I see this game only getting better with time, and i hope that time permits it too last for it to get better.
If they couldn't make a decent game in FIVE YEARS and with THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS what makes you think another couple of months is going to change anything? Especially with SOE and the NGE Crew pulling the strings?
while I agree this isn't exactly breaking news. Vanguard is a dead game. Anybody who thinks it will survive LotR, WAR and AoC is out of their mind. VG wasn't released to compete with what's coming. They simply are trying to recover as much money as possible before they eventually have to pull the plug. Let's face it VG had a terrbile launch. MMOs cannot recover from bad launches - they just can't. Sure the game "may" become somewhat decent in a years time but consumers will hardly walk into a game store and ask for a good MMO that's a couple of years old. People want new products and by the time VG has the slightest chance of being decent it will get clobbered by above mentioned titles.
In regards to WAR and AoC, the verdict is still out in these games, isn't it? In some ways they are being hyped just as hard and heavy as VSoH was. Now, possibly they will be successful and possibly they won't. Time will tell, but I find it somewhat tiresome to assume anything about MMO's that have little or no track record for game play.
As to LotRo, we have a history here, don't we? Today, they go Open Beta and we'll have even more data about game play. LotRo may very well be the hottest game for the next several months, I think.
The big difference in the hype between WAR/AoC and VG is that WAR & AoC are being hyped by the player base and not by the company that produces it. WAR for example does not claim to be 3rd generation or revolutionize the MMO genre. Heck the devs even tell people NOT to play the game if they are a certain type of player (care bears, TV watching healers etc.). Why do you think people hate Vanguard so much? It's a bad game with an even worse launch - big deal. But the fact that Sir Brad promissed the golden child and then shit the bed is what many people are not so fond of. At least Mythic is honest about their approach to the game.
Good god, some of you people seem to think that So Cal is the Land of Milk and Honey where ambrosia flows from out of the ground!!!
The average family income for San Diego county is about $65,000 - $68,000 right now. People claiming that you need to earn $70,000 - $90,000 per year just to survive here must be reading about some other planet. Most people who work in Carlsbad, Ca. certainly don't live there. They COMMUTE from cheaper areas.
You can't use places like Silicon Valley or Carlsbad to estimate yearly salaries because they do not represent the reality of living here.
I find it absurdly funny watching all of these pocket business gurus writing about what it would take for Sigil to succeed or fail. All of your assumptions, and numerations and prognostications are totally a waste unless you start with basic information. Otherwise it seems totally ignorant.
First and foremost, you don't know what their business plan is... what is Sigil's planned ROI? Is it 1 month, 6 months, or 6 years??? Many start up businesses PLAN on losing money for their first fiscal year. You don't know what their cash reserves are... they could bleed money out the nose but if they planned well it wouldn't matter. They could rake in the dough but if they planned badly they'd fail in a few months. Do they have a growth strategy or plan on max short term profits? Financial people live in a different world when it comes to talking about money. "Running out of funds" may not mean that the business is broke.
Unless you have this type of information, you seem like blind rats groping in the dark.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
You know what makes me sick is negative people like you OP!! How dare you sit here and say Vanguard won't make it when it has only been out what not even 2 months? Yea they have lots of problems now and they had to release early but in 6 months this game could be HOT considering how much they should have accomplished. I hate hate hate negative people why do you post and tell everyone how crappy Vanguard is and how it will never amount to anything? If Sigil didn't put enough effort and desire to make the game better than I would have to agree with you but come on dude they are working their fannies off to get this game working right and considering they are working on a limited budget I hope they continue to get enough subs and keep the subs they got going so they can work things out. The game won't die Sony won't let that happen I guarentee you that. Sure they have all kinds of balancing to do but this game is going to be alot of fun to play in about 6 months I bet. I bought the game about a month ago and I'm going to keep my Sub going even though I don't play a whole lot just to SUPPORT them!! I don't consider myself a Vanboi, I'm very much in love with EQ 1 still and hope this game will eventually bring me the same satisfaction EQ 1 did. While I only play WoW right now, and I play on the EQ 1 free trial, and toy around w/ith Vanguard until they get major bugs worked out I'm very optimistic about Vanguard and the future. Me like most people want a challenging game and are hoping Vanguard will bring that. I don't think it will bring the challenge we all hoped but it still has a lot to offer. Anyways there is my rant....
Originally posted by Stoneysilenc Your link requires a password to see.
Yes, indeed it does. Access to the majority of material on Gamasutra requires a username and password. I merely offered up the information for those who are actually interested in having some facts to back up their suppositions. Use it or don't use it, either is fine. Registration is free, after all.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq Adnihilo Beorn Judge's Edge Somnulus Perfect Black ---------------------- Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2 Everquest / Everquest 2 Anarchy Online Shadowbane Dark Age of Camelot Star Wars Galaxies Matrix Online World of Warcraft Guild Wars City of Heroes
Is there some kind of award for an OP if enough people respond to the thread? Just in case, I'll help out, just in case I decide to go for such an award that might possibly exist someday and might need the favor to be returned.
I'm sorry I have nothing really to say about the subject. I don't really know anything about it worth saying, that hasn't already been said many times before.
I'm sorry I have nothing really to say about the subject. I don't really know anything about it worth saying, that hasn't already been said many times before.
That's fine...it describes just about all of us who post to the Vanguard forum.
Good god, some of you people seem to think that So Cal is the Land of Milk and Honey where ambrosia flows from out of the ground!!! The average family income for San Diego county is about $65,000 - $68,000 right now. People claiming that you need to earn $70,000 - $90,000 per year just to survive here must be reading about some other planet. Most people who work in Carlsbad, Ca. certainly don't live there. They COMMUTE from cheaper areas. You can't use places like Silicon Valley or Carlsbad to estimate yearly salaries because they do not represent the reality of living here. I find it absurdly funny watching all of these pocket business gurus writing about what it would take for Sigil to succeed or fail. All of your assumptions, and numerations and prognostications are totally a waste unless you start with basic information. Otherwise it seems totally ignorant. First and foremost, you don't know what their business plan is... what is Sigil's planned ROI? Is it 1 month, 6 months, or 6 years??? Many start up businesses PLAN on losing money for their first fiscal year. You don't know what their cash reserves are... they could bleed money out the nose but if they planned well it wouldn't matter. They could rake in the dough but if they planned badly they'd fail in a few months. Do they have a growth strategy or plan on max short term profits? Financial people live in a different world when it comes to talking about money. "Running out of funds" may not mean that the business is broke. Unless you have this type of information, you seem like blind rats groping in the dark.
You do understand what an average is and what it means don't you? It means that all salaries are added
and divided by the number of people making up the sample. When you take into account the number of
people who are on public assistance, social security or other fixed incomes, those in the military, those
working part time, those working in fast food places, migrant workers, etc. - in order to keep the average
at 65K, the salaries have to be pretty high.
Saying the average salary is 65K doesn't mean that a majority of the people are making that amount or
even close to it. (Example : 10 waitresses are making 20K, and 10 attorneys are making 110K. The
average salary is 65K but no one is making anywhere near 65K).
Vanguard is finished, I'm not familiar with the financials of Sigil, their investors, or the arrangement with SOE, but it is painfully obvious that the game will not be able to make return on the investment sunk into its creation. It might limp along for a few years but the game will never meet its potential or even be a major player in the MMO market. The business world today seems to be plagued by a lack of vision and long-term planning. Decisions are made to return immediate, short term profits and boost shareholder value, with little if any thought to building long term viability or any concern for the effects on the environment, economy, and society at large. I think this same mentality was at work in the early release of Vanguard. A little more money, at least in relation to the amount already spent, and time invested in polishing the product might have resulted in a game that could endure for some time and even recoup most, if not all of the monies invested. So the game was pushed out the door early for financial concerns, and uncontrollable forces were unleashed. The company was overwhelmed with the amount of work still remaining to be done to finish the game and correct deficiencies, but with thousands of players now paying for the game, the focus switched to whatever short term fix was necessary to maintain the subscription base. Sigil has been running scared to maintain the subs since day one and has only exacerbated the situation with patch after patch. Players are angry about poor performance and bugs so Sigil gives them 'double xp' to compensate. Result, players level faster and now are complaining about a lack of content. Sigil gets its personnel focused on the high end game and takes resources away which are needed to fix the basics. Exploits are rampant in the game, some are very old issues that Sigil pays no attention to until they become widely known. Scared of losing players they are unwilling to take action against the exploiters. Even a rollback is not forthcoming, and the only reason can be that the company is terrified of losing more money. In the crafting sphere as well, they have failed to deal with botters due to the fear of losing players, in the end they will lose more honest players than the small amount they would have lost by dealing with cheaters. These exploits, which are fairly widespread due to the game being unfinished and the lack of will on Sigil's part only cause faster leveling, which results in positive feedback to the cycle described above. As people attain higher and higher levels they become bored or require more content. More and more attention is payed to this set, to the detriment of the game as a whole. Add to this the failure, time and time again, to be able to release a solid patch. Each new patch seems to fix a problem while at the same time breaking something that was working or introducing a new bug or issue. I don't know if it is simple incompetence, or a financial issue where they don't have enough on the payroll to properly code and test changes. I believe the upcoming availability of LOTRO open beta this week and the release of AoC and WAR in the fall is only going to accelerate the downward spiral, right now a lot of people are logging in as there is nothing else out there atm that is new. I would be very, very suprised if this game has more than 100,000 subs in 6 months.
Wow thanks really inciteful, I can really feel your hate and gloom and bitterness, I feel sorry for you.
Lol.... never heard such rubbish, these forums amaze me.
/pops back to VG and continues having a great time with 10's thousands of other people.
ROFLMAO... THANK GOD MR Business here is showing the LIGHT!!! As someone who actually IS in business, you simply couldn't be more incorrect about your so-called spiral. The truth is, the game is not in a good position. It's also true that the game can survive on only 75k subs, and it has much more then that. The only thing that could bring this game down is the LACK of progress over the next 6 months. If the game is not solid by the next holiday season, it may have problems. So stop the "SKY IS fALLING!!!" BS...
Well I think most people are 'in business' to one degree or another, for example I create a product which my company sells to customers for a profit.
You have stated that you are IN business, what that may mean I have no idea. I assume that your hubris stems from the fact that you actually deal with some financial aspect of a company, although again that could be almost anything, including zeroing your drawer after shift at Taco Bell. I strongly suspect that you are not a mover and shaker of any note as you would not have time to post on MMORPG.com if that were true.
To boldly say that I could not be any more incorrect and in the same breath make the assertion that 'the game can survive on only 75k subs' is the epitomy of hypocrisy. I am suprised your head hasn't exploded from the cognitive dissonance required to make such a post.
I'm waiting to see what the actual impact of games like LOTR, WAR, and AoC are on the game's population. If a lot of folks jump ship to those other games, and VG can't bring in anyone else, then they'll be destined for either a quick sale to SOE or an NGE/CU style "upgrade" to bring in more casual players. But until those games are actually out and on sale, with tangible ways of measuring their effects on VG, it's too soon to throw VG on the pile of dead games.
I played Vanguard for the past two months and I cancelled my account today because LOTR is freaking SO much more polished. I doubt that I am alone. I wanted to like Vanguard---but there are WAY too many things wrong with it that suck the FUN out of playing it.
I agree with the OP; i believe its the beginning of the end of Vanguard.
while I agree this isn't exactly breaking news. Let's face it VG had a terrbile launch. MMOs cannot recover from bad launches - they just can't. Sure the game "may" become somewhat decent in a years time but consumers will hardly walk into a game store and ask for a good MMO that's a couple of years old. People want new products and by the time VG has the slightest chance of being decent it will get clobbered by above mentioned titles.
Same ol crap that gets posted on every forum.
Provide some facts supporting your outrageous assumptions.
I will highlight in a nice bright colour which statements made me LOL. Practice what you preach, maybe? No, that might ruin that hardcore overzaelous hater image you've worked SO hard to build. Right? Ok then.
. There you go. Want me to address? - AO in worse shape than VG at launch is very debateable. Saying it is a great game now and it funded AoC's development is a complete assumption. You do relise what a publisher is right? Nothing but an opinion. Thank you for stating the obvious. - LotRO will always have better looking graphics than VG, saying VG's graphics CAN improve and LotRO's graphics CAN'T improve is now on my list of completely idiodic things that have ever came from a vanboi's mouth. Nothing but an opinion on the way graphics look. And wrong, any game can get a graphics update, even if it's just as simple as replacing current textures with higher res ones. Wrong? I was the one saying that any game can get a graphical update. The poster I quoted said that LotRO cannot get updated and VG can. Which is untrue. You misread my post. - There is nothing more complex about VG's models than most mmos out today. Do not kid yourself. Very wrong. Vanguard does have a many more polygon's on character's than most of this generation's games. There are numbers somewhere, but I'm too lazy, like you, to find them. At least I admitted to it. Though me saying that is just as bad as you spitting that same trash you wrote. Polygon count = Complexity now? - Three years from now VG will be nothing more than a station access game. Assumption? Yes. More likely to happen than your bias opinion? Yes! Every game on the SOE network is a Station Access game. Are you saying that every game currently under SOE's charge is a failure? And your opinion isn't biased, how? Good on you for taking my comment and placing it out of proportion. I stated VG will be NOTHING MORE than a station access game. Never did I suggest that every game under SOE's charge is a failure. In fact I have NEVER played an SOE game BESIDES VG. Have fun with your broken visioned, viral marketed, waste of space, still in beta game. Just don't post crap like this again. Sorry, I missed the part where you posted the official credentials stating that all of your opinions must be fact and everyone who didn't agree with yours were blasphemy. Gawd forbid someone stands up and gives his opinion of a game he loves on a forum for THAT game.
What was he thinking!? How can ANYONE not agree with your divine rightious un-biased statements? Idiots, all of them No one has to agree with me, I just would like to see some facts when people claim outrageous things like "LotRO cannot be updated graphically but VG can". How about you read my post CLEARLY before commenting. My views are opinions, and sometimes I support them with facts. I never stated my opinions WERE facts. Actually, you proved my point, you jumped the gun even assuming I had a vendetta against SOE. It was entertaining.
First: You can't find a publisher if you have no track record. So your attempt to insult me is just silly.
Second: It's much easier to redo textures than it is object models and new animations. If LOTR already has "high rez textures" in place, then where could they go from there? Super duper hi rez? VG models do have a substantially higher poly count... redoing textures over time will be easy.
LotRo absolutely BLASTS Vanguard graphically. Vanguard is an unstable, buggy POS. Like you, I used to defend Vanguard but it is indefensible and deserves to fail, which it undoubtedly will.
while I agree this isn't exactly breaking news. Let's face it VG had a terrbile launch. MMOs cannot recover from bad launches - they just can't. Sure the game "may" become somewhat decent in a years time but consumers will hardly walk into a game store and ask for a good MMO that's a couple of years old. People want new products and by the time VG has the slightest chance of being decent it will get clobbered by above mentioned titles.
Same ol crap that gets posted on every forum.
Provide some facts supporting your outrageous assumptions.
I will highlight in a nice bright colour which statements made me LOL. Practice what you preach, maybe? No, that might ruin that hardcore overzaelous hater image you've worked SO hard to build. Right? Ok then.
. There you go. Want me to address? - AO in worse shape than VG at launch is very debateable. Saying it is a great game now and it funded AoC's development is a complete assumption. You do relise what a publisher is right? Nothing but an opinion. Thank you for stating the obvious. - LotRO will always have better looking graphics than VG, saying VG's graphics CAN improve and LotRO's graphics CAN'T improve is now on my list of completely idiodic things that have ever came from a vanboi's mouth. Nothing but an opinion on the way graphics look. And wrong, any game can get a graphics update, even if it's just as simple as replacing current textures with higher res ones. Wrong? I was the one saying that any game can get a graphical update. The poster I quoted said that LotRO cannot get updated and VG can. Which is untrue. You misread my post. - There is nothing more complex about VG's models than most mmos out today. Do not kid yourself. Very wrong. Vanguard does have a many more polygon's on character's than most of this generation's games. There are numbers somewhere, but I'm too lazy, like you, to find them. At least I admitted to it. Though me saying that is just as bad as you spitting that same trash you wrote. Polygon count = Complexity now? - Three years from now VG will be nothing more than a station access game. Assumption? Yes. More likely to happen than your bias opinion? Yes! Every game on the SOE network is a Station Access game. Are you saying that every game currently under SOE's charge is a failure? And your opinion isn't biased, how? Good on you for taking my comment and placing it out of proportion. I stated VG will be NOTHING MORE than a station access game. Never did I suggest that every game under SOE's charge is a failure. In fact I have NEVER played an SOE game BESIDES VG. Have fun with your broken visioned, viral marketed, waste of space, still in beta game. Just don't post crap like this again. Sorry, I missed the part where you posted the official credentials stating that all of your opinions must be fact and everyone who didn't agree with yours were blasphemy. Gawd forbid someone stands up and gives his opinion of a game he loves on a forum for THAT game.
What was he thinking!? How can ANYONE not agree with your divine rightious un-biased statements? Idiots, all of them No one has to agree with me, I just would like to see some facts when people claim outrageous things like "LotRO cannot be updated graphically but VG can". How about you read my post CLEARLY before commenting. My views are opinions, and sometimes I support them with facts. I never stated my opinions WERE facts. Actually, you proved my point, you jumped the gun even assuming I had a vendetta against SOE. It was entertaining.
First: You can't find a publisher if you have no track record. So your attempt to insult me is just silly.
Second: It's much easier to redo textures than it is object models and new animations. If LOTR already has "high rez textures" in place, then where could they go from there? Super duper hi rez? VG models do have a substantially higher poly count... redoing textures over time will be easy.
LotRo absolutely BLASTS Vanguard graphically. Vanguard is an unstable, buggy POS. Like you, I used to defend Vanguard but it is indefensible and deserves to fail, which it undoubtedly will.
I'm waiting to see what the actual impact of games like LOTR, WAR, and AoC are on the game's population. If a lot of folks jump ship to those other games, and VG can't bring in anyone else, then they'll be destined for either a quick sale to SOE or an NGE/CU style "upgrade" to bring in more casual players. But until those games are actually out and on sale, with tangible ways of measuring their effects on VG, it's too soon to throw VG on the pile of dead games.
I played Vanguard for the past two months and I cancelled my account today because LOTR is freaking SO much more polished. I doubt that I am alone. I wanted to like Vanguard---but there are WAY too many things wrong with it that suck the FUN out of playing it.
I agree with the OP; i believe its the beginning of the end of Vanguard.
I also have to completly agree here too. I played VG for 1 month (had cancelled my account 2 weeks in) but still played it untill my account ceased. I carnt even think of an mmorpg that had a weekend of double xp gains within the 1st month of going retail, let alone 2 xp weekends back to back.
The game was rushed, i also agree that many players who came and trieed the game have also left in disgust too, which will be hard to regain them back, it will also be alot harder to get rid of all the bad publicity it has had (i have seen 3 reviews made by reviewers for magazines, they came in at 3/10 4/10 and 4.5/10, not even an average game, all rated it below average. I myself have been saying to people who have asked me whether to get it or not, i have said no, wait for about 6months or so, because the game is just not worth it right now. Having said that, Lotro is nice, has only a couple of bugs (had quite a few until last patch that fixed a load of bugs, cos i went round and checked all of the known bugs i had logged in, bar 1 and all had been fixed, however 3 new ones have opened up and have been logged) which i fully expect to be fixed before release (something i cannot say about VG or any SoE game to date),
Then by the time VG may start to become very playable as already mentioned it may be too late, newer games are scheduled to hit the shelves of which (oh god) SoE has 1 in its grasps and i am having to really think if i would go for it or not, and that is Gods and heroes, but the SoE tag is really really offputting, because i would like entertainment in my games i pay for and not enterPainment, of which SoE has a real nasty habit of stuffing every game up in 1 way or another.
Originally posted by RPGBeech You do understand what an average is and what it means don't you? It means that all salaries are added and divided by the number of people making up the sample. When you take into account the number of people who are on public assistance, social security or other fixed incomes, those in the military, those working part time, those working in fast food places, migrant workers, etc. - in order to keep the average at 65K, the salaries have to be pretty high.
Saying the average salary is 65K doesn't mean that a majority of the people are making that amount or even close to it. (Example : 10 waitresses are making 20K, and 10 attorneys are making 110K. The average salary is 65K but no one is making anywhere near 65K).
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Is teh deadz????!!11 Oh n0es run to teh hillz!!!!11 Waaaaaaaah! Waaaaaaaaah!! Waaaaaaaah!!!
I predict that in two months V:SoH will have five million subscribers and flowers, fireworks and cotton candy will shoot out of all mighty Brads arse. It's all in the spunk.
I tell you what, if in two months VSoH doesn't make 500k subs you never post again? If they do I won't post again! I am not worrying about losing.
Vanbois are idiots, Brad made the most awful steaming crappy game ever.
If you have any questions please ask. I have moved on to WoW from eq and no longer have any desire to play a dead game. Thank you. (posted by another selling his account in EQ1)
Thank you Nostradamus. I was wondering...do you forsee me getting that Red Rider BB gun i wanted for Christmas?
Dude, people said the same thing about WoW when it first came out. It was buggy as hell. <yawn> Nothing new with these posts.
WoW was in no way as buggy as VG. I played wow first day it came out, and played day in and day out to 60. I never noticed bugs that were anywhere near VG. Nothing stands out in my mind. I was one of the firsts to get to 60 on my server and i have no clue what you are talking about. if there were bugs i must have missed them. the only bug i do remember was the evade bug that would occur when fighting mobs that chased me into a body of water they would heal up and evade, or the servers crashing because 99999999999999999 people wanted to play. I hardly call that a bug, they just didn't anticipate the demand. MC bugs??? pfft that was end game at the time... 1-60 i never noticed any game breaking bugs. maybe the wind rider bug or the snowball one OMG GAME BREAKING!!!
vg on the other had..... invisible mobs attack me, the mob appears and is right in front of me but says it is too far away. it then teleports and i run at it then i get teleported. next thing you know i have another invisible mob on me and I die. my game crashes later on and i log back to where I started to in the first place with lost xp.
oh yeah and mobs from towers jump straight down when they reach low health and as for low health i mean they still have about a half or a third of life left, they aggro everything which does not run up the tower but some how magically appears at your level or simply hit you from under you where you cannot attack them yourself . Not to mention mobs stack right over each other as they attack you and you have no idea how many your fighting till you are OMGWTF DEAD.
Sometimes I run into a chunk and i slow down for a half hour (exaggeration more like 5-10 sec) and then all of sudden i am 1000000000000000 meters from where i froze only to see that ran into some mobs and i died. I lag up when more players show up and i cannot enjoy pvp. I have a good pc and can run every game i have with no problem, i can drop vg down to crap and it still acts like crap
yah wow had the same problems as vg does now.. .yeah right
You do understand what an average is and what it means don't you? It means that all salaries are added
and divided by the number of people making up the sample. When you take into account the number of
people who are on public assistance, social security or other fixed incomes, those in the military, those
working part time, those working in fast food places, migrant workers, etc. - in order to keep the average
at 65K, the salaries have to be pretty high. Saying the average salary is 65K doesn't mean that a majority of the people are making that amount or
even close to it. (Example : 10 waitresses are making 20K, and 10 attorneys are making 110K. The
average salary is 65K but no one is making anywhere near 65K).
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
Stratification - no.
What the example illustrates is that an average is meaningless.
Average by definition does not tell you anything about distribution since all numbers are treated equally.
Those values close to the average are treated no differently than those far from the average.
Review your statistics theory, the bell curve has meaning when you talk about mean - not when you
talk about average.
True, we can play games with numbers to prove anything we want, which is precisely why average is
meaningless. Can someone survive on 20K a year in San Diego county (yes, if they are a college
student working part time, or are living on public assistance with subsidized housing, or are a working
housewife trying to make grocery money while the kids are in school and her husband is an
executive, or perhaps there is a couple who is retired and their home is paid for and their kids have
left home. ) Are you telling me that none of the population of San Diego county fits into any of the above
categories and is not surviving ? Do they affect the average ? You bet. Are there other people who
pull their salaries to the average of 65K , yes there are.
But keep thinking that just because some people make meager salaries implies that they aren't
surviving when the average income is significantly higher. There could be special circumstances that
that make those salaries survivable where it would not work for most of the population.
You do understand what an average is and what it means don't you? It means that all salaries are added
and divided by the number of people making up the sample. When you take into account the number of
people who are on public assistance, social security or other fixed incomes, those in the military, those
working part time, those working in fast food places, migrant workers, etc. - in order to keep the average
at 65K, the salaries have to be pretty high. Saying the average salary is 65K doesn't mean that a majority of the people are making that amount or
even close to it. (Example : 10 waitresses are making 20K, and 10 attorneys are making 110K. The
average salary is 65K but no one is making anywhere near 65K).
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
Stratification - no.
What the example illustrates is that an average is meaningless.
Average by definition does not tell you anything about distribution since all numbers are treated equally.
Those values close to the average are treated no differently than those far from the average.
Review your statistics theory, the bell curve has meaning when you talk about mean - not when you
talk about average.
True, we can play games with numbers to prove anything we want, which is precisely why average is
meaningless. Can someone survive on 20K a year in San Diego county (yes, if they are a college
student working part time, or are living on public assistance with subsidized housing, or are a working
housewife trying to make grocery money while the kids are in school and her husband is an
executive, or perhaps there is a couple who is retired and their home is paid for and their kids have
left home. ) Are you telling me that none of the population of San Diego county fits into any of the above
categories and is not surviving ? Do they affect the average ? You bet. Are there other people who
pull their salaries to the average of 65K , yes there are.
But keep thinking that just because some people make meager salaries implies that they aren't
surviving when the average income is significantly higher. There could be special circumstances that
that make those salaries survivable where it would not work for most of the population. Uhmmm...in mathmetics...mean = average...go look it up. If you aren't just trolling, it becomes obvious that you know very little about economic wealth distribution.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Was reading this post and getting a good laugh out of it but that turned to guffaws when i read that LOTR looks better than Vanguard. LOTR looks almost like WOW neither shows depth. Its like looking at a flat picture. Vanguard looks like I can see depth like real 3d. EQ2 and Vanguard are the only MMOs that have fantastic graphics but you gotta have a machine capable. I like Vanguard and cancelled my station access and just subscribed to VG. Having played LOTR open beta and waiting to see AOC and Warhammer I think EQ2 and VG are head and shoulders above anything out there. Im in the largest guild on Thunderaxe server and every one there is having a blast. I really like the tradeskills not like WOW where u can craft while eating supper in the next room. . If Vanguard dies I will be the last one putting flowers on the grave. Dont think i will doing that anytime soon tho. The first poster is living in a world that he created. Exploits are widespread??? Gee havent seen any yet but heard of one and that guy got booted, and i sure dont see LOTR taking people from Vanguard, WOW yes but not VG. WOW and LOTR seem like the same game to me but thats just my opinion.
Was reading this post and getting a good laugh out of it but that turned to guffaws when i read that LOTR looks better than Vanguard. LOTR looks almost like WOW neither shows depth. Its like looking at a flat picture. Vanguard looks like I can see depth like real 3d.
LOTR graphics are not as cartoony like as WoW. Graphically, I would place LOTR halfway between WoW and Vanguard. That being said, I can run LOTR at ultra high quality and Vanguard at ONLY high Performance. Thus comparing Vanguard's "High Performance" to LOTR "ultra high quality" --- LOTR wins hands down (I know there are going to Vanboys that say "that is not a fair comparsion" and my response is "certainly is -- I am comparing the best graphic options available to me ON MY MACHINE."
i sure dont see LOTR taking people from Vanguard, WOW yes but not VG.
I, for one, play CURRENTLY, EQ2, WoW, COH and until just recently Vanguard. I cancelled my Vanguard account because I am going to LOTR and I know others from my Vanguard guild that did/are doing the same thing, so yes, LOTR is going to hurt Vanguard.
WOW and LOTR seem like the same game to me but thats just my opinion.
I agree, they are very similar but LOTR has as better graphics than WoW.
Im plating both and on my machine e6400 C2D oced to 3.2 ghz, 2 gigs ddr800, x1950 xt video card and with both turned up to max Vanguard and eq2 both blow everything else in the weeds. I would imagine that if you had a older video card yes LOTR would look better but on mine no way. I turned up LOTR to max video settings and was not impressed looks cartoony just like WOW.
Uhmmm...in mathmetics...mean = average...go look it up. If you aren't just trolling, it becomes obvious that you know very little about economic wealth distribution.
You are indeed correct that average and mean are used interchangeably.
However as my example illustrated, an average by itself is meaningless because you can not tell
how uniformly distributed the data is. One could assume that the data has a small variance (or
standard deviation) and is concentrated near the average or one could just as easily assume that the
data has a very large variance or standard deviation) and that the data is widely distributed. A
bell curve could still be drawn in both cases (bell curve is defined as encompassing one to three
standard deviations where 68, 95, and 99 percent of the values are within the given variance).
In San Diego county, it is not unreasonable to find people who work in Taco Bell or people who
are heart surgeons. One heart surgeon can bring the average salary of an awful lot of fast food workers
up to 65K. Are you going to try and tell me that all the college students in San Diego county that work
(even part time) also make nearly 65K a year ? The diversity of situations and the amounts people
make would tend to make me believe that the standard deviation or variance is very large.
No, definitely not trolling.
My my, don't we just love jumping to conclusions.
As I said before, one can not conclude anything about the uniformity or clustering of the data by
Im plating both and on my machine e6400 C2D oced to 3.2 ghz, 2 gigs ddr800, x1950 xt video card and with both turned up to max Vanguard and eq2 both blow everything else in the weeds. I would imagine that if you had a older video card yes LOTR would look better but on mine no way. I turned up LOTR to max video settings and was not impressed looks cartoony just like WOW.
Have you played it with the High Res client? The client that we are all using right now is only the Low Res client, don't think they released the High Res one due to bandwidth to download it. (LOTRO)
Was reading this post and getting a good laugh out of it but that turned to guffaws when i read that LOTR looks better than Vanguard. LOTR looks almost like WOW neither shows depth. Its like looking at a flat picture. Vanguard looks like I can see depth like real 3d. LOTR graphics are not as cartoony like as WoW. Graphically, I would place LOTR halfway between WoW and Vanguard. That being said, I can run LOTR at ultra high quality and Vanguard at ONLY high Performance. Thus comparing Vanguard's "High Performance" to LOTR "ultra high quality" --- LOTR wins hands down (I know there are going to Vanboys that say "that is not a fair comparsion" and my response is "certainly is -- I am comparing the best graphic options available to me ON MY MACHINE." Yes i fully agree that LotrO is definitly atleast 60x better looking then WoW, but graphic wise can't really compare it with Vanguard i sure dont see LOTR taking people from Vanguard, WOW yes but not VG. I, for one, play CURRENTLY, EQ2, WoW, COH and until just recently Vanguard. I cancelled my Vanguard account because I am going to LOTR and I know others from my Vanguard guild that did/are doing the same thing, so yes, LOTR is going to hurt Vanguard. I'm sure the first few months Vanguard will feel the rumble of LotrO but i wonder for how long that will be. LotrO is sure a fine looking and cool playing game, been in beta, enjoyd it very much, felt extremly stable and for the most part felt already finished to be released in my opinion, afcourse it very good they don't cause many things they still are polishing which is a very good thing they are doing. But in the end i think many gamers will not last very long in LotrO especialy when you track the Vanguard Forums read what people want out of a game and they expext LotrO will deliver its like some thought months ago the same way about Vanguard. Vanguard made a bad start but will grow, LotrO will have a great start but will it stick, only time will tell. WOW and LOTR seem like the same game to me but thats just my opinion. I agree, they are very similar but LOTR has as better graphics than WoW. The thing i see similair between WoW and LotrO is that both are very easy to get into, it also will be a game you can hop in for 1 hour and feel you have accomplished something, which is almost the same as with Vanguard but with Vanguard you accomplish beter things at a very early start, WoW and LotrO will take some time before getting to the really cool things. Crafting in LotrO is pretty decent but also very easy, cool feature is the way the implemented crafting and harvesting inlike using famrfield, see you unions/weeds ect grow on the spot. LotrO will do pretty good when its released, but like i said only time will tell for how long.
Comments
As to LotRo, we have a history here, don't we? Today, they go Open Beta and we'll have even more data about game play. LotRo may very well be the hottest game for the next several months, I think.
The big difference in the hype between WAR/AoC and VG is that WAR & AoC are being hyped by the player base and not by the company that produces it. WAR for example does not claim to be 3rd generation or revolutionize the MMO genre. Heck the devs even tell people NOT to play the game if they are a certain type of player (care bears, TV watching healers etc.). Why do you think people hate Vanguard so much? It's a bad game with an even worse launch - big deal. But the fact that Sir Brad promissed the golden child and then shit the bed is what many people are not so fond of. At least Mythic is honest about their approach to the game.
Good god, some of you people seem to think that So Cal is the Land of Milk and Honey where ambrosia flows from out of the ground!!!
The average family income for San Diego county is about $65,000 - $68,000 right now. People claiming that you need to earn $70,000 - $90,000 per year just to survive here must be reading about some other planet. Most people who work in Carlsbad, Ca. certainly don't live there. They COMMUTE from cheaper areas.
You can't use places like Silicon Valley or Carlsbad to estimate yearly salaries because they do not represent the reality of living here.
I find it absurdly funny watching all of these pocket business gurus writing about what it would take for Sigil to succeed or fail. All of your assumptions, and numerations and prognostications are totally a waste unless you start with basic information. Otherwise it seems totally ignorant.
First and foremost, you don't know what their business plan is... what is Sigil's planned ROI? Is it 1 month, 6 months, or 6 years??? Many start up businesses PLAN on losing money for their first fiscal year. You don't know what their cash reserves are... they could bleed money out the nose but if they planned well it wouldn't matter. They could rake in the dough but if they planned badly they'd fail in a few months. Do they have a growth strategy or plan on max short term profits? Financial people live in a different world when it comes to talking about money. "Running out of funds" may not mean that the business is broke.
Unless you have this type of information, you seem like blind rats groping in the dark.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Yes, indeed it does. Access to the majority of material on Gamasutra requires a username and password. I merely offered up the information for those who are actually interested in having some facts to back up their suppositions. Use it or don't use it, either is fine. Registration is free, after all.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
Is there some kind of award for an OP if enough people respond to the thread? Just in case, I'll help out, just in case I decide to go for such an award that might possibly exist someday and might need the favor to be returned.
I'm sorry I have nothing really to say about the subject. I don't really know anything about it worth saying, that hasn't already been said many times before.
and divided by the number of people making up the sample. When you take into account the number of
people who are on public assistance, social security or other fixed incomes, those in the military, those
working part time, those working in fast food places, migrant workers, etc. - in order to keep the average
at 65K, the salaries have to be pretty high.
Saying the average salary is 65K doesn't mean that a majority of the people are making that amount or
even close to it. (Example : 10 waitresses are making 20K, and 10 attorneys are making 110K. The
average salary is 65K but no one is making anywhere near 65K).
Wow thanks really inciteful, I can really feel your hate and gloom and bitterness, I feel sorry for you.
Lol.... never heard such rubbish, these forums amaze me.
/pops back to VG and continues having a great time with 10's thousands of other people.
/wave
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/111949
Whatever you are smoking, I want some!!
Well I think most people are 'in business' to one degree or another, for example I create a product which my company sells to customers for a profit.
You have stated that you are IN business, what that may mean I have no idea. I assume that your hubris stems from the fact that you actually deal with some financial aspect of a company, although again that could be almost anything, including zeroing your drawer after shift at Taco Bell. I strongly suspect that you are not a mover and shaker of any note as you would not have time to post on MMORPG.com if that were true.
To boldly say that I could not be any more incorrect and in the same breath make the assertion that 'the game can survive on only 75k subs' is the epitomy of hypocrisy. I am suprised your head hasn't exploded from the cognitive dissonance required to make such a post.
I played Vanguard for the past two months and I cancelled my account today because LOTR is freaking SO much more polished. I doubt that I am alone. I wanted to like Vanguard---but there are WAY too many things wrong with it that suck the FUN out of playing it.
I agree with the OP; i believe its the beginning of the end of Vanguard.
Same ol crap that gets posted on every forum.
Provide some facts supporting your outrageous assumptions.
I will highlight in a nice bright colour which statements made me LOL.
Practice what you preach, maybe? No, that might ruin that hardcore overzaelous hater image you've worked SO hard to build. Right?
Ok then.
.
There you go.
Want me to address?
- AO in worse shape than VG at launch is very debateable. Saying it is a great game now and it funded AoC's development is a complete assumption. You do relise what a publisher is right?
Nothing but an opinion.
Thank you for stating the obvious.
- LotRO will always have better looking graphics than VG, saying VG's graphics CAN improve and LotRO's graphics CAN'T improve is now on my list of completely idiodic things that have ever came from a vanboi's mouth.
Nothing but an opinion on the way graphics look. And wrong, any game can get a graphics update, even if it's just as simple as replacing current textures with higher res ones.
Wrong? I was the one saying that any game can get a graphical update. The poster I quoted said that LotRO cannot get updated and VG can. Which is untrue. You misread my post.
- There is nothing more complex about VG's models than most mmos out today. Do not kid yourself.
Very wrong. Vanguard does have a many more polygon's on character's than most of this generation's games. There are numbers somewhere, but I'm too lazy, like you, to find them. At least I admitted to it. Though me saying that is just as bad as you spitting that same trash you wrote.
Polygon count = Complexity now?
- Three years from now VG will be nothing more than a station access game. Assumption? Yes. More likely to happen than your bias opinion? Yes!
Every game on the SOE network is a Station Access game. Are you saying that every game currently under SOE's charge is a failure? And your opinion isn't biased, how?
Good on you for taking my comment and placing it out of proportion. I stated VG will be NOTHING MORE than a station access game. Never did I suggest that every game under SOE's charge is a failure. In fact I have NEVER played an SOE game BESIDES VG.
Have fun with your broken visioned, viral marketed, waste of space, still in beta game. Just don't post crap like this again.
Sorry, I missed the part where you posted the official credentials stating that all of your opinions must be fact and everyone who didn't agree with yours were blasphemy. Gawd forbid someone stands up and gives his opinion of a game he loves on a forum for THAT game.
What was he thinking!? How can ANYONE not agree with your divine rightious un-biased statements? Idiots, all of them
No one has to agree with me, I just would like to see some facts when people claim outrageous things like "LotRO cannot be updated graphically but VG can".
How about you read my post CLEARLY before commenting. My views are opinions, and sometimes I support them with facts. I never stated my opinions WERE facts.
Actually, you proved my point, you jumped the gun even assuming I had a vendetta against SOE. It was entertaining.
First: You can't find a publisher if you have no track record. So your attempt to insult me is just silly.
Second: It's much easier to redo textures than it is object models and new animations. If LOTR already has "high rez textures" in place, then where could they go from there? Super duper hi rez? VG models do have a substantially higher poly count... redoing textures over time will be easy.
LotRo absolutely BLASTS Vanguard graphically. Vanguard is an unstable, buggy POS. Like you, I used to defend Vanguard but it is indefensible and deserves to fail, which it undoubtedly will.
S
Same ol crap that gets posted on every forum.
Provide some facts supporting your outrageous assumptions.
I will highlight in a nice bright colour which statements made me LOL.
Practice what you preach, maybe? No, that might ruin that hardcore overzaelous hater image you've worked SO hard to build. Right?
Ok then.
.
There you go.
Want me to address?
- AO in worse shape than VG at launch is very debateable. Saying it is a great game now and it funded AoC's development is a complete assumption. You do relise what a publisher is right?
Nothing but an opinion.
Thank you for stating the obvious.
- LotRO will always have better looking graphics than VG, saying VG's graphics CAN improve and LotRO's graphics CAN'T improve is now on my list of completely idiodic things that have ever came from a vanboi's mouth.
Nothing but an opinion on the way graphics look. And wrong, any game can get a graphics update, even if it's just as simple as replacing current textures with higher res ones.
Wrong? I was the one saying that any game can get a graphical update. The poster I quoted said that LotRO cannot get updated and VG can. Which is untrue. You misread my post.
- There is nothing more complex about VG's models than most mmos out today. Do not kid yourself.
Very wrong. Vanguard does have a many more polygon's on character's than most of this generation's games. There are numbers somewhere, but I'm too lazy, like you, to find them. At least I admitted to it. Though me saying that is just as bad as you spitting that same trash you wrote.
Polygon count = Complexity now?
- Three years from now VG will be nothing more than a station access game. Assumption? Yes. More likely to happen than your bias opinion? Yes!
Every game on the SOE network is a Station Access game. Are you saying that every game currently under SOE's charge is a failure? And your opinion isn't biased, how?
Good on you for taking my comment and placing it out of proportion. I stated VG will be NOTHING MORE than a station access game. Never did I suggest that every game under SOE's charge is a failure. In fact I have NEVER played an SOE game BESIDES VG.
Have fun with your broken visioned, viral marketed, waste of space, still in beta game. Just don't post crap like this again.
Sorry, I missed the part where you posted the official credentials stating that all of your opinions must be fact and everyone who didn't agree with yours were blasphemy. Gawd forbid someone stands up and gives his opinion of a game he loves on a forum for THAT game.
What was he thinking!? How can ANYONE not agree with your divine rightious un-biased statements? Idiots, all of them
No one has to agree with me, I just would like to see some facts when people claim outrageous things like "LotRO cannot be updated graphically but VG can".
How about you read my post CLEARLY before commenting. My views are opinions, and sometimes I support them with facts. I never stated my opinions WERE facts.
Actually, you proved my point, you jumped the gun even assuming I had a vendetta against SOE. It was entertaining.
First: You can't find a publisher if you have no track record. So your attempt to insult me is just silly.
Second: It's much easier to redo textures than it is object models and new animations. If LOTR already has "high rez textures" in place, then where could they go from there? Super duper hi rez? VG models do have a substantially higher poly count... redoing textures over time will be easy.
LotRo absolutely BLASTS Vanguard graphically. Vanguard is an unstable, buggy POS. Like you, I used to defend Vanguard but it is indefensible and deserves to fail, which it undoubtedly will.
S
Vanguard graphics =
50% in game graphics
50% desktop graphics after crashing
pwnd
I played Vanguard for the past two months and I cancelled my account today because LOTR is freaking SO much more polished. I doubt that I am alone. I wanted to like Vanguard---but there are WAY too many things wrong with it that suck the FUN out of playing it.
I agree with the OP; i believe its the beginning of the end of Vanguard.
I also have to completly agree here too. I played VG for 1 month (had cancelled my account 2 weeks in) but still played it untill my account ceased. I carnt even think of an mmorpg that had a weekend of double xp gains within the 1st month of going retail, let alone 2 xp weekends back to back.
The game was rushed, i also agree that many players who came and trieed the game have also left in disgust too, which will be hard to regain them back, it will also be alot harder to get rid of all the bad publicity it has had (i have seen 3 reviews made by reviewers for magazines, they came in at 3/10 4/10 and 4.5/10, not even an average game, all rated it below average. I myself have been saying to people who have asked me whether to get it or not, i have said no, wait for about 6months or so, because the game is just not worth it right now. Having said that, Lotro is nice, has only a couple of bugs (had quite a few until last patch that fixed a load of bugs, cos i went round and checked all of the known bugs i had logged in, bar 1 and all had been fixed, however 3 new ones have opened up and have been logged) which i fully expect to be fixed before release (something i cannot say about VG or any SoE game to date),
Then by the time VG may start to become very playable as already mentioned it may be too late, newer games are scheduled to hit the shelves of which (oh god) SoE has 1 in its grasps and i am having to really think if i would go for it or not, and that is Gods and heroes, but the SoE tag is really really offputting, because i would like entertainment in my games i pay for and not enterPainment, of which SoE has a real nasty habit of stuffing every game up in 1 way or another.
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
I tell you what, if in two months VSoH doesn't make 500k subs you never post again? If they do I won't post again! I am not worrying about losing.
Vanbois are idiots, Brad made the most awful steaming crappy game ever.
If you have any questions please ask. I have moved on to WoW from eq and no longer have any desire to play a dead game. Thank you. (posted by another selling his account in EQ1)
vg on the other had..... invisible mobs attack me, the mob appears and is right in front of me but says it is too far away. it then teleports and i run at it then i get teleported. next thing you know i have another invisible mob on me and I die. my game crashes later on and i log back to where I started to in the first place with lost xp.
oh yeah and mobs from towers jump straight down when they reach low health and as for low health i mean they still have about a half or a third of life left, they aggro everything which does not run up the tower but some how magically appears at your level or simply hit you from under you where you cannot attack them yourself . Not to mention mobs stack right over each other as they attack you and you have no idea how many your fighting till you are OMGWTF DEAD.
Sometimes I run into a chunk and i slow down for a half hour (exaggeration more like 5-10 sec) and then all of sudden i am 1000000000000000 meters from where i froze only to see that ran into some mobs and i died. I lag up when more players show up and i cannot enjoy pvp. I have a good pc and can run every game i have with no problem, i can drop vg down to crap and it still acts like crap
yah wow had the same problems as vg does now.. .yeah right
TOOL
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
Stratification - no.What the example illustrates is that an average is meaningless.
Average by definition does not tell you anything about distribution since all numbers are treated equally.
Those values close to the average are treated no differently than those far from the average.
Review your statistics theory, the bell curve has meaning when you talk about mean - not when you
talk about average.
True, we can play games with numbers to prove anything we want, which is precisely why average is
meaningless. Can someone survive on 20K a year in San Diego county (yes, if they are a college
student working part time, or are living on public assistance with subsidized housing, or are a working
housewife trying to make grocery money while the kids are in school and her husband is an
executive, or perhaps there is a couple who is retired and their home is paid for and their kids have
left home. ) Are you telling me that none of the population of San Diego county fits into any of the above
categories and is not surviving ? Do they affect the average ? You bet. Are there other people who
pull their salaries to the average of 65K , yes there are.
But keep thinking that just because some people make meager salaries implies that they aren't
surviving when the average income is significantly higher. There could be special circumstances that
that make those salaries survivable where it would not work for most of the population.
Well thank you for the mathmetics lesson, but are you seriously suggesting that the salary demographics for a city are stratified like in your example? We can all play with numbers to prove anything we want, but we're talking real world population and economic bell curves not abstract mathematics games.
You do understand what a bell curve is and what it means don't you? The largest portions of the populations will be distributed around the median or average, with diminishing numbers and populations the further away from the average a point is. I could start into a long winded discussion about population distributions in a normal bell curve but that would take a lot of space.
Leaving all that aside, and using your example, you just reinforced my original point. If so many lower salary people are offsetting all these hypothetical high salaried ones, then people must not need sky high salaries to survive in So Cal.
Stratification - no.What the example illustrates is that an average is meaningless.
Average by definition does not tell you anything about distribution since all numbers are treated equally.
Those values close to the average are treated no differently than those far from the average.
Review your statistics theory, the bell curve has meaning when you talk about mean - not when you
talk about average.
True, we can play games with numbers to prove anything we want, which is precisely why average is
meaningless. Can someone survive on 20K a year in San Diego county (yes, if they are a college
student working part time, or are living on public assistance with subsidized housing, or are a working
housewife trying to make grocery money while the kids are in school and her husband is an
executive, or perhaps there is a couple who is retired and their home is paid for and their kids have
left home. ) Are you telling me that none of the population of San Diego county fits into any of the above
categories and is not surviving ? Do they affect the average ? You bet. Are there other people who
pull their salaries to the average of 65K , yes there are.
But keep thinking that just because some people make meager salaries implies that they aren't
surviving when the average income is significantly higher. There could be special circumstances that
that make those salaries survivable where it would not work for most of the population. Uhmmm...in mathmetics...mean = average...go look it up. If you aren't just trolling, it becomes obvious that you know very little about economic wealth distribution.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
You are indeed correct that average and mean are used interchangeably.
However as my example illustrated, an average by itself is meaningless because you can not tell
how uniformly distributed the data is. One could assume that the data has a small variance (or
standard deviation) and is concentrated near the average or one could just as easily assume that the
data has a very large variance or standard deviation) and that the data is widely distributed. A
bell curve could still be drawn in both cases (bell curve is defined as encompassing one to three
standard deviations where 68, 95, and 99 percent of the values are within the given variance).
In San Diego county, it is not unreasonable to find people who work in Taco Bell or people who
are heart surgeons. One heart surgeon can bring the average salary of an awful lot of fast food workers
up to 65K. Are you going to try and tell me that all the college students in San Diego county that work
(even part time) also make nearly 65K a year ? The diversity of situations and the amounts people
make would tend to make me believe that the standard deviation or variance is very large.
No, definitely not trolling.
My my, don't we just love jumping to conclusions.
As I said before, one can not conclude anything about the uniformity or clustering of the data by
only knowing the average.