Star Citizen Stats

Babuinix

Where does the "1,500,000 backers playing 6.2 hours" number comes from?

rpmcmurphy

There are 2.4 million accounts shown on CIG's website right? The Turbulence interview from 2016 said that roughly half of the accounts were actually paying backers, which would mean 1.2 million paying backers. I am adding another 25% to that number out of generosity.

Babuinix

So you are basing your data in data from 2016 and escalating it for "generosity" and "imagining" the "6.2 hours of playing" lol

In short, a bunch of math based on made up assumptions 

That's a wrap then 

sgel

Babuinix said:

So you are basing your data in data from 2016 and escalating it for "generosity"

So how would you escalate it? More than 25% increase?

rpmcmurphy

All I see now is you deflecting again. You claimed the maths was incorrect but you've avoided posting the "correct" maths.

I kind of worry about you Babs, it seems you struggle with things like patterns and past indicators and employees giving out numbers that CIG would prefer to keep quiet.

Here's a question for you. After 2016 CIG focused their efforts on leveraging existing whales instead of trying to encourage new backers (as evidenced by the drop of free fly weeks, the type of ship sales etc), do you think that this would increase or decrease the number of paying backers signing up on their website.

Babuinix

I dont know and I dont make math bases on assumptions. I just post screenshots from twitch stats 

So now that it's clear the 1.500.000 number was made up based on your own assumption...Where does the "6.2 hours played" number come from? 

Pingu2012

Babuinix said:

I dont know and I dont make math bases on assumptions. I just post screenshots from twitch stats 

So now that it's clear the 1.500.000 number was made up based on assumptions...

How about the "6.2 hours played" number?

Where does that come from? 

This is true. Accurate and fair calculations require the use of the company's stated number of accounts, not extrapolation using assumptions which may or may not be right.

So to get the average concurrency and hours played you need to use the actual number of accounts CIG says they have now (or at least within the last couple of months), and the hours played they give in the figures in the OP.

Edit: although thinking about it I'm not sure how to get accurate concurrency, since there's no way to know how many accounts are waiting for the release

sgel

Babuinix said:

I dont know 

This is probably the most honest remark you've made in 4 years.

Kefo

rpmcmurphy said:

All I see now is you deflecting again. You claimed the maths was incorrect but you've avoided posting the "correct" maths.

I kind of worry about you Babs, it seems you struggle with things like patterns and past indicators and employees giving out numbers that CIG would prefer to keep quiet.

Here's a question for you. After 2016 CIG focused their efforts on leveraging existing whales instead of trying to encourage new backers (as evidenced by the drop of free fly weeks, the type of ship sales etc), do you think that this would increase or decrease the number of paying backers signing up on their website.

There are certain posters here who will happily shout out numbers to prove how awesome the game is doing and how popular it is but the second you use those same numbers the values are wrong or made up or some other excuse. Just gives more weight to their idea there are paid shills on this forum or people really are in deep and sunk cost has taken over

Phaserlight

Pingu2012 said:

Babuinix said:

I dont know and I dont make math bases on assumptions. I just post screenshots from twitch stats 

So now that it's clear the 1.500.000 number was made up based on assumptions...

How about the "6.2 hours played" number?

Where does that come from? 

This is true. Accurate and fair calculations require the use of the company's stated number of accounts, not extrapolation using assumptions which may or may not be right.

So to get the average concurrency and hours played you need to use the actual number of accounts CIG says they have now (or at least within the last couple of months), and the hours played they give in the figures in the OP.

Edit: although thinking about it I'm not sure how to get accurate concurrency, since there's no way to know how many accounts are waiting for the release

CIG has posted there are more minutes played within a given timeframe than there are actual minutes by a factor of roughly 1,000, ergo average concurrency. @rpmcmurphy is correct. 

Personally, I find this rather impressive.  You'd have to compare it to other public alphas to get a benchmark, I guess.  This is hard to do in SC's case as it's one heck of an outlier.

At any given minute in 2019, you'd find somewhere around 1,000 people simultaneously playing the SC alpha.

Babuinix

Yeah but where does the "6.2 hours played" come from?  

rpmcmurphy

Babuinix said:

I dont know and I dont make math bases on assumptions. I just post screenshots from twitch stats 

You don't know or you don't want to answer because you realise you're walking yourself into a trap?

You might not do maths on so-called assumptions yet you happily claim other people's maths is wrong based on your own assumptions... that's ironic don't you think?

Babuinix said:

So now that it's clear the 1.500.000 number was made up based on your own assumption...Where does the "6.2 hours played" number come from? 

What would you prefer, that I say there are only 1,200,000 based on Turbulence's info?

Babuinix

But I just told you I dont do math based on made up numbers   

You can try and spin the numbers as much as you like and it will be as useless and irrelevant as ever, just like that post about ship renting it will fall into obscurity and prooved to be a waste of time 

rpmcmurphy

Pingu2012 said:

This is true. Accurate and fair calculations require the use of the company's stated number of accounts, not extrapolation using assumptions which may or may not be right.

Yes and no. We can look at other evidence and weigh it in against their best case scenario. It is certainly an assumption but it is one based on legitimate factors.

Pingu2012 said:

So to get the average concurrency and hours played you need to use the actual number of accounts CIG says they have now (or at least within the last couple of months), and the hours played they give in the figures in the OP.

Edit: although thinking about it I'm not sure how to get accurate concurrency, since there's no way to know how many accounts are waiting for the release

No we don''t need this information, not for an average. All we need is time played and time elapsed. That would tell you the average concurrency that would need to be upheld 24/7 to reach X number of hours over Y time period.

rpmcmurphy

Babuinix said:

But I just told you I dont do math based on made up numbers   

You can try and spin the numbers as much as you like...

Then how can you say someone else is wrong unless you can prove otherwise via maths?

It's not me spinning the numbers you plonker, it is CIG....

Babuinix said:

...and it will be as useless and irrelevant as ever, just like that post about ship renting it will fall into obscurity and prooved to be a waste of time 

And yet here you are arguing incessantly against so-called useless and irrelevant information...

Babuinix

Hey like they say It's what you make of it that matters

Anyone knows it's wrong because it consists of made up assumptions, a regular ocurrence whenever you try to make a point lol

And let's be real, your track record leaves a bit to be desired to say the least 

rpmcmurphy

Babuinix said:

Hey like they say It's what you make of it that matters

Anyone knows it's wrong because it consists of made up assumptions, a regular ocurrence whenever you try to make a point lol

Yet you're clearly incapabale of proving otherwise, all you have is your attempts at flippancy and edgelording.

Babuinix said:

And let's be real, your track record leaves a bit to be desired to say the least 

And what record would that be? That the game gives you a shitty amount of income for obscenely priced ships, that travel times are ridiculously bad, so bad that fans alt tab instead of playing the game or that CIG's numbers look good at first glance but fall apart under the tiniest bit of scrutiny.

You just sound bitter that someone points these things out, that's all.

It's like that old saying of being careful to not become the thing you hate, Babs has tirned into a hater lol

Babuinix

If there's someone who need to proove something is you lol

And no fudged math based on assumptions just doesn't cut it sorry 

Mensur

Scam Citizen! 

rpmcmurphy

Babuinix said:

If there's someone who neess to proove something is you lol

And no fudged math based on assumptions just doesn't cut it sorry 

And yet you are the one trying to prove me wrong, post after post after post....

Come up with some contrary maths and we'll talk. Until then you're just full of shit.

You're all talk, zero action Babs

Babuinix

Sorry but claiming facts based on assumptions doesn't work that way. We've been through this before when you made that post about the ship rental prices remember. 

rpmcmurphy

Babuinix said:

Sorry but claiming facts based on assumptions doesn't work that way. We've been through this already back in your ship rental thread remember. 

In other words you've got nothing.

Zzzzzz

What we can glean from this is that the game has an average concurrency of 1290 people.

We can also say that if all 1.5 million paying backers have tried the game over the last 10 months it would mean they played for roughly 6 hours each, aka 2 evening play sessions out of 300 potential evening sessions.

Oof

gervaise1

There is nothing fudged about @rpmcmurphy 's numbers.

The average concurrency is the actual average concurrency based on the numbers in the chart. Its a straight calculation. 

The average hours played is an estimated. Its 6.2 hours, average, if 1.5M played. Other estimates can be done.

10k its 930 hours! 
100k its 93 hours;
500k its 18.6 hours;
3M and its 3.1 hours. The period of time includes free fly weekend so the number who have played SC this year could be some higher number.

The reality: core testers will have spent "longer" in the game; people who maybe check in once a year or who have checked it out for the first time played it for a single session a "short" period of time.



The key question is what do the numbers mean?

To me they say that RSI have a substantial body of people "testing" stuff. Whether its 5,000  dedicated testers playing over 40 hours a week for 10 months) or 1M people generating data from a few hours of playtime the number, imo, is substantial. Companies like ZoS and other companies have lamented the lack of new content testers. And the general reply they got on the forums was: hire some testers!

Babuinix

That's a lot of IF's to reach any sort of meaningfull conclusion

Based on assumption math numbers can mean everything and nothing depending on the assumption and that's the only conclusion possible.

Not really thread worthy, much like making assumptions about ship rental prices based on fudge math 

rpmcmurphy

gervaise1 said:

3M and its 3.1 hours. The period of time includes free fly weekend so the number who have played SC this year could be some higher number.

This is a really good point. I know some companies exclude trial account data but unless they state otherwise there is no reason to believe it is excluded.

gervaise1 said:

To me they say that RSI have a substantial body of people "testing" stuff. Whether its 5,000  dedicated testers playing over 40 hours a week for 10 months) or 1M people generating data from a few hours of playtime the number, imo, is substantial. Companies like ZoS and other companies have lamented the lack of new content testers. And the general reply they got on the forums was: hire some testers!

Totally agree. Typically you hear of whales and hardcore players accounting for a few percent of the total and I see no reason why it wouldn't be much the same in this scenario. If there were 1.5 million paying backers and just 3% are hardcore, that's a pretty substantial 45,000 playing the game avidly and that is like 200 hours each over 10 months.