170 positive reviews but just 697 peak players?

[Mr. Zero]

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

[DEFFROOM]

Ha Ha

[Mortius]

ChatGPT ahh reviews

[Blunts]

Originally posted by Mr. Zero:

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

Rule of thumb is that usually only 10% of peak players will leave a rating (70 in this case), so they are probably padding the numbers with employee reviews.

[Termix]

Originally posted by Mr. Zero:

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

Mathematician is the term you are searching for.
And 170 reviews is nothing, since the game had 3 days of Early Access too.

This game came and went away like a fart in a tornado.

[Termix]

Originally posted by Blunts:

Originally posted by Mr. Zero:

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

Rule of thumb is that usually only 10% of peak players will leave a rating (70 in this case), so they are probably padding the numbers with employee reviews.

We had ~90 reviews (early access) before today which added ~80 more, so your rule of thumb is not broken.
Also with extremely niche titles more people are leaving reviews, since we're entering "special interest" territory.

[StuartAce]

Originally posted by Blunts:

Originally posted by Mr. Zero:

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

Rule of thumb is that usually only 10% of peak players will leave a rating (70 in this case), so they are probably padding the numbers with employee reviews.

Yeah i was just going to say that 170 reviews already, on launch day, for a game with a peak of 700 players is an incredible large amount of reviews.
def something fishy going on here.

[Termix]

Originally posted by Spicy Grasshopper:

Nah it does add up.
The people who actually bought the game are few, and they are the ones that really want to play it, and on top of that they are voting their pet project up.

Really think about it, 170 reviews is not that many, thats a lecture hall at a university.
And a 700 playerbase is nothing either.

Now normally its about 1 review for every 30-58 sales, but if you arent selling to a wide net, you will get more reviews per sale.

But the narrow net means your game will die sooner and likely hasnt even broken even.

These devs are probably locked in for a year of post launch content, because most publishers want a year after launch to funnel more money, but after that this game will be dead, like Suicide Squad and Rock Steady.

Helper syndrome/White knighting is a huge thing - weird parasocial stuff where people think they will save this game/studio.

Engagement is higher with these games, so it's nothing fishy.
None of the "haters" bought the game.

[Phoenix King Sherman]

40 fun bucks is a not insignificant buy in if you don't know you're going to like something or not, or to hate buy just to leave a negative review. I'm betting a goodly chunk of the positive reviews are a mix of the game's genuine fans (who I feel sorry for, no one deserves to hitch themselves to a bad game) and people who've already bit the bullet and need to double down or admit they paid for a heaping serving of slop.

[Notabene]

Fake reviews, skewed Steam system that give fake ranking and score, at the except of actual player numbers which they haven't censored or corrupted yet.

Notice how this game has no player, little reviews and yet is in the top Steam charts? The Steam charts are completely fake as well, so no reviews are almost irrelevant

[Mr. Zero]

Originally posted by Termix:

Originally posted by Mr. Zero:

I'm no mathematist but something doesn't add up there.

Mathematician is the term you are searching for.

Nope.

[ChaosLegion]

Honestly the way this was going I thought this game was gonna launch 2025. LMAO what a joke