to do.

The metric to compare should be the percentage of players you are losing and how many will return after updates patches and such.

If say a game loses 90% or its players/customers in a short time that could highlight a problem. the real test is how many return after aforementioned patches etc.

That remains to be seen. i hope GGG addresses issues players have. time and the retention numbers will tell the tale

"

tarloch#1873 a écrit :

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

"

tarloch#1873 a écrit :

OP you do realize that negative feedback is very important and far more valuable than someone praising something to high heaven

When buying a product its wise to search for the negative reviews to get a true sense of what you are buying and any issues there may be that is glossed over by starry eyed fans or missed by people with limited playtime

That's not entirely true. It only is useful IF the feedback is valid.

If you say "the game is not good and/or will fail because the current player numbers are proof of it" - you make a false-true claim and thus it doesn't help anybody.
If someone provides actual constructive feedback, based on objective information or presented as subjective views, THAN it can be useful.

Who decides what is valid and what is not?
Sure rants/trolls etc can be ignored but you can apply that principle to both negative and positive you know "game is best ever" blah blah
it should be plainly obvious by what is written.... QED

I never mentioned player numbers but its obvious a game will lose players over time if players are unhappy/bored/did what they wanted to do.

The metric to compare should be the percentage of players you are losing and how many will return after updates patches and such.

If say a game loses 90% or its players/customers in a short time that could highlight a problem. the real test is how many return after aforementioned patches etc.

That remains to be seen. i hope GGG addresses issues players have. time and the retention numbers will tell the tale

My point is - if you make a claim and connect it to something you need to be able to prove that the claim is true and that the connection is right.
Otherwise, it's a conclusion fallacy and thus invalid for argumentation.

For example, if I claim "the majority of PoE2 players left because Templar is not in the game atm" I would produce a statement where the separate information pieces are true, but the result is wrong.
The "Templar" does not exist atm - true.
The majority of the player base stopped playing - true.
But the conclusion made that there is a causation is wrong.
I produced a "strawman".

So, if someone makes the claim "the majority left because of X" they actually need to back it up with valid evidence (not "I feel like it").

Humans can't look into the future, so it's safer to work with information we already have.
Do we have something similar to "PoE2 Early Access - stage 1" (EA release until the first major update)? Yes. PoE1 leagues.
That's why it's easily comparable. Same developer, mostly the same community, same genre, yadda yadda.

You obviously can turn the total numbers into percentages if you want, if it helps you to get a better picture.

PoE1 (Settlers of Kalguur)
Max player count 230k and after 100 days 10k. That's 4% (rounded).

PoE2 (Early Access Phase 1)
Max player count 578k and after 100 days 40k. That's 7% (rounded).

If you want to take a deeper look you can use the provided graphs.
PoE1: https://poedb.tw/us/League#ConcurrentPlayers
PoE2: https://poe2db.tw/us/League
And to be fair, if you keep in mind that PoE2 has less content to offer atm compared to PoE1... the slower decrease in player numbers could actually be seen as impressive. But that's another topic.

There are even a few things some ppl completely overlook.
They sometimes argue "The majority of PoE2 players are new/casual/whatever" because they look at the numbers, compare them, don't consider important factors and draw the wrong conclusion.
They think "Well, PoE1 was around 200k and PoE2 was around 600k, thus the new players are more", but they don't consider that the Chinese players contribute to the Steam numbers for PoE2 because they don't have their separate Chinese Client yet, thus using Steam when they normally wouldn't. And so on.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

snip

Please stop comparing PoE and PoE2 steam charts, it doesn't make any sense. We have no idea what percentage of PoE2 players are on steam vs. standalone client and we also have no idea how many people from china are playing PoE2 right now, that otherwise have their own PoE client.

U can compare PoE2 to any other Steam only game if u want to make a point, but not PoE. (kinda the same for D4 obviously)

"

Sadaukar#2191 a écrit :

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

snip

Please stop comparing PoE and PoE2 steam charts, it doesn't make any sense. We have no idea what percentage of PoE2 players are on steam vs. standalone client and we also have no idea how many people from china are playing PoE2 right now, that otherwise have their own PoE client.

U can compare PoE2 to any other Steam only game if u want to make a point, but not PoE. (kinda the same for D4 obviously)

Nonsense. You can, in fact, compare PoE1 steam charts with PoE2.
If you actually read what I wrote you would know that I keep things like "Chinese players" in mind. Anyway.

It's less about the total player count, it's about the behaviour of the population and THERE you can easily compare the charts.
The population does not behave differently when they use Steam or the Standalone client, at least not to an important degree.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

"

Sadaukar#2191 a écrit :

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 a écrit :

snip

Please stop comparing PoE and PoE2 steam charts, it doesn't make any sense. We have no idea what percentage of PoE2 players are on steam vs. standalone client and we also have no idea how many people from china are playing PoE2 right now, that otherwise have their own PoE client.

U can compare PoE2 to any other Steam only game if u want to make a point, but not PoE. (kinda the same for D4 obviously)

Nonsense. You can, in fact, compare PoE1 steam charts with PoE2.
If you actually read what I wrote you would know that I keep things like "Chinese players" in mind. Anyway.

It's less about the total player count, it's about the behaviour of the population and THERE you can easily compare the charts.
The population does not behave differently when they use Steam or the Standalone client, at least not to an important degree.

I'm sorry I only see assumptions. And u can't assume that chinese players behave like westerners. Also we don't know if standalone players behave like steam players, one can argue that older players might be willing to play a league longer than newer steam players.

Like I said, it doesn't make alot of sense, it's mostly guessing. If u want to believe it, go ahead, but the data is flawed.

Arguing about numbers seems pretty pointless, the game is basically in beta with not much content added atm.

next patch brings a new class but from what i see alot of players are concerned with core issues and a new class does nothing for that.

to elaborate, the campaign and mapping feel like two totally different games.

We were promised a more accessable game with slow tactical gameplay.

during the campaign the game does play like that. Tough bosses with as many tries as you like.

Then you hit mapping and its one attempt per map, death penalties and a playstyle that is essentially kill the mobs (one button build) fast or you will die.

A complete opposite of what was hyped, stated, promised.

That is where the negative feedback is coming from. i think that is a very valid critcism especially if you factor in what the devs said the game would be.

Yes the game is in EA but we are not talking minor annoyances, its the core endgame gameplay.

So far the devs seem unwilling of unable to address these core concerns.
i think a failure to do so will drive away a huge proportion of the playerbase.

"

Sadaukar#2191 a écrit :

I'm sorry I only see assumptions. And u can't assume that chinese players behave like westerners. Also we don't know if standalone players behave like steam players, one can argue that older players might be willing to play a league longer than newer steam players.

Like I said, it doesn't make alot of sense, it's mostly guessing. If u want to believe it, go ahead, but the data is flawed.

That's illogical. When I compare PoE1 to PoE2 numbers you say "nah, only an assumption because we don't know how Chinese players behave" while you don't know either and it's not unlikely that a community of the same game behaves similarly no matter the region. Not exactly the same, but similar.
At least similar enough that they would not invalidate data outcomes, especially not when they are not the majority.

And where are you trying to go with your point "one can argue that older players might be willing to play a league longer than newer steam players"?
The amount of "older players" (PoE vets) is stable, so their behaviour will be reflected the same no matter where you look and if newer players are less likely to stay... ok... sure... and!? That says nothing if you look at the graphs.
Hell, you could even make the meaningless argument that "new ppl played longer because PoE newbies are still stuck in Acts yadda yadda", it's meaningless.

We can not empirically prove WHY the population is how it is in PoE2 atm, THAT'S the thing we only can guess, BUT we CAN determine that this population behaviour is normal for PoE.

Furthermore, there is literally nothing that would even indicate that Steam and Standalone players behave differently regarding this case.

"

tarloch#1873 a écrit :

Arguing about numbers seems pretty pointless, the game is basically in beta with not much content added atm.

next patch brings a new class but from what i see alot of players are concerned with core issues and a new class does nothing for that.

to elaborate, the campaign and mapping feel like two totally different games.

We were promised a more accessable game with slow tactical gameplay.

during the campaign the game does play like that. Tough bosses with as many tries as you like.

Then you hit mapping and its one attempt per map, death penalties and a playstyle that is essentially kill the mobs (one button build) fast or you will die.

A complete opposite of what was hyped, stated, promised.

That is where the negative feedback is coming from. i think that is a very valid critcism especially if you factor in what the devs said the game would be.

Yes the game is in EA but we are not talking minor annoyances, its the core endgame gameplay.

So far the devs seem unwilling of unable to address these core concerns.
i think a failure to do so will drive away a huge proportion of the playerbase.

That's what I am talking about. You have an observation, you voice it and don't connect it in an unlogical manner and your final statement is pending because we don't have enough information (how patch 0.2.0 fully looks like) to conclude.

Should "nobody" come back for 0.2.0 or ppl leave extremely early or the negative feedback doesn't reduce or even increase - THEN the new data would be "abnormal" and make a great evidential argument.

"

tarloch#1873 a écrit :

Arguing about numbers seems pretty pointless, the game is basically in beta with not much content added atm.

next patch brings a new class but from what i see alot of players are concerned with core issues and a new class does nothing for that.

to elaborate, the campaign and mapping feel like two totally different games.

We were promised a more accessable game with slow tactical gameplay.

during the campaign the game does play like that. Tough bosses with as many tries as you like.

Then you hit mapping and its one attempt per map, death penalties and a playstyle that is essentially kill the mobs (one button build) fast or you will die.

A complete opposite of what was hyped, stated, promised.

That is where the negative feedback is coming from. i think that is a very valid critcism especially if you factor in what the devs said the game would be.

Yes the game is in EA but we are not talking minor annoyances, its the core endgame gameplay.

So far the devs seem unwilling of unable to address these core concerns.
i think a failure to do so will drive away a huge proportion of the playerbase.

Completely in solidarity with this opinion. We need not poe 1 v4.0 - we need the promised game, from the assurances of the developers - not such a fast gameplay.