Fake player count

[Sam]

A lot of people are having severe difficulty reading the OP, so I've removed those few first sentences so they pay attention to what is important and stop saying the exact same thing over and over again.

EDIT: https://truesteamachievements.com/game/The-First-Descendant/achievements
According to this only 2300 people have ever even unlocked the achievement on Steam out of their sample size of hundreds of thousands.

That's a total of 2% of players having completed the achievement according to the accurate sample size. These accounts are privately tracked so no Steam bugs can occur.

The game can only be detected on 3000 accounts out of the entire community.
So let's be generous and multiply that number by 10 for private accounts, that's 30K.

Nope, fake numbers.

EDIT: For the people saying visual bug, look at any tracking website. It all matches!

[mykidsnamedme]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by Tharkkun:

Where do you think this API pulls from? It comes from Valve's database. Valve just chooses not to run the website themselves and allows fansites and whatever else pull the numbers.

That doesn't mean they are always accurate...or the websites cache is bad.

You are the person who brought up that the website wasn't provided by Valve. By that same logic, then the player counts must be all incorrect data too.

If this website, which represents the sample size, is completely wrong because of the Steam API, then every website is wrong as they're all pulling from the same pool of data, right?

Why would just this one specific website get it wrong? No, the data is uniform. There's just a large number of accounts, all pretending to run the game. That's why just for this one game, the data is incorrect.

The numbers have been faked.

Guess all those players I keep seeing are fake

[mykidsnamedme]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by mykidsnamedme:

It's 67.9% for EQUIPPING a mod

Please take a look at the tracking website!

I'm not going to some random website that's probably a virus when I can just use my eyes

[Tharkkun]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by Tharkkun:

Where do you think this API pulls from? It comes from Valve's database. Valve just chooses not to run the website themselves and allows fansites and whatever else pull the numbers.

That doesn't mean they are always accurate...or the websites cache is bad.

You are the person who brought up that the website wasn't provided by Valve. By that same logic, then the player counts must be all incorrect data too.

If this website, which represents the sample size, is completely wrong because of the Steam API, then every website is wrong as they're all pulling from the same pool of data, right?

Why would just this one specific website get it wrong? No, the data is uniform. There's just a large number of accounts, all pretending to run the game. That's why just for this one game, the data is incorrect.

The numbers have been faked.

How so? Each is a different API. One could easily be broken. You're definitely delusional but keep farming clowns. Maybe provide some concrete evidence next time.

[_Atr4Mør5]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

Apparently this site only shows people who... logged in? Or what does it show? Because it says 23k people have "played" in Baldurs Gate 3. Although SteamDB will confirm that the peak online for the game was +800k

Okay, so I've been explaining this to alot of people but ♥♥♥♥ it, one more time around.

The website is powered by the Steam API and represents a community submitted tracker, it's self reported accounts, which are a sample size of the entire Steam community.

All statistics on Steam or otherwise are sample sizes, which represent the greater picture. Private accounts or profiles which have hidden their game history, would still have played it won't appear on the website. That's why you multiply it by 10x, as that is the average number of private to public accounts, according to SteamDB.

So sure, you can go through the entire website and find one single game that you think doesn't match, which has happened before with Hunt: Showdown in this thread.

If your account is private, you don't count for the website, but you do add to the global player count!

I heard about that, Using Steam reviews to estimate player numbers. Statistically, only 1 out of 60-80 people leave a review. So you can safely multiply the number of reviews by 7.

The First Descendant has Mixed (38,009 reviews) x 7 = 266 063 and that number is most likely an underestimate.

And it's only in Steam, game is cross-platform between PC, Xbox, PlayStation.

Your theory failed miserably, dude.

[Sam]

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

Originally posted by Sam:

Okay, so I've been explaining this to alot of people but ♥♥♥♥ it, one more time around.

The website is powered by the Steam API and represents a community submitted tracker, it's self reported accounts, which are a sample size of the entire Steam community.

All statistics on Steam or otherwise are sample sizes, which represent the greater picture. Private accounts or profiles which have hidden their game history, would still have played it won't appear on the website. That's why you multiply it by 10x, as that is the average number of private to public accounts, according to SteamDB.

So sure, you can go through the entire website and find one single game that you think doesn't match, which has happened before with Hunt: Showdown in this thread.

If your account is private, you don't count for the website, but you do add to the global player count!

I heard about that, Using Steam reviews to estimate player numbers. Statistically, only 1 out of 60-80 people leave a review. So you can safely multiply the number of reviews by 7.

The First Descendant has Mixed (38,009 reviews) x 7 = 266 063 and that number is most likely an underestimate.

Your theory failed miserably, dude.

Can you provide a source on the 7x number? Where are you getting that from?

[mykidsnamedme]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

I heard about that, Using Steam reviews to estimate player numbers. Statistically, only 1 out of 60-80 people leave a review. So you can safely multiply the number of reviews by 7.

The First Descendant has Mixed (38,009 reviews) x 7 = 266 063 and that number is most likely an underestimate.

Your theory failed miserably, dude.

Can you provide a source on the 7x number? Where are you getting that from?

The same place your wonderful tracking site is his butt

In all seriousness give it up games a success.

Can't even count the number of PS players for example they are everywhere

[_Atr4Mør5]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

I heard about that, Using Steam reviews to estimate player numbers. Statistically, only 1 out of 60-80 people leave a review. So you can safely multiply the number of reviews by 7.

The First Descendant has Mixed (38,009 reviews) x 7 = 266 063 and that number is most likely an underestimate.

Your theory failed miserably, dude.

Can you provide a source on the 7x number? Where are you getting that from?

You can look at the charts via SteamDB, match it up with date information from the publisher, how many copies were sold, what the peak online was on a particular day, and how many reviews were done.

[Sam]

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

Originally posted by Sam:

Can you provide a source on the 7x number? Where are you getting that from?

You can look at the charts via SteamDB, match it up with date information from the publisher, how many copies were sold, what the peak online was on a particular day, and how many reviews were done.

https://newsletter.gamediscover.co/p/steam-sales-estimates-why-game-popularity
https://gameworldobserver.com/2022/11/15/how-to-count-game-sales-steam-2022-review-multiplier
Give these a read please! Only purchased games, as in, games you have to put money down for have the 60 or 70 times statistic.

Free to play games are around 20. Games with high popularity, for example, Elden Ring: “And so 1 in 20-25 players leave a review, compared to the 1 in 50-60 that is more normal with a large-scale game.”

So no, it's not 7x, it's more like 2x. The more popular the game is, the more likely people are to leave reviews. This game is very, very popular according to Steam.

[_Atr4Mør5]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

You can look at the charts via SteamDB, match it up with date information from the publisher, how many copies were sold, what the peak online was on a particular day, and how many reviews were done.

https://newsletter.gamediscover.co/p/steam-sales-estimates-why-game-popularity
Give this a read please! Only purchased games, as in, games you have to put money down for have the 60 or 70 times statistic.

Free to play games are around 20. Games with high popularity, for example, Elden Ring: “And so 1 in 20-25 players leave a review, compared to the 1 in 50-60 that is more normal with a large-scale game.”

So no, it's not 7x, it's more like 2x.

1 in 20 is higher then 1 in 50, because it's more frequently, so it's more closer to 1:1 rather then 1:6. If each player would leave a review it would mean exactly the same number of copies sold as many reviews as there are.
Intelligence is not your attribute, is it?

[Sam]

Originally posted by _Atr4Mør5:

Originally posted by Sam:

https://newsletter.gamediscover.co/p/steam-sales-estimates-why-game-popularity
Give this a read please! Only purchased games, as in, games you have to put money down for have the 60 or 70 times statistic.

Free to play games are around 20. Games with high popularity, for example, Elden Ring: “And so 1 in 20-25 players leave a review, compared to the 1 in 50-60 that is more normal with a large-scale game.”

So no, it's not 7x, it's more like 2x.

1 in 20 is higher then 1 in 50, because it's more frequently, so it's more closer to 1:1 rather then 1:6. If each player would leave a review it would mean exactly the same number of copies sold as many reviews as there are.
Intelligence is not your attribute, is it?

No-one ever said it was 1:1. How did you even get to that?

Why did you feel the need to insult me there at the end?

[superblake_]

Also Sam when I use your math when I times the 38,144 mixed reviews by 10 it is 381,440. Not every person that has reviewed is always playing the game some people are playing on different platforms with their accounts linked to a nexon account and you did subtract you didn't include the people who play on multiple platforms and you also say that streams and videos don't effect the how many of people are playing. But that is not correct streams and videos do effect how many people are playing the game.

[SaltyBalls]

Originally posted by Sam:

Check your achievements, only 0.1% of players have ever equipped a mod. You do that within a few minutes of the game starting properly.

So either, everyone's quitting before in a few minutes, or someone's botting the game to make thousands upon thousands of accounts.

Check your Steam achievements for the game, they're all suddenly super rare.

Out of 230,982 players, playing right now. Only 230 have ever equipped a mod?
Nope, someone's faking the player numbers.

EDIT: https://truesteamachievements.com/game/The-First-Descendant/achievements
According to this only 2300 people have ever even unlocked the achievement on Steam out of their sample size of hundreds of thousands.

The game can only be detected on 3000 accounts out of the entire community.
So let's be generous and multiply that number by 10 for private accounts, that's 30K.

Nope, fake numbers.

EDIT: For the people saying visual bug, look at any tracking website. It all matches!

Who care games all ready getting boring repetitive and way to much P2W I give it less than 3 months and only ps5 and xbox player will be playing it...their much better games coming out and this one will die

[Sam]

Originally posted by superblake_:

Also Sam when I use your math when I times the 38,144 mixed reviews by 10 it is 381,440. Not every person that has reviewed is always playing the game some people are playing on different platforms with their accounts linked to a nexon account and you did subtract you didn't include the people who play on multiple platforms and you also say that streams and videos don't effect the how many of people are playing. But that is not correct streams and videos do effect how many people are playing the game.

I appreciate what you're saying and you're 100% right, that doesn't make any sense at all. That's why I was disagreeing with that guy! I'm not the person who brought reviews into it. My point was that reviews to players can't be trusted as there's a 20 - 70 point difference.

The people watching streams can't be playing the game at the same time. One guy streaming for like 20K people, isn't going to make any game, the most popular in the world overnight.

Twitch streams don't really have anything to do with Steam achievements. I mean, they can sure make people play the game, but if they don't even make it through the first 30 minutes of the game when they finally play it, it didn't really work as an advert in my opinion.

According to those Steam Achievements, most people, or an overwhelming majority didn't even bother.

[superblake_]

Originally posted by Sam:

Originally posted by superblake_:

Also Sam when I use your math when I times the 38,144 mixed reviews by 10 it is 381,440. Not every person that has reviewed is always playing the game some people are playing on different platforms with their accounts linked to a nexon account and you did subtract you didn't include the people who play on multiple platforms and you also say that streams and videos don't effect the how many of people are playing. But that is not correct streams and videos do effect how many people are playing the game.

I appreciate what you're saying and you're 100% right, that doesn't make any sense at all. That's why I was disagreeing with that guy! I'm not the person who brought reviews into it. My point was that reviews to players can't be trusted as there's a 20 - 70 point difference.

The people watching streams can't be playing the game at the same time. One guy streaming for like 20K people, isn't going to make any game, the most popular in the world overnight.

Twitch streams don't really have anything to do with Steam achievements. I mean, they can sure make people play the game, but if they don't even make it through the first 30 minutes of the game when they finally play it, it didn't really work as an advert in my opinion.

According to those Steam Achievements, most people, or an overwhelming majority didn't even bother.

Actually people watching streams and videos can play the game at the same time.

[Sam]

Originally posted by superblake_:

Originally posted by Sam:

I appreciate what you're saying and you're 100% right, that doesn't make any sense at all. That's why I was disagreeing with that guy! I'm not the person who brought reviews into it. My point was that reviews to players can't be trusted as there's a 20 - 70 point difference.

The people watching streams can't be playing the game at the same time. One guy streaming for like 20K people, isn't going to make any game, the most popular in the world overnight.

Twitch streams don't really have anything to do with Steam achievements. I mean, they can sure make people play the game, but if they don't even make it through the first 30 minutes of the game when they finally play it, it didn't really work as an advert in my opinion.

According to those Steam Achievements, most people, or an overwhelming majority didn't even bother.

Actually people watching streams and videos can play the game at the same time.

Out of everything I wrote? That's it? Okay then.

Yeah, sure you can watching a video of someone playing the game, but if you've got the game directly in front of you installed and running...

Why would you watch the video?
You're focused on the game, right?