You're suggesting the dlc that was well ranked sales wise on steam sold only
Please read the post above.
Steam Awards Badges Driving Up Reviews. (+ a Flashpoint review discussion)
- Thread starter Ken-Sw
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Please read the post above.
You're suggesting the dlc that was well ranked sales wise on steam sold only 1000-1700 copies. (170 reviews)
Please read the post above.
Math again. I said 60-100:1.
We do know it's sold <20k units on steam.
Oops. Left off a sleepy zero.Math again. I said 60-100:1.
We do know it's sold <20k units on steam.
Brings me back to "define poor"
Oops. Left off a sleepy zero.
Brings me back to "define poor"
Dropping from 75% to bellow 50% is pretty "poor" in my book. A quick scan of the negatives mostly talk about value for money. Even some of the positives are advising people to wait for discount. Is it ultimately profitable for HBS? Don't know. But considering how thirsty the fan base have been for the base game, you can't deny the lukewarm reception for the first DLC is consumer voting with their wallet.
And yet it's all of 85 peoples reviews you reference. (though thank you for defining your threshold for "poor")
A similar number posted an opposite review.
The rest felt no need to weigh in yet.
Probably because they're playing it exactly like the base game in the OP post.
Which is why it serves zero purpose to try and bandwagon off it to puff up personal criticisms instead of just list ones own suggestions constructively. The margins between the two percentages at that sum total are too low.
If one has a good idea to share, no amount of the above would change that. If one doesn't, well the same.
I value steam reviews.
There is so much options that unless i already want the game or receive a friend recommendation, mixed or below is poor enough to make me move on without a 2nd look.
I just don´t have time to research every game that might interest me...
Also put my positive review there for Flashpoint.
Why? Because it isn´t perfect, but i believe it brings enough to deserve better than 50%.
There is so much options that unless i already want the game or receive a friend recommendation, mixed or below is poor enough to make me move on without a 2nd look.
I just don´t have time to research every game that might interest me...
Also put my positive review there for Flashpoint.
Why? Because it isn´t perfect, but i believe it brings enough to deserve better than 50%.
I think the main problem people have with FP is the cost. If it was a free update, the reviews would likely be a lot more positive.
Free? Of course anyone loves free stuff, but there are only so many free updates a studio can do before it needs to get paid for the work it's doing...
(As comparison, and without taking advantage of discounts, it's the cost of most MWO standard packs of 1 new mech. That's a lot more content than 1 mech.)
But to each their own...
Speaking about reviews... I was browsing the main game ones and found someone who gave a negative review after 468 hours of game play. A grand total of 470 hours playing a game you don't like? I find that hard to believe that someone would waste 470 hours playing a game they don't like. I don't even think my grand total of game time for all games combined in the past 5 years is that high. Plus it was their only review. The first time they decide to review something is to give a negative review for something they sank 470 hours of their life into. (And no, it wasn't a negative review because the game is addictive.)
You can't just pick a DLC with 50% negative reviews and low number of review and say lots of happy customers are just not reviewing it yet. If 500 extra reviews pop up this week, it'll just as likely to stay at 50%. We are all decade-long fans of the IP but we can't pretend a bad score will change if we just have larger sample size. Short of a malicious trolling campaign, steam reviews are remarkably consistent beyond a certain sample size.
Here's an example I've been plugging for weeks because both are so similar in genre and time frame. Battle Brothers's base game got an excellent 87% positives over 5k reviews. Their DLC, which came out the same time as FP, also got an 89% positives with 250 reviews. THAT, is how DLC suppose be received compared to the base game. So is BB's DLC player base happier with their purchase compared to FP's or is BB's happier portion of the player base just more vocal?
I'm not saying FP is bad, I'm saying whatever the combination of content, quality and price HBS decided was appropriate definitely fell short of general expectation compared to the base game. If Urban Combat is just more of the same (3 mechs, a map, a new mission type, 20hrs of FPs), then things are just going to get worse.
BB's sample size of 5189 is enough for statistical significance.
BT:Flashpoint's sample size of 139 is not.
Hell, you could double that number and still not have a statistically significant sample size. Especially when the sampling is not random.
And a non-random sample that is too small to draw statistical significance cannot be generalized.
Simply put, we cannot use the Steam reviews of BT:Flashpoint to generalize how the entire customer base feels.
Neither can you hyperbole gloom and doom the future of the franchise on the drop in the bucket of 85 of them to attempt to inflate the importance of personal criticisms. My whole point from the beginning. QED
Better to just share your suggestions on their merits which one assumes you feel confident of to stand on their own legs.
That threshold has not at the least been reached yet. As referenced already. Previous experience with the main game in this very thread shows some examples of the way of it.
Redundant repetition. Bad comparison as already discussed at some length in other threads.
BB promotion better suited to the OT forum please.
When is the sample size significant then? Why isn't those reviews considered random? Does the player base who review the DLC have an agenda unique to non-reviewing ones? There are entire indie games with 150ish reviews so are these games's score totally suspect too?
Short of a discount promo, the number of buyer/reviews aren't going to get many more than 150. But then, that's probably the entire reason - for an IP with dedicated fan base, you'd want to milk them first before discounting it to suit the general public.
Anyway, the amount of content for this DLC for 1/2 of base game's cost feels like [Mod edit: disrespect, inflammatory] especially while the base game still has so many issues with the sandbox. If Urban Warfare simply contains more of those generic 'hand-crafted' FP missions, I can safely put BT away until the proper expansion. Or install Rogue Tech *shudder*
I don't think it should be free, per sa, but I'm still balking at the $20 for what you get. I understand that FP sets the framework for many things to come but I just can't seem to pull the trigger on it due to the fact that it's a framework, 3 mechs (none of which I'm interested in) and a new biome.
Don't get me wrong, I *want* the DLC but I'll probably end up waiting to get it till Urban Warfare comes out and I see what that has to offer. By that time, hopefully they'll have announced what the third DLC will be and I'll just drop the coinage on the Season Pass.
But until then, I'm in a wait and see mode.
And I would have the same type of hesitation about purchasing a MWO mech pack. Only difference here is that I'll more than likely by the BATTLETECH DLC were as I wouldn't buy the MWO mech pack.
That's my main issue too. Framework and the other trinkets are fine, even if none of them really fixes the sandbox, but the asking price was a surprise. For 50% of base game, you'd expect some major new mechanics or at least some of the stuff left out from the original KS dev diaries and not just extra padding. How are they gonna price an actual meaty expansion? $38.99?
So, lets say the next one is the same price. What would make it worth it in addition to 3 new 'Mechs and the urban biome we presumably get and some rudimentary building features like being able melee them or move through them at a slight damage cost?
Would a pack of 10-15 more FPs be worth it in addition? Some kind of 10 mission campaign? More variants for existing units?
While fixing the mission design to vary the sandbox is something I agree should to be done, that's something that is likely to apply to the base game as well and not part of the DLC the way the Rep/Alliance/Black Market was with FP/1.3's release. What is something that base game won't get that would make the next DLC worth it?
Greetings Mechwarriors.
This is the Review thread.
Game suggestions have other appropriate topical threads to explore them at length.
Thank you.
This is the Review thread.
Game suggestions have other appropriate topical threads to explore them at length.
Thank you.
In this instance? I can't say. I don't know the sales numbers for BATTLETECH, so I don't know the size of the population we're trying to sample. I also don't have any demographic information on the population, so I don't know what kind of cleavages would need to be accounted for. At a minimum though? I'd guess you need 1500-2000 people in the sample for statistical significance.
The reviews aren't considered random because people went out of their way to volunteer them. We have no information on their motivations for doing so. A general rule when conducting a quantitative statistical survey is to avoid conducting your survey such that you ask people to come give you their opinion, because their motivations for doing so are unknown and the truth of their answers is made suspect. It could very well be that having a negative opinion about a video game makes a person more likely to go write a review for it (or vice versa).
Basically, if your sample isn't large enough, and isn't random, then your sample could contain a very niche group that doesn't represent the population as a whole (in fact, it's quite likely to). So, yeah, indie games with only 150 user reviews? You can't generalize that. And I wouldn't recommend basing a purchase solely off the aggregate review score from so few people.