Thank you for an impartial and scientific analysis of forum opinions.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Thank you for an impartial and scientific analysis of forum opinions.
Lol.
My god, are you serious? What was impartial about anything Terilynn says?
Where is the scientific analysis? She made the decisions on what she perceives as being pro and negative and what was neutral. Others may read posts differently. Plus they are tearing apart her analysis to show the flaws of it.
Coupled with the fact that she didn't really need to do a column like this anyway and tbh, it seems to have backfired (nice one Bran for giving the link though).
At least the feedback on the site is giving it the feedback it deserves.
Haven't not listened to the podcast and will not, is this the same person who says -
at 3:30 she calls players who play STFs at elite pathetic
at 4:30 she says "gamers" who play STO or PVPers need to get a life and go play WOW
What was it she said last year about ragers being 12 year old or something?
Yep, impartial. Thats Terilynn. The woman who tells newcomers that most people by keys for lockboxes.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
Here is a post from a forumite debunking her column (wish I had the skills to do it )
Who's to say she's right or he's right? I don't know, but I know it's still a column that makes her look silly and people are now understanding exactly what she is.
It also makes Cryptic look silly for linking it, thinking it was going to be some positive PR.
Don't think so...
Here it is - --- (not mine once again).
I don't agree with the way you handled "off topic" posts - your numbers don't agree either. Just because angry trollish behavior isn't an acceptable way to deal with disappointment does not mean that the poster isn't angry or disappointed.
Just tossing out 47.1% of the posts pretty much invalidates your study. If you are discarding those numbers then they should be removed from the totals anyways. That would leave 407 posts.. (roughly):
26.2% positive
45% negative
28.7% neutral
This is an overwhelmingly negative response even though the validity of the data is weakened towards the positive by tossing out the responses of those who did not respond to frustration or excitement within your accepted parameters.
If your goal is to find out how much of the community responded negatively vs positively, then the neutral responses, or "do not know" - people who haven't made up their minds should not be counted either (until they make up their minds). After all, you didn't set out to find out the fanboi vs hater vs level headed responder ratio. This leaves 290 posts and the breakdown is then:
36.9% positive
63.1% negative
To me, the frequency of posts by each unique account whether positive or negative would indicate the level of energy behind the feelings or willingness to act on those feelings. We could just toss that data to get closer to your desired result and that leaves 107 positive posts divided by 1.4 posts/person or 76 positive respondents and 183 negative posts divided by 2.6 posts/person or 70 negative respondents. So:
52% people happy with the content change
48% people unhappy with the content change
However, and this is a biggie - you were trying to figure out of a thread was Rage Filled or not and the first thing you did was toss out the 47% of posts that contained only Rage. Furthermore, the conclusion that you changed to by the end - how much of the population was happy/disappointed with the bait and switch is invalidated by your standards for appropriate response. From what I've seen, the vast majority of gamers respond to change with over-reaction, professed undying love, troll posts or flame bait - and that over-reaction leans very heavily towards the disappointed side.
tldr: a 70 page thread with 47% of the posts being trollish or flame bait-ish enough for you to discount them and another 63.7% of the remaining posts containing an opinion that's clearly negative is the DEFINITION of a thread exploding into rage.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
I agree with Terilynn's analysis. She made a very good point about how the numbers are skewed due to how some people rant incessantly instead of simply posting an opinion. It's something I've noticed myself and commented on. That "level of energy" idea is TRIBBLE. I know some of these people well enough to know that that rant angrily about almost everything Cryptic does and they do it DAILY. they are in no way a representative sample of the population.
I am very excited for LoR. So seem to be many people who probably avoid the forums because it is filled with negativity.
Is well known that people who post on the forums are a minority....in every game .Even those who post comments on youtube or rate videos are a minority.
Is well known that people who post on the forums are a minority....in every game .Even those who post comments on youtube or rate videos are a minority.
People who post are a minority, the view counts are much higher, a lot people do read the forums and it does have a impact on their decisions about the game.
Yeah, there was nothing "scientific" about that at all. It's really a little disturbing that anybody would say there was.
She proved that the number of people actively complaining about the RR's implementation on the forums versus the number of people who are in favor of it are actually very close, and that those complaining are disproportionately vocal about it versus those who are not. This proves that despite the forum being more or less alight with people complaining, the opinions in general about it are far more balanced than they appear.
Her opinions and statements do not necessarily invalidate the numbers.
That said, an independent recount might be in order since the tally of "off-topic" posts does seem a bit high.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them." -Thomas Marrone
While I am still excited about the upcoming release of LoR despite the recent information which has shed a different light on what we are getting, I would just say that you can't always put things down into percentages based on what you perceive as negative and call it "scientific fact" IMO. Everything is down to every individuals perspective on the matter and what I deem as really negative and angry might be completely different to somebody else. The only way to get a fair reading based on the people who read the forums would be to have a poll:
"Does the recent news about not being able to create Romulan Fleets & Starbases at full launch irritate you"
&
"Would you have preferred a FULL FACTION with Fleets & Starbases at launch?"
Yes, No or Neutral. Then again like many have stated not everyone checks the forum. Either way Cryptic had said that they would be adding a new faction and in the information that was released it even stated that's what we were getting. The only fact you can possibly outline is that if you are to look at what Cryptic already classes as factions (KDF & FED) and what they include, then technically what we are getting is not a 3rd faction.
I understand that they don't want to make things harder for players with more grinds, but at the same time they could have allowed creating a Romulan Fleet and deciding which of the two existing factions you would like to work closer with in building trade / relations and allowing a fleet alliance where both Romulan & FED / KDF fleet can help towards each others projects and have the FED / KDF fleet help build the Romulan Fleet's first HQ / Base etc.
Despite the lack of the Romulan Fleet & Starbase / HQ, I am really excited about the upcoming changes to the UI and trying out the warbirds. I just only hope that these changes will come sooner than later in regards to ROM Fleets / Bases.
She proved that the number of people actively complaining about the RR's implementation on the forums versus the number of people who are in favor of it are actually very close, and that those complaining are disproportionately vocal about it versus those who are not. This proves that despite the forum being more or less alight with people complaining, the opinions in general about it are far more balanced than they appear.
Her opinions and statements do not necessarily invalidate the numbers.
That said, an independent recount might be in order since the tally of "off-topic" posts does seem a bit high.
I don't think the off topic count is excessive. Her categories were setup for posts about LoR(which were subsorted by tone), and everything else. The everything else category included all sorts of random posts. I'm going to look at page 43. Doing the whole thing would be too time consuming.
1: Maybe negative
2: offtopic
3: offtopic
4: generally negative, but not really talking about LoR, thus offtopic
5: (same person) ditto
6: positive
7: offtopic (this one is talking about the possibility of getting a Borg faction in the future)
8: offtopic (this one was actually discussing whether the playerbase was uniformly unhappy or just a few)
9: offtopic (this one is talking about general Zen purchases)
10: offtopic
See? people eventually started arguing about all sorts of random things in that thread. O-o'
1: Maybe negative
2: offtopic
3: offtopic
4: generally negative, but not really talking about LoR, thus offtopic
5: (same person) ditto
6: positive
7: offtopic (this one is talking about the possibility of getting a Borg faction in the future)
8: offtopic (this one was actually discussing whether the playerbase was uniformly unhappy or just a few)
9: offtopic (this one is talking about general Zen purchases)
10: offtopic
The problem here is that even in your small list, I can see two, maybe even three posts that are arguably different than what you categorize them as. Why argue about how many posts are what, when we should be discussing the merits / issues with the info we have so far?
People who post are a minority, the view counts are much higher, a lot people do read the forums and it does have a impact on their decisions about the game.
alot of people as in 1000?2000?3000? @3000 people play the game only on steam at any hour (you can check steam statistics).Read the steam forums to see that most never go on these forums.You dont know math if you say thiings on this forums represent majority's opinion.
Not all people play on steam .If 20% of people who play the game would come on forums to post this thread would be at least 2000 pages.
She proved that the number of people actively complaining about the RR's implementation on the forums versus the number of people who are in favor of it are actually very close, and that those complaining are disproportionately vocal about it versus those who are not. This proves that despite the forum being more or less alight with people complaining, the opinions in general about it are far more balanced than they appear.
Her opinions and statements do not necessarily invalidate the numbers.
That said, an independent recount might be in order since the tally of "off-topic" posts does seem a bit high.
Be that as it may, it had nothing to do with science or the scientific method. And it proved nothing of the sort regarding general opinion, given that this forum is hardly a random or representative sample, nor is any particular forum thread, even if she had an actual scientific methodology.
It was a person counting posts in a thread and assigning them into categories based on her own opinion. No more and no less.
alot of people as in 1000?2000?3000? @3000 people play the game only on steam at any hour (you can check steam statistics).Read the steam forums to see that most never go on these forums.You dont know math if you say thiings on this forums represent majority's opinion.
Not all people play on steam .If 20% of people who play the game would come on forums to post this thread would be at least 2000 pages.
Forums are always a good way to figure out how things are going in a mmo, its usually the people that play the game are more hardcore , know the mechanics of the game better are the ones that post their opinions about how they like and dislike the game. They also tell their friends how they feel about the game, they go on other gaming sites and let their opinions be read by others there and those people tell others. That how you end up with millions of gamers knowing all the bad stuff about a MMO and generally unaware of the good stuff because people who are content don't post that much.
Forums are always a good way to figure out how things are going in a mmo, its usually the people that play the game are more hardcore , know the mechanics of the game better are the ones that post their opinions about how they like and dislike the game. They also tell their friends how they feel about the game, they go on other gaming sites and let their opinions be read by others there and those people tell others. That how you end up with millions of gamers knowing all the bad stuff about a MMO and generally unaware of the good stuff because people who are content don't post that much.
seems to me they are more on gaming sites then actual play the game.
as for "they know better" ...thats BS.Most cry babies on this forum dont know how use distribute shields on their ships (or ask for tricobalt nerf and after is nerfed want it un nerfed...thats the almighty pvp forum :rolleyes:).
so 200 people on this forum are responsable for all those people who play the game.I say lets fire the marketing guy because no more adds are needed ....people will do the marketing job from now on.
seems to me they are more on gaming sites then actual play the game.
as for "they know better" ...thats BS.Most cry babies on this forum dont know how use distribute shields on their ships (or ask for tricobalt nerf and after is nerfed want it un nerfed...thats the almighty pvp forum :rolleyes:).
so 200 people on this forum are responsable for all those people who play the game.I say lets fire the marketing guy because no more adds are needed ....people will do the marketing job from now on.
Opinions do spread like of virus on the internet, that why it hard for mmo companies to get players to try their games if they already read or heard a negative opinion. And yes not all forum posters are crybabies , many do have great understanding of the game they are playing and rather if its good or bad their opinions do have more merit.
Opinions do spread like of virus on the internet, that why it hard for mmo companies to get players to try their games if they already read or heard a negative opinion. And yes not all forum posters are crybabies , many do have great understanding of the game they are playing and rather if its good or bad their opinions do have more merit.
So you think not star trek name makes people download this ?
star trek fans will want to play it .Guess is really hard to start a game and people's opinions are more important than your own eyes.
Btw many people told me DC universe is a good game.Why am I not playing it?
So you think not star trek name makes people download this ?
star trek fans will want to play it .Guess is really hard to start a game and people's opinions are more important than your own eyes.
Btw many people told me DC universe is a good game.Why am I not playing it?
Not all startrek fans want to play this , and many who had left and yes there are many people who like playing new mmo's have check out STO and might be still be playing. Point is lots of people go by hear say about a game. Other wise you would not have big websights about games and people giving their opinions about them, people making money on youtube giving their opinions about games or gaming journalism is general. What do you think polls are in politics , its a small group of people giving opinion and they can get a good idea on how millions of people are feeling.
Thank you for an impartial and scientific analysis of forum opinions.
Sorry Bluegeek for critizising you.
It is not scientific and it is not impartial at all.
reasons why it is not impartial and scientific
1.)She defines the thread as "thread of rage"...it isn't .. it is disappointment mixed with passion for this game....we are not ragers or haters....we love this game
2.)I couldn't listen to the podcast because i have difficulties to understand spoken english. but relating to the comments on this site of her....she shows a negative attitude in the podcast towards sto players in general....for me(personal opinion) it looks like she use this analysis to discredit not only to people who post negatively more she wants to discredit sto in general to show that there are only hooligans in the forums
3.) She is categorizing the posts in positive, negative, neutral or off-topic: No one is impartial if it is concerning categorizing. I would bet if you let 10 people categorize then you would have 10 different analysis data.
4.) Neutral does not include positive. Neutral is neutral.
A high percentage of off-topic is because people in forums are generally reply to each other...if you categorize answers in off-topic you can technically rise the perecentage of off-topic.
In my eyes there are still more negative post than positive. But even it would be other way round. It is fact that she is not analysing if there are some truth or rational arguments behind the negative posts.
Math shouldn't judge who is right and who is not right.
i had a bit of a moan about the new style hud the other day and although my opinion hasnt changed with that, on a positive note i would like to add that i love the new style charactor status screens and the other pop up screens that have been remastered.
its just the front end screen that is not to my liking, especially the bridge crew section at the top left of the screen, what is with that gastly background that you cannot see through and hides a good portion of what is visible currently, and the icons that you click on to select actions seem a lot more basic in comparison to the current ones, i dearly hope this is a work in progress and that what we have on tribble is not the finished article. thanks.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Forums are always a good way to figure out how things are going in a mmo,
Wrong.
Forums will tell you who is the most vocal. If there are specific, cogent discussions (not rants), you might get some information, but otherwise you can get a *lot* of misinformation from forums.
Another MMO I know of has it's share of negative forum posts (has for several years) that might lead you to believe the game is in trouble, when the reality is it is doing better than it ever has before.
A large percentage of players who are geniunely happy with a game never post and may rarely peruse the forums. They just play and have fun. People who are unhappy with a game are more likely to come complain about it. Some are certainly worthwhile complaints, others are not so much.
Another segment of the forum base are players like me, who like to keep up to date with what's coming, provide input and opinions on specific discussions, and so forth. But those of us on the forums are not the majority of players by any stretch of the imagination, and can't really declare ourselves representative of the playerbase as a whole.
It is not scientific and it is not impartial at all.
reasons why it is not impartial and scientific
1.)She defines the thread as "thread of rage"...it isn't .. it is disappointment mixed with passion for this game....we are not ragers or haters....we love this game
2.)I couldn't listen to the podcast because i have difficulties to understand spoken english. but relating to the comments on this site of her....she shows a negative attitude in the podcast towards sto players in general....for me(personal opinion) it looks like she use this analysis to discredit not only to people who post negatively more she wants to discredit sto in general to show that there are only hooligans in the forums
3.) She is categorizing the posts in positive, negative, neutral or off-topic: No one is impartial if it is concerning categorizing. I would bet if you let 10 people categorize then you would have 10 different analysis data.
4.) Neutral does not include positive. Neutral is neutral.
A high percentage of off-topic is because people in forums are generally reply to each other...if you categorize answers in off-topic you can technically rise the perecentage of off-topic.
In my eyes there are still more negative post than positive. But even it would be other way round. It is fact that she is not analysing if there are some truth or rational arguments behind the negative posts.
Math shouldn't judge who is right and who is not right.
just my 2 cents
It's just unfortunate that you missed the entire point of the column. My column was not meant in any way to even discuss the validity of any single opinion - positive or negative or neutral. The validity of an opinion is always 100%.
My column was an effort to reply to those who contacted me, telling me that there was a "Thread of Rage" (not MY definition - theirs) and that the length of the thread was PROOF that a majority of PLAYERS hated the expansion. Then, to top it off, those players informed me that if I didn't cover the thread in my column it was PROOF I was "Cryptic's Wh***".
So, I took on their little challenge and began to read the thread - and by page 12 I realized that the thread didn't really seem all that "ragey" to me, and that most of the anger about the expansion seemed to be coming from a core group of posters.
So - in order to refute the claim that I was Cryptic's Wh*** - and as requested - I covered the thread in my column. The person who broke down the data has never played an MMO, doesn't belong to a forum and has no vested interest in this game at all. As Markhawkman stated in his breakdown of just one page http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=8996151&postcount=103 just about half of the posts had nothing to do with the "specific expression of an opinion" about the expansion - in the same way that most posts in THIS VERY THREAD (including this post) are not really discussing Verdict's interview with BranFlakes.
I am not, have not and will not tell people they are wrong for having a negative opinion about the expansion! If you are taking it that way, then you are misconstruing the intent behind the column and are taking offense for no reason. However I stand by the data and the results that refute the claim made by others that a thread which "explodes" proves, on its face, that it contains more rage from more individual people.
My data clearly reflected that within the first 770 posts only 194 accounts actually posted. 75 people posted 107 positive posts and 71 people posted 183 negative posts. Heck - ONE person posted 71 times! Does that invalidate her negative opinion? HECK NO! But is sure doesn't prove that the "majority of players" - as stated in emails to me - hate the expansion.
Please don't let the minority of naysayers (one with 71 posts) out-validate the majority.
This was an excellent analysis of that thread. I think that the people that compiled, evaluated, quantified, and analyzed that thread should apply that set of techniques to other socio-political issues, i believe that the technique used here would provide incredible enlightenment on issues of measures of "passion" verses measures of validity and policy shift via individualistic rather than collectivistic focus.
all that heady stuff said, Cryptic did an outstanding job. for the first time since i started playing the game, i am eagerly looking forward to creating another faction character, and spending time and money developing it.
gojo.
[SIGPIC]tritrophic mutualism: we get a viable game experience, and perfect worlds new ai "ARC" dines on our zen[/SIGPIC]
The problem here is that even in your small list, I can see two, maybe even three posts that are arguably different than what you categorize them as. Why argue about how many posts are what, when we should be discussing the merits / issues with the info we have so far?
Please elaborate on how you would have characterized those 10 posts. I'm curious to see your thoughts.
Anyways, Flash's post is, to me, a very polite way of well... almost trolling the Devs. At one point he accuses Stahl of ignoring player feedback just because he(flash) didn't see any changes based on it... Flash also says that he feels that advertisements of RR as a "complete unique faction" were a misrepresentation of what it actually was.
I mean really.... we don't have enough data to make such drastic conclusions. discussing the merits of the data is a bit futile due to how little it is so far.
It's just unfortunate that you missed the entire point of the column. My column was not meant in any way to even discuss the validity of any single opinion - positive or negative or neutral. The validity of an opinion is always 100%.
My column was an effort to reply to those who contacted me, telling me that there was a "Thread of Rage" (not MY definition - theirs) and that the length of the thread was PROOF that a majority of PLAYERS hated the expansion. Then, to top it off, those players informed me that if I didn't cover the thread in my column it was PROOF I was "Cryptic's Wh***".
So, I took on their little challenge and began to read the thread - and by page 12 I realized that the thread didn't really seem all that "ragey" to me, and that most of the anger about the expansion seemed to be coming from a core group of posters.
So - in order to refute the claim that I was Cryptic's Wh*** - and as requested - I covered the thread in my column. The person who broke down the data has never played an MMO, doesn't belong to a forum and has no vested interest in this game at all. As Markhawkman stated in his breakdown of just one page http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=8996151&postcount=103 just about half of the posts had nothing to do with the "specific expression of an opinion" about the expansion - in the same way that most posts in THIS VERY THREAD (including this post) are not really discussing Verdict's interview with BranFlakes.
I am not, have not and will not tell people they are wrong for having a negative opinion about the expansion! If you are taking it that way, then you are misconstruing the intent behind the column and are taking offense for no reason. However I stand by the data and the results that refute the claim made by others that a thread which "explodes" proves, on its face, that it contains more rage from more individual people.
My data clearly reflected that within the first 770 posts only 194 accounts actually posted. 75 people posted 107 positive posts and 71 people posted 183 negative posts. Heck - ONE person posted 71 times! Does that invalidate her negative opinion? HECK NO! But is sure doesn't prove that the "majority of players" - as stated in emails to me - hate the expansion.
I personally feel that you did a very good analysis and have concluded that most of the people attackign you are doing so simply because their feelings got hurt.
Well I dont think I missed the point ... it was noting but attempting to discredit every opinion that did not conformed to Perfect World's advertisement department.
Also if it was what you are saying it was, you would not just use STO alone so its either what I said or a shoddy rushed piece of "journalism".
One of the reasons I dont really read Massively is because if I want to read the spin at least I read of the game website, I dont need so called "journalism" for that ...
Oh and this isnt just STO, I notice the same when it comes to TWS and TSO or pretty much every single MMO its covered ... no idea what reality you people are on but when you saying "everything is good, everything is fine, everything is wonderful" I just think ...
Heil Werbung
Come back when "gaming journalism" have any kind of credibility because until then you dont.
Sorry but i have to defend terrilynns post even i belong to the group who are critizising this addon.
First of all thx Terrilynns for your post. Now i have understood your intention.
Her intention was not to discredit people with an another opinion.
She was harassed by some annoying people to write about this thread.
The statement of this annoying people was:
"there is Rage against the addon proven by the length of the thread"
she read it and realize it was not 100 % negative and that 770 posts are not from 770 single accounts.
That is why she started this analysis...not to show who is right or not....more to show that 770 posts are not 770 single opinions(because some writes more) and not every opinion were negative...not more not less....i see no sign ...that she is using this data to be on any side.
And it is not the task of journalists to be neutral. Neither is she getting any money from cryptic to support them..if she writes positive or negative it is still the freedom of a journalist to have their own opinion.
Last words: Talk a little bit more gentle to women...no need for hard street talkling
Comments
Bravo, Teri!
Thank you for an impartial and scientific analysis of forum opinions.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Lol.
My god, are you serious? What was impartial about anything Terilynn says?
Where is the scientific analysis? She made the decisions on what she perceives as being pro and negative and what was neutral. Others may read posts differently. Plus they are tearing apart her analysis to show the flaws of it.
Coupled with the fact that she didn't really need to do a column like this anyway and tbh, it seems to have backfired (nice one Bran for giving the link though).
At least the feedback on the site is giving it the feedback it deserves.
Haven't not listened to the podcast and will not, is this the same person who says -
at 3:30 she calls players who play STFs at elite pathetic
at 4:30 she says "gamers" who play STO or PVPers need to get a life and go play WOW
What was it she said last year about ragers being 12 year old or something?
Yep, impartial. Thats Terilynn. The woman who tells newcomers that most people by keys for lockboxes.
Here is a post from a forumite debunking her column (wish I had the skills to do it
Who's to say she's right or he's right? I don't know, but I know it's still a column that makes her look silly and people are now understanding exactly what she is.
It also makes Cryptic look silly for linking it, thinking it was going to be some positive PR.
Don't think so...
Here it is - --- (not mine once again).
I don't agree with the way you handled "off topic" posts - your numbers don't agree either. Just because angry trollish behavior isn't an acceptable way to deal with disappointment does not mean that the poster isn't angry or disappointed.
Just tossing out 47.1% of the posts pretty much invalidates your study. If you are discarding those numbers then they should be removed from the totals anyways. That would leave 407 posts.. (roughly):
26.2% positive
45% negative
28.7% neutral
This is an overwhelmingly negative response even though the validity of the data is weakened towards the positive by tossing out the responses of those who did not respond to frustration or excitement within your accepted parameters.
If your goal is to find out how much of the community responded negatively vs positively, then the neutral responses, or "do not know" - people who haven't made up their minds should not be counted either (until they make up their minds). After all, you didn't set out to find out the fanboi vs hater vs level headed responder ratio. This leaves 290 posts and the breakdown is then:
36.9% positive
63.1% negative
To me, the frequency of posts by each unique account whether positive or negative would indicate the level of energy behind the feelings or willingness to act on those feelings. We could just toss that data to get closer to your desired result and that leaves 107 positive posts divided by 1.4 posts/person or 76 positive respondents and 183 negative posts divided by 2.6 posts/person or 70 negative respondents. So:
52% people happy with the content change
48% people unhappy with the content change
However, and this is a biggie - you were trying to figure out of a thread was Rage Filled or not and the first thing you did was toss out the 47% of posts that contained only Rage. Furthermore, the conclusion that you changed to by the end - how much of the population was happy/disappointed with the bait and switch is invalidated by your standards for appropriate response. From what I've seen, the vast majority of gamers respond to change with over-reaction, professed undying love, troll posts or flame bait - and that over-reaction leans very heavily towards the disappointed side.
tldr: a 70 page thread with 47% of the posts being trollish or flame bait-ish enough for you to discount them and another 63.7% of the remaining posts containing an opinion that's clearly negative is the DEFINITION of a thread exploding into rage.
My character Tsin'xing
Yeah, there was nothing "scientific" about that at all. It's really a little disturbing that anybody would say there was.
Is well known that people who post on the forums are a minority....in every game .Even those who post comments on youtube or rate videos are a minority.
People who post are a minority, the view counts are much higher, a lot people do read the forums and it does have a impact on their decisions about the game.
She proved that the number of people actively complaining about the RR's implementation on the forums versus the number of people who are in favor of it are actually very close, and that those complaining are disproportionately vocal about it versus those who are not. This proves that despite the forum being more or less alight with people complaining, the opinions in general about it are far more balanced than they appear.
Her opinions and statements do not necessarily invalidate the numbers.
That said, an independent recount might be in order since the tally of "off-topic" posts does seem a bit high.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
I'm one of them.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone
"Does the recent news about not being able to create Romulan Fleets & Starbases at full launch irritate you"
&
"Would you have preferred a FULL FACTION with Fleets & Starbases at launch?"
Yes, No or Neutral. Then again like many have stated not everyone checks the forum. Either way Cryptic had said that they would be adding a new faction and in the information that was released it even stated that's what we were getting. The only fact you can possibly outline is that if you are to look at what Cryptic already classes as factions (KDF & FED) and what they include, then technically what we are getting is not a 3rd faction.
I understand that they don't want to make things harder for players with more grinds, but at the same time they could have allowed creating a Romulan Fleet and deciding which of the two existing factions you would like to work closer with in building trade / relations and allowing a fleet alliance where both Romulan & FED / KDF fleet can help towards each others projects and have the FED / KDF fleet help build the Romulan Fleet's first HQ / Base etc.
Despite the lack of the Romulan Fleet & Starbase / HQ, I am really excited about the upcoming changes to the UI and trying out the warbirds. I just only hope that these changes will come sooner than later in regards to ROM Fleets / Bases.
1: Maybe negative
2: offtopic
3: offtopic
4: generally negative, but not really talking about LoR, thus offtopic
5: (same person) ditto
6: positive
7: offtopic (this one is talking about the possibility of getting a Borg faction in the future)
8: offtopic (this one was actually discussing whether the playerbase was uniformly unhappy or just a few)
9: offtopic (this one is talking about general Zen purchases)
10: offtopic
See? people eventually started arguing about all sorts of random things in that thread. O-o'
My character Tsin'xing
The problem here is that even in your small list, I can see two, maybe even three posts that are arguably different than what you categorize them as. Why argue about how many posts are what, when we should be discussing the merits / issues with the info we have so far?
This post is probably the best in describing the problems people have: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=8966951#post8966951
alot of people as in 1000?2000?3000?
@3000 people play the game only on steam at any hour (you can check steam statistics).Read the steam forums to see that most never go on these forums.You dont know math if you say thiings on this forums represent majority's opinion.
Not all people play on steam .If 20% of people who play the game would come on forums to post this thread would be at least 2000 pages.
Be that as it may, it had nothing to do with science or the scientific method. And it proved nothing of the sort regarding general opinion, given that this forum is hardly a random or representative sample, nor is any particular forum thread, even if she had an actual scientific methodology.
It was a person counting posts in a thread and assigning them into categories based on her own opinion. No more and no less.
Forums are always a good way to figure out how things are going in a mmo, its usually the people that play the game are more hardcore , know the mechanics of the game better are the ones that post their opinions about how they like and dislike the game. They also tell their friends how they feel about the game, they go on other gaming sites and let their opinions be read by others there and those people tell others. That how you end up with millions of gamers knowing all the bad stuff about a MMO and generally unaware of the good stuff because people who are content don't post that much.
seems to me they are more on gaming sites then actual play the game.
as for "they know better" ...thats BS.Most cry babies on this forum dont know how use distribute shields on their ships (or ask for tricobalt nerf and after is nerfed want it un nerfed...thats the almighty pvp forum :rolleyes:).
so 200 people on this forum are responsable for all those people who play the game.I say lets fire the marketing guy because no more adds are needed ....people will do the marketing job from now on.
Opinions do spread like of virus on the internet, that why it hard for mmo companies to get players to try their games if they already read or heard a negative opinion. And yes not all forum posters are crybabies , many do have great understanding of the game they are playing and rather if its good or bad their opinions do have more merit.
So you think not star trek name makes people download this ?
star trek fans will want to play it .Guess is really hard to start a game and people's opinions are more important than your own eyes.
Btw many people told me DC universe is a good game.Why am I not playing it?
Not all startrek fans want to play this , and many who had left and yes there are many people who like playing new mmo's have check out STO and might be still be playing. Point is lots of people go by hear say about a game. Other wise you would not have big websights about games and people giving their opinions about them, people making money on youtube giving their opinions about games or gaming journalism is general. What do you think polls are in politics , its a small group of people giving opinion and they can get a good idea on how millions of people are feeling.
Sorry Bluegeek for critizising you.
It is not scientific and it is not impartial at all.
reasons why it is not impartial and scientific
1.)She defines the thread as "thread of rage"...it isn't .. it is disappointment mixed with passion for this game....we are not ragers or haters....we love this game
2.)I couldn't listen to the podcast because i have difficulties to understand spoken english. but relating to the comments on this site of her....she shows a negative attitude in the podcast towards sto players in general....for me(personal opinion) it looks like she use this analysis to discredit not only to people who post negatively more she wants to discredit sto in general to show that there are only hooligans in the forums
3.) She is categorizing the posts in positive, negative, neutral or off-topic: No one is impartial if it is concerning categorizing. I would bet if you let 10 people categorize then you would have 10 different analysis data.
4.) Neutral does not include positive. Neutral is neutral.
A high percentage of off-topic is because people in forums are generally reply to each other...if you categorize answers in off-topic you can technically rise the perecentage of off-topic.
In my eyes there are still more negative post than positive. But even it would be other way round. It is fact that she is not analysing if there are some truth or rational arguments behind the negative posts.
Math shouldn't judge who is right and who is not right.
just my 2 cents
its just the front end screen that is not to my liking, especially the bridge crew section at the top left of the screen, what is with that gastly background that you cannot see through and hides a good portion of what is visible currently, and the icons that you click on to select actions seem a lot more basic in comparison to the current ones, i dearly hope this is a work in progress and that what we have on tribble is not the finished article. thanks.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Wrong.
Forums will tell you who is the most vocal. If there are specific, cogent discussions (not rants), you might get some information, but otherwise you can get a *lot* of misinformation from forums.
Another MMO I know of has it's share of negative forum posts (has for several years) that might lead you to believe the game is in trouble, when the reality is it is doing better than it ever has before.
A large percentage of players who are geniunely happy with a game never post and may rarely peruse the forums. They just play and have fun. People who are unhappy with a game are more likely to come complain about it. Some are certainly worthwhile complaints, others are not so much.
Another segment of the forum base are players like me, who like to keep up to date with what's coming, provide input and opinions on specific discussions, and so forth. But those of us on the forums are not the majority of players by any stretch of the imagination, and can't really declare ourselves representative of the playerbase as a whole.
Forum users naturally can't speak for a whole community, however, those are more often than not the most knowledgable about the game.
It's just unfortunate that you missed the entire point of the column. My column was not meant in any way to even discuss the validity of any single opinion - positive or negative or neutral. The validity of an opinion is always 100%.
My column was an effort to reply to those who contacted me, telling me that there was a "Thread of Rage" (not MY definition - theirs) and that the length of the thread was PROOF that a majority of PLAYERS hated the expansion. Then, to top it off, those players informed me that if I didn't cover the thread in my column it was PROOF I was "Cryptic's Wh***".
So, I took on their little challenge and began to read the thread - and by page 12 I realized that the thread didn't really seem all that "ragey" to me, and that most of the anger about the expansion seemed to be coming from a core group of posters.
So - in order to refute the claim that I was Cryptic's Wh*** - and as requested - I covered the thread in my column. The person who broke down the data has never played an MMO, doesn't belong to a forum and has no vested interest in this game at all. As Markhawkman stated in his breakdown of just one page http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=8996151&postcount=103 just about half of the posts had nothing to do with the "specific expression of an opinion" about the expansion - in the same way that most posts in THIS VERY THREAD (including this post) are not really discussing Verdict's interview with BranFlakes.
I am not, have not and will not tell people they are wrong for having a negative opinion about the expansion! If you are taking it that way, then you are misconstruing the intent behind the column and are taking offense for no reason. However I stand by the data and the results that refute the claim made by others that a thread which "explodes" proves, on its face, that it contains more rage from more individual people.
My data clearly reflected that within the first 770 posts only 194 accounts actually posted. 75 people posted 107 positive posts and 71 people posted 183 negative posts. Heck - ONE person posted 71 times! Does that invalidate her negative opinion? HECK NO! But is sure doesn't prove that the "majority of players" - as stated in emails to me - hate the expansion.
This was an excellent analysis of that thread. I think that the people that compiled, evaluated, quantified, and analyzed that thread should apply that set of techniques to other socio-political issues, i believe that the technique used here would provide incredible enlightenment on issues of measures of "passion" verses measures of validity and policy shift via individualistic rather than collectivistic focus.
all that heady stuff said, Cryptic did an outstanding job. for the first time since i started playing the game, i am eagerly looking forward to creating another faction character, and spending time and money developing it.
gojo.
Anyways, Flash's post is, to me, a very polite way of well... almost trolling the Devs. At one point he accuses Stahl of ignoring player feedback just because he(flash) didn't see any changes based on it... Flash also says that he feels that advertisements of RR as a "complete unique faction" were a misrepresentation of what it actually was.
I mean really.... we don't have enough data to make such drastic conclusions. discussing the merits of the data is a bit futile due to how little it is so far.
My character Tsin'xing
My character Tsin'xing
Sorry but i have to defend terrilynns post even i belong to the group who are critizising this addon.
First of all thx Terrilynns for your post. Now i have understood your intention.
Her intention was not to discredit people with an another opinion.
She was harassed by some annoying people to write about this thread.
The statement of this annoying people was:
"there is Rage against the addon proven by the length of the thread"
she read it and realize it was not 100 % negative and that 770 posts are not from 770 single accounts.
That is why she started this analysis...not to show who is right or not....more to show that 770 posts are not 770 single opinions(because some writes more) and not every opinion were negative...not more not less....i see no sign ...that she is using this data to be on any side.
And it is not the task of journalists to be neutral. Neither is she getting any money from cryptic to support them..if she writes positive or negative it is still the freedom of a journalist to have their own opinion.
Last words: Talk a little bit more gentle to women...no need for hard street talkling