Star Citizen Stats

gervaise1 · October 2019

Amathe said:

The numbers seem less about informing me of anything useful, and seem more just to convince me SC is a real game making progress.

But a real game making progress wouldn't focus on things like how many kills with a certain kind of gun. Because seriously whoop de do.
<snip>

No of orcs killed; guns fired; ships sunk ..... this is standard stuff. Doesn't take much searching to bring up dozens of games that have produced the same - essentially meaningless - infographics.

You know that there are those on these forums who "hate" them don't you

And I am sure you have the "right" of it. It is intended to convince people that SC is a "real game". Either way its certainly a lot of play testing whether you use @rpmcmurphy 's "guess" or not.

Plus a dash of publicity of course.

Kyleran · October 2019

MaxBacon said:

@Vrika @rpmcmurphy

The numbers of the game currently are not much relevant, after all the game is still doing major wipes every main update so it's not to expect any serious sinking of time on the game as is.

I mean simply put yourself on that position, you play such but the game will wipe all your progression soon, isn't it logical you won't sink much time on the game?

I know for myself I don't play much because next month, again, all my progress is wiped so I'm waiting until there is more persistency between patches. For others, this varies from wanting more content to a more stable experience.

This is why this debate (how many playing the game) does not reflect the interest in the game or its popularity.

What you said....is why I have to wait on trying SC, I loath losing progression which is why I've never even tried to log in to CU despite being an alpha level backer.

Someday....

Kefo · October 2019

sgel said:

Babuinix said:

I think I've mentioned before that I dont do math based on made up numbers.

Only someone desperate would go through that dead end route

Babs: YOUR NUMBAS ARE WRONG!
Murphy: Ok, give me the right numbers.
Babs: YOUR NUMBAS ARE WRONG!

Clown Incorporated Games

If you want to be correct it’s actually just Clown Incorporated. CI dropped the Games part I think a little under a year ago?

Kefo · October 2019

gervaise1 said:

Amathe said:

The numbers seem less about informing me of anything useful, and seem more just to convince me SC is a real game making progress.

But a real game making progress wouldn't focus on things like how many kills with a certain kind of gun. Because seriously whoop de do.
<snip>

No of orcs killed; guns fired; ships sunk ..... this is standard stuff. Doesn't take much searching to bring up dozens of games that have produced the same - essentially meaningless - infographics.

You know that there are those on these forums who "hate" them don't you

And I am sure you have the "right" of it. It is intended to convince people that SC is a "real game". Either way its certainly a lot of play testing whether you use @rpmcmurphy 's "guess" or not.

Plus a dash of publicity of course.

I think the point they were trying to make is that instead of putting out these stats that generally completed games release to hype up their game they should probably just finish their game first

gervaise1 · October 2019

Kefo said:

gervaise1 said:

Amathe said:

The numbers seem less about informing me of anything useful, and seem more just to convince me SC is a real game making progress.

But a real game making progress wouldn't focus on things like how many kills with a certain kind of gun. Because seriously whoop de do.
<snip>

No of orcs killed; guns fired; ships sunk ..... this is standard stuff. Doesn't take much searching to bring up dozens of games that have produced the same - essentially meaningless - infographics.

You know that there are those on these forums who "hate" them don't you

And I am sure you have the "right" of it. It is intended to convince people that SC is a "real game". Either way its certainly a lot of play testing whether you use @rpmcmurphy 's "guess" or not.

Plus a dash of publicity of course.

I think the point they were trying to make is that instead of putting out these stats that generally completed games release to hype up their game they should probably just finish their game first

Maybe. I didn't attribute any "sinister" motive.

It is a typical infographic. Done by companies large and small. And pre-launch is not untypical. And easy to see why: cost/effort of producing something like this: peanuts; publicity value: huge.

And - as with all developments - you can be doing the best job in the world but if the money runs out: curtains; you can make the best whatever in the world but if no one knows about it: so what.

Now if it wasn't for this thread I would have simply seen the headline / picture, assumed it was just "another infographic" (it is!) and thought nothing of it. As a result of the thread though: 45,000 (or whatever) is an awful lot of people "hanging around" in a game not slated to launch for ...... some quarters.

BeansnBread · October 2019

gervaise1 is officially a defender of this fiasco IMO. There is no other way to read this bullshit. Look at the stretch marks - they are as ugly as sticking your head out of a window and getting arrested for mooning. - Rodney Dangerfield.

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

Roll on CitizenCon is all I can say...

Erillion · October 2019

RebornDragon said:

Hey, since we're all talking about math here a fun fact:

Since 2011, if the rumors are true that they have a 500+ man dev team, they've spent over 8,000,000 man hours developing this game - assuming 8 hour a day, 5 day work weeks since 2011.

The Empire State Building only took 7,000,000 man hours and they built it in a year.

This game seems like a scam more and more every day.

Another one who obviously has no idea what he is talking about.

Numbers wrong. Facts wrong. Math wrong.

Have fun

PS:

Even your Empire State Building facts are wrong

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_State_Building

Scot · October 2019

We have had posters comparing SC player numbers with games that are already out and one guy compared the time spent so far on the SC software project to a building construction project! Like with like guys, some of the reasoning in this thread needs to be questioned. It is taking forever and I have real concerns about how much of a joined up game we will see at launch, but we will see some sort of Space MMO.

Erillion · October 2019

I am quite happy that there is a renaissance of space games in general.

For sure triggered by the triple example of Star Citizen + Elite Dangerous + No Man's Sky.

Even if some posters here get creative with their math and numbers .... it is quite obvious that it is a good time for those who love space games.

Have fun

Kyleran · October 2019

Erillion said:

I am quite happy that there is a renaissance of space games in general.

For sure triggered by the triple example of Star Citizen + Elite Dangerous + No Man's Sky.

Even if some posters here get creative with their math and numbers .... it is quite obvious that it is a good time for those who love space games.

Have fun

Well yeah, not like we can keep playing EVE forever.

Erillion · October 2019

>>>

Well yeah, not like we can keep playing EVE forever.
>>>

Switching to smartphone soon for playing EVE ;-) It has been announced here too.

Processing power is sufficient for EVE if you do not go into 4000 player battles ;-)

Stats have been a propaganda tool in EVE as much as they are (and will be) in SC.

Have fun

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

Erillion said:

I am quite happy that there is a renaissance of space games in general.

For sure triggered by the triple example of Star Citizen + Elite Dangerous + No Man's Sky.

Even if some posters here get creative with their math and numbers .... it is quite obvious that it is a good time for those who love space games.

Have fun

I'm quite happy as well, bar the ones you mentioned it's also interesting hearing about Dual Universe etc although I have to say I'd be far more concerned about businesses getting creative with numbers than random nobodies on a small forum.

It is actually really funny, if you use numbers not to CIG's benefit the fans get mad, if you use numbers to CIG's benefit, they also get mad.

The only time they are happy is when one of the faithful posts numbers... ie Babs and his selective Twitch numbers will get "insightful" likes from fellow fanbois...

rawfox · October 2019

No idea why so many people hating on SC.

We want this game and CIG is doing it.

Not even Stanton is done now, and Pyro is arriving soon.

What do you think what they do ?

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/starmap

Kyleran · October 2019

Erillion said:

>>>
Well yeah, not like we can keep playing EVE forever.
>>>

Switching to smartphone soon for playing EVE ;-) It has been announced here too.

Processing power is sufficient for EVE if you do not go into 4000 player battles ;-)

Have fun

Yeah, but can I run 6 accounts on my Samsung 8?

Babuinix · October 2019

What's selective about Twitch Stats?

https://sullygnome.com
https://twitchtracker.com
https://twitchstats.net
https://www.twitchmetrics.net

Are you saying that all these sites are doctoring their numbers to show that in the last years Star Citizen ranks higher than it should?

I supose making up that the average concurrent players are 1295 because that number of people playing 24/7 for 10 months straight without pauses makes much better sense

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

Babuinix said:

What's selective about Twitch Stats?

https://sullygnome.com
https://twitchtracker.com
https://twitchstats.net
https://www.twitchmetrics.net

Are you saying that all these sites are doctoring their numbers to show that in the last years Star Citizen ranks higher than it should?

The innocent act is fooling no one. You know full well that taking screenshots during patch week/free fly week and comparng it to games not in patch week is misrepresentative. It is textbook selectiveness.

Babuinix said:
I supose making up that the average concurrent players are 1295 because that number of people playing 24/7 for 10 months straight without pauses makes much better sense

Well this just demonstrates that you don't even understand what concurrent means or even what the word average means.

It has nothing to do with 1295 people playing 24/7 for 10 months. The count could fluctuate to 10000 at the weekend but drop off during the week, it would increases dramtically during patch or free fly weeks and then drop again.

However, if you add up all the played hours and divide them by the period you get an average, and in this case the average concurrency equals 1295 players.

sgel · October 2019

Yeah guys.. don't look at CIG's official numbers.. look at Twitch numbers!!

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

sgel said:

Yeah guys.. don't look at CIG's official numbers.. look at Twitch numbers!!

AKA eyes on the product are more important than hands on the product. It's the sort of thing marketing would come up with.

Babuinix · October 2019

rpmcmurphy said:

Babuinix said:

What's selective about Twitch Stats?

https://sullygnome.com
https://twitchtracker.com
https://twitchstats.net
https://www.twitchmetrics.net

Are you saying that all these sites are doctoring their numbers to show that in the last years Star Citizen ranks higher than it should?

The innocent act is fooling no one. You know full well that taking screenshots during patch week/free fly week and comparng it to games not in patch week is misrepresentative. It is textbook selectiveness.

Babuinix said:
I supose making up that the average concurrent players are 1295 because that number of people playing 24/7 for 10 months straight without pauses makes much better sense

Well this just demonstrates that you don't even understand what concurrent means or even what the word average means.

It has nothing to do with 1295 people playing 24/7 for 10 months. The count could fluctuate to 10000 at the weekend but drop off during the week, it would increases dramtically during patch or free fly weeks and then drop again.

However, if you add up all the played hours and divide them by the period you get an average, and in this case the average concurrency equals 1295 players.

What is exactly your problem with a screenshot that showcase daily, weekly, yearly data and overall rank of twitch engagement?

You dont think some hours are spent sleeping/working when making assumptions based on how many hours people played during those 10 months lol?

There's nothing wrong with RSI numbers but everything wrong with this op rethoric and "conclusion".

Erillion · October 2019

Kyleran said:

Erillion said:

>>>
Well yeah, not like we can keep playing EVE forever.
>>>

Switching to smartphone soon for playing EVE ;-) It has been announced here too.

Processing power is sufficient for EVE if you do not go into 4000 player battles ;-)

Have fun

Yeah, but can I run 6 accounts on my Samsung 8?

Yes. With special apps to run multiple instances of another app.

https://www.online-tech-tips.com/smartphones/how-to-run-multiple-instances-of-an-app-on-android-mac/

Go mine ;-)

Have fun

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

Babuinix said:

What is exactly your problem with a screenshot that showcase daily, weekly, yearly data and overall rank of twitch engagement?

What is your problem with some simple maths being applied to CIG's published info?

Babuinix said:

You dont think some hours are spent sleeping/working when making assumptions based on how many hours people played during those 10 months lol?

What are you even on about? People sleeping or working have absolutely no relevance here.

The numbers played are what they are. The time elapsed from Jan to Oct is what it is. Those are fixed numbers, You can't start adding in variables like people sleeping and people working... what the fuckity fuck?

Babuinix said:
There's nothing wrong with RSI numbers but everything wrong with this op rethoric and "conclusion".

This makes no sense. If I take CIG's numbers which you claim are fine and do some basic division without adding anything to it, you now claim the numbers are wrong.... that is fucking delusional.

CIG: 4 ships sold in the last 4 hours.

Me: An average of 1 per hour.

Babs: OMG you are fudging the math, get out with "rethoric and conculsion"

Erillion · October 2019

>>>

CIG: 4 ships sold in the last 4 hours.

Me: An average of 1 per hour.

>>>

That IS wrong math.

That value is only valid for the 4 hours you are looking at. And is in no way representative for a longer period of time.

Try "Me: An average of 1 per hour over the last 4 hours."

Have fun

rpmcmurphy · October 2019

Erillion said:

>>>
CIG: 4 ships sold in the last 4 hours.
Me: An average of 1 per hour.
>>>

That IS wrong math.

That value is only valid for the 4 hours you are looking at. And is in no way representative for a longer period of time.

Try "Me: An average of 1 per hour over the last 4 hours."

Have fun

Another troll enters the chat....

Babuinix · October 2019

rpmcmurphy said:

Babuinix said:

What is exactly your problem with a screenshot that showcase daily, weekly, yearly data and overall rank of twitch engagement?

What is your problem with some simple maths being applied to CIG's published info?

Babuinix said:

You dont think some hours are spent sleeping/working when making assumptions based on how many hours people played during those 10 months lol?
What are you even on about? People sleeping or working have absolutely no relevance here.
The numbers played are what they are. The time elapsed from Jan to Oct is what it is. Those are fixed numbers, You can't start adding in variables like people sleeping and people working... what the fuckity fuck?

Babuinix said:
There's nothing wrong with RSI numbers but everything wrong with this op rethoric and "conclusion".

This makes no sense. If I take CIG's numbers which you claim are fine and do some basic division withiout adding anything to it, you now claim the numbers are wrong.... that is fucking delusional.

CIG: 4 ships sold in the last 4 hours.
Me: An average of 1 per hour.
Babs: OMG you are fudging the math, get out with "rethoric and conculsion"

Why wouldn't you had realistic variables when you're the one trying to reach some kind of realistic conclusion from these numbers?

Remember, You posted the graphic and it was You who started adding variables like number of player based on assumptions to push a inconclusive conclusion as a fact.

Again, like the last thread, just another desperate tactic of obfuscation and deceit as an excuse to atack the game lol

Even Twitch stats and rank are fabricated, Star Citizen players that were said so be only whales are flying the cheapest ship Aurora, the mighty whales overpowering everyone in kills with the mighty Arrow

Ah well at least we can agree on something! Bring on CitizenCon!

Howdy, Stranger!

Star Citizen Stats

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Star Citizen Stats

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV