Yes, I have
solid evidence, from SteamDB.
- Amount of positive reviews in those 4 weeks: 14,264
- Total amount of positive reviews in the first 3 years & 1 month: 53,684
That works out to 27%. When I said error, I meant an error in the way SteamDB collects the data which for some reason would group an overwhelming positive amount in a certain week of November, or an error with Steam itself grouping positive reviews.
I didnt point to the numbers, I was referring to evidence of your claim that the outlier was likely due a steamdb error, or worse, that they were "fake reviews".
Also you
completely skipped on the broader point, which is that even an outlier like this doesn't change the overall picture for civ 6 reviews, which is very solid even if we removed this outlier entirely.
I got them from Twitchtracker, as you did.
- No, it isn't dishonest. It's a fact. They aren't "technically" under 10. They ARE under 10.
- Yes, Civ VII had a huge drop. You'd see a huge drop for Civ VI too if Twitchtracker started collecting dating in October 2016 when Civ VI launched and not in December 2016, 2 months after the released of Civ VI.
- Yes, Civ VI stabilised at a higher number of average streams compared to Civ VII has. Both are under 10. Civ VII has been between 3 and 7 steamers. Civ VI 7 or 8 streamers. Both are poor numbers. Yes, Civ VI had more average viewers than Civ VII does now.
It looks like Boesthius only made 8 videos in the year prior to Civ VII, and around 24 videos in the year before that, was he already checked out of YouTube? Potato already explained that the amount of negativity surrounding Civ VII is why he hasn't played or uploaded it as much.
No it is in fact dishonest what you are doing here, because whether or not they are "under 10" is irrelevant.
This is extremely selective interpretation of data, because you are making an arbitrary goalpost here by measuring success on whether there are less or more than 10 streams, which is a useless measure by itself without context.
The point I was making is that while they are "under 10" (which is a number that means
nothing without context), civ 6 plateaued at both a
higher stream count than civ 7 (lowest was 7 for civ 6, while the lowest for civ 7 was
3),
and a lower viewer count than civ 7 (72 for civ 6 and just
19 for civ 7).
While both are "poor numbers", you are looking at a doubling in stream counts and more than triple the viewer counts.
And while this particular data point (the lowest recorded number) is a single data point and thus to be taken with a grain of salt since the variance could be high otherwise, the pattern repeats itself for every month and civ 6 consistently outperformed civ 7 for the entire post-release stage.
You simply cant argue that away, civ 7 is performing horribly for streams.
While the drop might have been sharper if based on when twitchtracker started recording data, the fact is that we have no data for this at the moment.
Thus you are making a claim here which perhaps might be plausible, but you have nothing to back it up with.
And in regards to everything else we know about civ 7 (terrible player counts compared to civ 6 and 7, and sharing a similar curve of player count dropoff that matches the curve for the stream count dropoff, as well as the bad reviews), the overall picture is one where civ 7 is doing extremely poorly.
Yes, Boesthius uploaded less in the year before civ 7 because the civ 6 cycle was ending (and civ 7 announced at that stage) — that’s normal before a new release. The fact that he
still dropped Civ 7 despite higher upload activity right after its release shows disillusionment, not disengagement from YouTube.
And either way, you are doing the same thing you were accusing me of doing with PotatoMcWhiskey.
You claim that I just made a baseless speculation as to why he more or less stopped doing civ content (fair, he never said that directly, but the context heavily implies it since he likely took a very heavy hit in viewership revenue stream), whereas I pointed you to a video where Boesthius literally says that he was "initially high on copium" about civ 7 and wanted it to succeed (but now won't anymore), and where you are now essentially claiming that what he literally said himself is "probably not true".
So which one is it?
