anyone saw blizzard new season content? LOL

"

Xyel wrote:

For it to have any value, the sample needs to be representative.

How do you see the numerical value for steam reviews?

The store page have ratio of likes and dislikes

That ratio tends to align with the metacritic rates, as rule, any steam game that dont have a blue rating can be expected to be yellow or red on metacritic, really divisive stuff like SF6 are very much exception(and it is also noticeable on metacritic itself: the amount of positives and negatives are super close to each other, telling the game is indeed hit or miss)

And you can tell if the sample is representative if you bother to read the reviews, just looking at the number is not how ones supposed to do it, if a large number of reviews are just one-liners, then it really dont mean a lot, but a great many reviews on D4 are quite elaborate and agree with each other

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

Not once have i said it was low effort, it's you people that keep regurgitating that.

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

They will keep doing low effort stuff because it's proven it works.

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

It's also very funny that you say i don't grasp the marketing strategy, when it was clear they sold exactly to their target audience, the softcore soy players, not the veterans.

But you're right, it is stupid that financial success is an objective indication that most players liked the game, but that's exactly how the corporate world thinks. Players think that the horse armor(dlc) was the worst invention in gaming, while companies think it was the best. Deal with it.

Thats not really true. The ties does keep up with how the franquise is doing and they look at more than raw gross numbers
Ties keep up with numbers like player retention and compare sales numbers with previous titles and recent competition, that blizzard dodged releasing sales numbers suggests strongly the game hasnt sold like it was expected. Its the sort of bull the average jornalistic gaming sites overlook, but dedicated market trends sources make sure to highlight(oh and the horse stuff from bethesda? They had to make some quick damage control and gave people who bough the horse DLC a true addition with new content to put the fires out)

Thing is: Its hard to tell what exactly is the perception around blizzard on the stocks world because activision is doing super well and both companies are fused. Microsoft in particular is looking to aquire the company, but telling, all the titles that microsoft mentions is interested to make x-box exclusive are from activision side of the company. The feeling in general tends to be activision is hot and blizzard is kinda just "there"

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

The most radical tend also to be the most vocal. It looks very similar, really(August 1, loot cull and dropped support of chonk wide screens). And the best acclamation of PoE in steam was when PoE was the most softcore focused. Isn't that interesting.

So kalandra was hated, isnt that a bit old news? The steam store page on that period had poe sitting on a red review perception and the forums both here and on steam were flooded with people screaming about the loot, the nerf machine working in full gear and AN yellows that hit like ubers

Basically, it was a period the game kinda sucked, and the numbers reflected that, if anything, it is an example that the rating does works. Wasnt the first time it happened either, if you fish the rating on syntesis, it was quite similar

"

esostaks wrote:

"

RandallPOE wrote:

"

esostaks wrote:

Oh dear

lmao, while I've been disappointed with the endgame in D4 or lack of, when the fuck did review bombs from 5000 angry neckbeards on Metacritic mean anything?

So when does something qualifies as a review bombing and when - as a legit negative reviews? Fact: Zelda and PoE also were review bombed, but regained good ratings. Meanwhile D4 sitting on 5/10 since launch and D3 on 5/10 for years. A good game just can't be held down by review bombing for a long time.

Sure it was sitting around 5 and then in the last 24 hours the number of reviews doubled and the score dropped because people lost their minds over a patch. Every 10 minutes some other donut posted a screenshot on Reddit of the score with "hurr durr durr look what we done"

While it's a mediocre game at the moment there's no way that score is actually representative of the quality. That site is a joke, nobody pays any attention to the score on there. You don't even need to own the product to leave a review ffs.

Be funny to have all the Blizzard games on steam, or the same listings of player counts and reviews on battle.net instead.

Quite a shame they don't hand those out as I'm sure they would be quite ashamed of their own numbers and "feedback".
Well nvm they don't feel ashamed for anything giving their last released flop along with the incidence with their female employees during the past lol.

"

feike wrote:

The store page have ratio of likes and dislikes

That ratio tends to align with the metacritic rates, as rule, any steam game that dont have a blue rating can be expected to be yellow or red on metacritic, really divisive stuff like SF6 are very much exception(and it is also noticeable on metacritic itself: the amount of positives and negatives are super close to each other, telling the game is indeed hit or miss)

This sounds nice, but completely falls apart at an individual case, like say, Diablo 3. That's one of the most successful games of all time by pretty much every measurable metric, but has a 4/10 on metacritic.

"

feike wrote:

And you can tell if the sample is representative if you bother to read the reviews, just looking at the number is not how ones supposed to do it, if a large number of reviews are just one-liners, then it really dont mean a lot, but a great many reviews on D4 are quite elaborate and agree with each other

It's the other way around. Natural reviews are short, at least half of them beig one/two liners. It's reviews written with an ulterior motive, like a review bombing, that are all elaborate.

You can even see that on the D4 reviews, where the ones from Jul18+ when the crybabies started review bombing the game, and the reviews are generally suddenly much longer than the reviews given to the game prior to that. Or you can see that if you randomly scroll through PoE reviews on steam, where at least half are short.

Also, reviewing on metacritic is an extremely unnatural way to give a review because it isn't connected to the product's platform at all. That's visible on D3. With 65 million copies sold, it has 10k reviews, so about 0.01% review rate. A normal review rate for a product is 1 - 3 %

"

Xyel wrote:

This sounds nice, but completely falls apart at an individual case, like say, Diablo 3. That's one of the most successful games of all time by pretty much every measurable metric, but has a 4/10 on metacritic.

It was a finantial sucess, but it established a record death time for a blizzard title, even hots had a bigger lifespam, wich is why it recieved barely any content past reaper and even reaper sales blizzard dodged to release sales numbers. Thus, i would beg to differ it was a "sucess by any metric"

"

Xyel wrote:

It's the other way around. Natural reviews are short, at least half of them beig one/two liners. It's reviews written with an ulterior motive, like a review bombing, that are all elaborate.

You can even see that on the D4 reviews, where the ones from Jul18+ when the crybabies started review bombing the game, and the reviews are generally suddenly much longer than the reviews given to the game prior to that. Or you can see that if you randomly scroll through PoE reviews on steam, where at least half are short.

Also, reviewing on metacritic is an extremely unnatural way to give a review because it isn't connected to the product's platform at all. That's visible on D3. With 65 million copies sold, it has 10k reviews, so about 0.01% review rate. A normal review rate for a product is 1 - 3 %

Short reviews anywhere dont have value, a single liner just saying "it sucks" or "its awesome" dont say anything and is more prone to come from someone who is emotional, is talking on feeling and not making a more objective view(assuming it was not made by a chinese paid to write it)

Idk where you pulled that 65m, number of sales from D3 is 30m combining vanilla and expansion, witch mean we are counting tons of players at least twice right out of the bat(last number we had from reaper alone is a much more modest 3m, so its fair to extrapolate the vanilla sold around 20m and reaper 10m)
Rotten tomatoes have many movies with a hundred million revenue numbering 5 digits reviews, movies with 50M revenue often dont reach 5 digits of reviews, thus the site usually have a review rate closer to 0.1%. On videogames, resident evil 2 sold around 10m, but have less than 3k reviews. Devil may cry 4 and 5 both sold around 5m, they both also sit under 3k reviews. Street fighter 6 sold 2m so far and dont have 2k reviews across all platforms, i dont know where you pulled that 1/3% from(if we take 20m sales, then the number of 10k translates closer to 0.05% wich is par with videogame standards)

Metacritic isnt unnatural at all, its the most popular place that readily hands out users evaluation outside steam, and for blizzard products, its pretty much the only place that gives non-professional views

You know the worst fucking part of this so called league IT'S BARELY there like you do a fucking nightmare dungeon and once in a blue moon instead of one elite you get two elites?

Well it's BARELY active it's like 10% of the time or some shit what the fuck dude nice season you got here LMAO

"

feike wrote:

It was a finantial sucess, but it established a record death time for a blizzard title, even hots had a bigger lifespam, wich is why it recieved barely any content past reaper and even reaper sales blizzard dodged to release sales numbers. Thus, i would beg to differ it was a "sucess by any metric"

D3 has been very much alive even in the Feb23 season. That's 11 years in, and the only reason it's now dead is because D4 came out.

"

feike wrote:

Short reviews anywhere dont have value, a single liner just saying "it sucks" or "its awesome" dont say anything and is more prone to come from someone who is emotional, is talking on feeling and not making a more objective view(assuming it was not made by a chinese paid to write it)

The topic was representativeness. Unnatural reviews aren't representative, so they are worthless statistics-wise.

"

feike wrote:

Idk where you pulled that 65m, number of sales from D3 is 30m combining vanilla and expansion, witch mean we are counting tons of players at least twice right out of the bat(last number we had from reaper alone is a much more modest 3m, so its fair to extrapolate the vanilla sold around 20m and reaper 10m)
Rotten tomatoes have many movies with a hundred million revenue numbering 5 digits reviews, movies with 50M revenue often dont reach 5 digits of reviews, thus the site usually have a review rate closer to 0.1%. On videogames, resident evil 2 sold around 10m, but have less than 3k reviews. Devil may cry 4 and 5 both sold around 5m, they both also sit under 3k reviews. Street fighter 6 sold 2m so far and dont have 2k reviews across all platforms, i dont know where you pulled that 1/3% from(if we take 20m sales, then the number of 10k translates closer to 0.05% wich is par with videogame standards)

Metacritic isnt unnatural at all, its the most popular place that readily hands out users evaluation outside steam, and for blizzard products, its pretty much the only place that gives non-professional views

30m are 2015 numbers. 65m is from the 10 year anniversary blizzard official announcement: https://www.vgchartz.com/article/453645/diablo-iii-tops-65-million-players/

That metacritic is an unnatural place to give reviews is visible by the review count difference between steam (the natural spot, as in the platform connected to the product) and metacritic for steam games. On the example of dota 2, it has over 2 million reviews on steam and ~12k on metacritic. It's also funny how it has a 6 rating on metacritic while sporting 550k+ concurrent players every evening even now, over 10 years after its release. Metacritic reviews are absolutely worthless.

65 million included accounts made in their free to play sessions. Kinda of like its meaningless to count POE account numbers.

And many players bought it multiple times, even in that thread. 65 million isnt even unique users.

I got to play through the season storyline tonight. There was more story and voiceacting than I thought there would be but nothing with any depth. Just a few half dungeons.

The malignant hearts are actually so common that you can pretty much instantly get whichever you want. I even got multiples of the ones that can go in any color slot. The hearts appear to be level locked at 5 so you can powerlevel the early levels of a second character even though they removed traditional powerleveling from the game. Not too shabby to play around with. There's going to be no endgame chase with most of the hearts. I got near perfect rolls on my druid ones by around level 20.

The battle pass design is kind of scummy and has a terrible UI. Blizzard really, really wants you to spend real money on tier skips on the battle pass that you already paid for.

League is pretty much what I expected. It's season 0.1.

lol