Age of Conan

Originally posted by altair4

I'm sceptical to Xfire aswell, cause it feels like the numbers are just too high. Ok, game havent been out long enough for most to get to the failing point of the game, but still it blows my mind how many still plays it cause doesnt take that long to realize you are playing an unfinished game that is being fixed way too slow to be worth paying for.

1-20 is good though. They were smart (from a smarmy dishonest point of view) to limit the test to Tort.

Originally posted by LondonMagus

So lets see, according to the quantcast analysis, the majority of Xfire users are actually below the age limit for the game which means that even though the '18-34' cluster is very crude it is likely that it will be haevily skewed toward the lower boundary.

So, to answer your comments I repeat, Xfire is not a valid random sample of the average player base.

 

So what? On Launch day the majority where below the age limit too. We are comparing now to launch day. With this sort of caomparison the actual demographic matters far less.

Comparing 18+ year old crossfire users at launch with 18+ year old crossfire users now is valid.

Originally posted by Gorilla

Originally posted by LondonMagus

So lets see, according to the quantcast analysis, the majority of Xfire users are actually below the age limit for the game which means that even though the '18-34' cluster is very crude it is likely that it will be haevily skewed toward the lower boundary.

So, to answer your comments I repeat, Xfire is not a valid random sample of the average player base.

 

 

So what? On Launch day the majority where below the age limit too. We are comparing now to launch day. With this sort of caomparison the actual demographic matters far less.

Comparing 18+ year old crossfire users at launch with 18+ year old crossfire users now is valid.

ok link to where you get these figures from please? In my playing of 2 months I find the opposite is true regarding the age of players.

Yet more made up bullshit and untruths. How about i poll all my guildies (150+) to see how many use xfire?

Originally posted by Artermis

Originally posted by Gorilla

Originally posted by LondonMagus

So lets see, according to the quantcast analysis, the majority of Xfire users are actually below the age limit for the game which means that even though the '18-34' cluster is very crude it is likely that it will be haevily skewed toward the lower boundary.

So, to answer your comments I repeat, Xfire is not a valid random sample of the average player base.

 

 

So what? On Launch day the majority where below the age limit too. We are comparing now to launch day. With this sort of caomparison the actual demographic matters far less.

Comparing 18+ year old crossfire users at launch with 18+ year old crossfire users now is valid.

ok link to where you get these figures from please? In my playing of 2 months I find the opposite is true regarding the age of players.

Yet more made up bullshit and untruths. How about i poll all my guildies (150+) to see how many use xfire?

Can't accept evidence, followed by an ambiguous and empty back up. Yes poll these "guildies" if they exist.

Even if you find zero in this 150 player guild you claim (haha!), does that change the random sample of the  player base? Let me guess, you hate the message so you attack the source?

http://www.xfire.com/games/aoc/Age_of_Conan_Hyborian_Adventures/

Figures still going up.

Also ive raised a poll on my guild forums and will post the results here in 1 week time.

Originally posted by Artermis

http://www.xfire.com/games/aoc/Age_of_Conan_Hyborian_Adventures/

Figures still going up.

Also ive raised a poll on my guild forums and will post the results here in 1 week time.

?

If you look at the graph the figures are going down...sure there are short fluctuations but overall it's going down.

Originally posted by Artermis

Originally posted by Gorilla

Originally posted by LondonMagus

So lets see, according to the quantcast analysis, the majority of Xfire users are actually below the age limit for the game which means that even though the '18-34' cluster is very crude it is likely that it will be haevily skewed toward the lower boundary.

So, to answer your comments I repeat, Xfire is not a valid random sample of the average player base.

 

 

So what? On Launch day the majority where below the age limit too. We are comparing now to launch day. With this sort of caomparison the actual demographic matters far less.

Comparing 18+ year old crossfire users at launch with 18+ year old crossfire users now is valid.

ok link to where you get these figures from please? In my playing of 2 months I find the opposite is true regarding the age of players.

Yet more made up bullshit and untruths. How about i poll all my guildies (150+) to see how many use xfire?

What the figures for Xfire show is the population of "Xfire" players that continue to play games to this day.

I had shown before how Guild Wars is consistent, heck LOTRO which is way down the list is CONSISTENT in the time (actually LOTRO has gone up a little) that people play.

What is consistent for AoC? Lets check the last 3 Sundays.

On June 29th - 40594 hrs were played

July 6th - 36596 hrs

July 13th - 30467 hrs

I think I see a trend a here..

Now, of course we could take the server counts at various times on the server...oh wait, Funcom took that ability away.

Now, lets question this. Why would something that has been in game since before launch be taken out, when it affected the game in no manner shape or form. It was not a bug, was not an exploit. It was only the capability to see how many people were on the server at the time between levels 1-80.

Last Fridays patch removed that.

So, please go ahead and poll your guild of 150 players. It is probably the only 150 on the server though, so that kinda skews the data...don't you think?

Originally posted by openedge1

So, please go ahead and poll your guild of 150 players. It is probably the only 150 on the server though, so that kinda skews the data...don't you think?

 

Need the link to the source to prove this statement, otherwise im just classing it as the usual made up bullshit.