🚀 go-pugleaf

Mr. Mark,

>> Any chart is repre-
>> sentative of only a fraction of gamers' opinion, because there is no way
>> to force *everybody* to express their opinion on a subject.
>
>Since the only test of opinion retailers are really interested in is
>sales the above statement is plain wrong. 

Retailers?  Who wants to know what retailers think?  The charts aren't
for retailers, they're for gamers.  But even so, would retailers not
be interested to know which games are more popular based on actual
use?  And as for the statement being wrong, he's talking about sample
size and margins of error.  Are you saying that statistical theory is
invalid?

>> On the other
>> hand, this chart is hands down the most accurate indicator of games'
>> popularity *available*, because unlike anything published in magazines
>> it is unbiased (feel free to prove otherwise!)
>
>It is as easy for me to prove this chart is biased as it is for you to
>prove a magazine's chart is biased. I.e its a matter of opinion. You
>might argue the magazine's chart is biased through a desire on their
>part to please the advertisers, I would argue this chart is biased by
>organised voting.

You have completely misunderstood the whole point of the chart.  It
attempts to measure games' popularity, people's satisfaction with the
games they've purchased.  That's much more valuable info to me than
what's selling.  Remember Outpost?  Got a good review from a strategy
freak, and sold enough copies to justify a sequel.  But I don't know
anyone who wasn't disappointed with it once they brought it home.
Trophy Bass?  I bought it for my dad for Father's Day like every other
son desperate for ideas.  If he's played it once I'd be surprised.

>>, it's longevity,
>
>Please explain why this is in any way relevent?

Longevity speaks to penetration, obviously.

>> number
>> of vote(r)s
>
>Why should I believe these figures?

Aw come on.  Why should you believe in an objective reality?  If
you're gonna go philosopher on us, what's the point.

>> and the fact that voting is open for anybody.
>
>This is a positive disadvantage and that you would argue it as a
>strength shows you have a very poor understanding of census-taking.

While it's true that the chart could be better if the participants
were better distributed among the gaming community, that doesn't make
it useless, as you suggest.  People who vote are people who feel
strongly about the game they vote for.  And that's exactly what I want
to know before I buy a game... how many people feel strongly positive
about a game they have purchased.  It's not perfect, and it's open to
abuse, but it's far from useless.


If you're only arguing for the sake of it, I apologize for not
catching it sooner, and for wasting your reading time with a reply.

BT