Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[IntelligentDisk]

But the game was released on February 11, which was a Tuesday. So, it makes sense to compare weeks starting on Tuesdays.

It makes sense, doesn't it? Although I start on February 6th for both reviews and player count. 30,560 reviews (64% of all reviews) came before the full launch on the 11th, so it makes sense to start on the 6th.

 

[Kwami]

It makes sense, doesn't it? Although I start on February 6th for both reviews and player count. 30,560 reviews (64% of all reviews) came before the full launch on the 11th, so it makes sense to start on the 6th.

That's good, too. I forgot about the pre-release period.

 

[Smegger213]

A week is a unit of measurement. 7 days. I've already stated multiple times these are weeks from launch. This is so you can accurately compare to other games.


I've never claimed there would be more positive reviews than negative ones at the end of October. I fully expect there will be more negative ones. As I've already repeated several times, October so far is the best reviewed calendar month since February. But wait, I can't speak about October until October is finished right?

• Feb - 50.9% (32,635 reviews)
• March - 43.% (5,583)
• April - 41.6% (1,912)
• May - 33.5% (1,770)
• June - 27.5% (1,928)
• July - 40.6% (1,293)
• August - 36.9% (1,386)
• September - 38.4% (870)
• October- 46.1% (813)

We are not comparing it to other games. Well I am not. Also, you have started your week quoted on Thursdays. Not Tuesdays as someone said game was released on a Tuesday.
You can move the start day all over the place and get different numbers. That is why I say its a waste of time trying to do it on a weekly basis. I will be waiting till the end of October. Then you can properly compare the numbers between September and October. Only then can you really say if the positive count improved and by how much.

 

[AD1730]

Again, if we're asking questions on October 23rd about whether October will have above 50% positive reviews, then the game probably isn't turning around yet. This game needs over 125K more positive reviews (assuming no negative ones) to be in the Civ 6 review score range. In other words, it requires a drastic turnaround in reception. If we're splitting hairs about whether a few dozen reviews in either direction in a given week is a sign of a turnaround, then it's probably safe to say that the much-needed turnaround isn't underway.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

We are not comparing it to other games. Well I am not. Also, you have started your week quoted on Thursdays. Not Tuesdays as someone said game was released on a Tuesday.

Refer to the 2 comments above yours.

You can move the start day all over the place and get different numbers.

You can't move the start day to any other day since February and get a 50% positive rating over 2 weeks.

That is why I say its a waste of time trying to do it on a weekly basis. I will be waiting till the end of October. Then you can properly compare the numbers between September and October. Only then can you really say if the positive count improved and by how much.

It's waste of time doing it on a weekly basis while the reviews show some signs of improvement, right? But if/when they start to go downhill again, I'm sure we will hear about it whether it is daily or weekly. I look forward to seeing you call those people out too. It is undeniable that the positive % has improved recently.

 

[AD1730]

It is undeniable that the positive % has improved recently.

10/10 - 19 positive, 15 negative
10/11 - 12 positive, 13 negative
10/12 - 10 positive, 15 negative
10/13 - 7 positive, 19 negative
10/14 - 9 positive, 7 negative
10/15 - 6 positive, 7 negative
10/16 - 9 positive, 9 negative
10/17 - 11 positive, 10 negative
10/18 - 17 positive, 20 negative
10/19 - 11 positive, 6 negative
10/20 - 20 positive, 14 negative
10/21 - 3 positive, 7 negative
10/22 - 8 positive, 6 negative
10/23 - 2 positive, 7 negative

124 positive, 135 negative
47.88% positive

Conclusion = very deniable

 

[IntelligentDisk]

10/10 - 19 positive, 15 negative
10/11 - 12 positive, 13 negative
10/12 - 10 positive, 15 negative
10/13 - 7 positive, 19 negative
10/14 - 9 positive, 7 negative
10/15 - 6 positive, 7 negative
10/16 - 9 positive, 9 negative
10/17 - 11 positive, 10 negative
10/18 - 17 positive, 20 negative
10/19 - 11 positive, 6 negative
10/20 - 20 positive, 14 negative
10/21 - 3 positive, 7 negative
10/22 - 8 positive, 6 negative
10/23 - 2 positive, 7 negative

124 positive, 135 negative
47.88% positive

Conclusion = very deniable

I wonder how many times I will need to repost this graph?

 

[ColtSeavers]

SteamDB.

1. 10/09 - 21 positive, 8 negative
2. 10/10 - 18 positive, 14 negative
3. 10/11 - 22 positive, 17 negative
4. 10/12 - 15 positive, 23 negative
5. 10/13 - 11 positive, 23 negative
6. 10/14 - 12 positive, 10 negative
7. 10/15 - 8 positive, 11 negative

That's the first week. 107 positive, 106 negative, 213 total, 50.2% positive.

1. 10/16 - 7 positive, 18 negative
2. 10/17 - 17 positive, 18 negative
3. 10/18 - 18 positive, 19 negative
4. 10/19 - 20 positive, 11 negative
5. 10/20 - 15 positive, 13 negative
6. 10/21 - 16 positive, 14 negative
7. 10/22 - 8 positive, 8 negative

That's the second week. 101 positive, 101 negative. 202 total, 50% positive.

14 days in a row. They are both week 36 & week 37 respectively, since launch. Today has seen 4 positive, 10 negative.

If the graph you are referring to is the graph on the Steam reviews, then they don't include Steam reviews of people who purchased the game outside of Steam. SteamDB includes all of them.

Didn't think it would get that complicated. I just did select the reviews myself, and came up with the following:

Week 1: 10th Sept - 17th Sept: 41 positive out of 132 reviews
Week 2: 17th Sept - 24th Sept: 39 % positive out 105 reviews
Week 3: 24th Sept - 1st Oct: 48 % postive out of 174 reviews
Week 4: 1st Oct - 8th Oct: 42 positive out of of 276 reviews
Week 5: 8th Oct - 15th Oct: 47 % positive out of 175 reviews.
Week 6: 15th Oct - 22nd Oct: 51 % positive out of 150 reviews.

I selected all languages and Steam buyers only, so we all seem to be getting slightly different figures after all.

Anyway, from my point of view, it’s pretty obvious that Civ7's reviews are more or less stuck in the 40–50% positive range. Last week, Civ 7 was at 51% positive. If you think that’s the beginning of a great comeback, that’s up to you. For me, it just looks like normal statistical noise, similar to what happened in Week 3, when the positives jumped from 39% to 48%. In Week 4, it went down to 42% positive again, which, by the way, had by far the most reviews during this period.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Didn't think it would get that complicated. I just did select the reviews myself, and came up with the following:

Week 1: 10th Sept - 17th Sept: 41 positive out of 132 reviews
Week 2: 17th Sept - 24th Sept: 39 % positive out 105 reviews
Week 3: 24th Sept - 1st Oct: 48 % postive out of 174 reviews
Week 4: 1st Oct - 8th Oct: 42 positive out of of 276 reviews
Week 5: 8th Oct - 15th Oct: 47 % positive out of 175 reviews.
Week 6: 15th Oct - 22nd Oct: 51 % positive out of 150 reviews.

I selected all languages and Steam buyers only, so we all seem to be getting slightly different figures after all.

Anyway, from my point of view, it’s pretty obvious that Civ7's reviews are more or less stuck in the 40–50% positive range. Last week, Civ 7 was at 51% positive. If you think that’s the beginning of a great comeback, that’s up to you. For me, it just looks like normal statistical noise, similar to what happened in Week 3, when the positives jumped from 39% to 48%. In Week 4, it went down to 42% positive again, which, by the way, had by far the most reviews during this period.

I'm not sure what is complicated about the most recent 2 weeks having above 50% positive rating for the first time since February. Yes if you use Steam for the data and omit non-Steam purchased Steam reviews then you will get different data to me. I use SteamDB, which uses all the reviews and doesn't omit any.

If you're talking since the very first day, then yes they're stuck. But it's more like being stuck between 25% to 50% instead of 40% to 50%. Recent reviews are close to that ceiling, we will see if it breaks through.

 

[ColtSeavers]

View attachment 745684

I wonder how many times I will need to repost this graph?

Well, congratulations then, it seems Civ 7 is back to where it was right after launch, when its fans claimed that the negative feedback would only be temporary and that, after some UI patches, it would eventually turn out to be the most beloved game in the entire franchise.

Besides that, the reviews are back to where they were during the summer, hovering around the 50% threshold. If someone wants to celebrate that the reviews are no longer in the 20% territory, which they briefly hit in June, that’s totally fine. From my point of view, that’s not a real trend but just a return to normal. The positive reviews in June were so low, they could almost only go up from there.

 

[ColtSeavers]

I'm not sure what is complicated about the most recent 2 weeks having above 50% positive rating for the first time since February. Yes if you use Steam for the data and omit non-Steam purchased Steam reviews then you will get different data to me. I use SteamDB, which uses all the reviews and doesn't omit any.

If you're talking since the very first day, then yes they're stuck. But it's more like being stuck between 25% to 50% instead of 40% to 50%. Recent reviews are close to that ceiling, we will see if it breaks through.

Well, I’m not so sure what’s so complicated about the fact that nobody except you shows the last two weeks above 50%, and that a few days with only a couple dozen reviews don’t prove a trend after all.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Well, I’m not so sure what’s so complicated about the fact that nobody except you shows the last two weeks above 50%, and that a few days with only a couple dozen reviews don’t prove a trend after all.

It's crazy that not just you, but other people are in denial about factual data. I made an image for you. Add up the positive, add up the negative, and let me know what you get. Then you will agree with me.

Well, congratulations then, it seems Civ 7 is back to where it was right after launch, when its fans claimed that the negative feedback would only be temporary and that, after some UI patches, it would eventually turn out to be the most beloved game in the entire franchise.

Besides that, the reviews are back to where they were during the summer, hovering around the 50% threshold. If someone wants to celebrate that the reviews are no longer in the 20% territory, which they briefly hit in June, that’s totally fine. From my point of view, that’s not a real trend but just a return to normal. The positive reviews in June were so low, they could almost only go up from there.

I never claimed that. So keep holding a grudge against other people I guess?

That's correct. The 2 week figure is around a figure it was at after the 1.2.2 update. As you can see, the reviews have improved recently. That's what I've been saying but some people have found it very difficult to admit.

 

[ColtSeavers]

View attachment 745686

View attachment 745686
It's crazy that not just you, but other people are in denial about factual data. I made an image for you. Add up the positive, add up the negative, and let me know what you get. Then you will agree with me.


I never claimed that. So keep holding a grudge against other people I guess?

That's correct. The 2 week figure is around a figure it was at after the 1.2.2 update. As you can see, the reviews have improved recently. That's what I've been saying but some people have found it very difficult to admit.

It's crazy that not just you, but other people are in denial about factual data. I made an image for you. Add up the positive, add up the negative, and let me know what you get. Then you will agree with me.


I never claimed that. So keep holding a grudge against other people I guess?

That's correct. The 2 week figure is around a figure it was at after the 1.2.2 update. As you can see, the reviews have improved recently. That's what I've been saying but some people have found it very difficult to admit.

My Steam data for the week of October 8–15 shows 47% positive out of 175 reviews. Your figures are slightly different, fair enough. AD 1730 and Smegger 213 also have different numbers from yours. I’m not sure what exactly you filtered when you compiled your stats, nor does that really matter to me. As I mentioned before, the differences are minor, and with such a small sample size, the "trend" you’re trying to demonstrate isn’t statistically significant in my view.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

My Steam data for the week of October 8–15 shows 47% positive out of 175 reviews. Your figures are slightly different, fair enough. AD 1730 and Smegger 213 also have different numbers from yours. I’m not sure what exactly you filtered when you compiled your stats, nor does that really matter to me. As I mentioned before, the differences are minor, and with such a small sample size, the "trend" you’re trying to demonstrate isn’t statistically significant in my view.

This what I said earlier in response to you: "Yes if you use Steam for the data and omit non-Steam purchased Steam reviews then you will get different data to me. I use SteamDB, which uses all the reviews and doesn't omit any." Steam by default ignores non-Steam purchased reviews in its calculation for the overall score, recent score & on the graph they provide.

Steam = not all the reviews.
SteamDB = all the reviews.

They have been getting their data from Steam (incomplete data), hence different data. Also in some comments they have used different dates.

the "trend" you’re trying to demonstrate isn’t statistically significant in my view

That's fair.

 

[Wrenched]

Steam = not all the reviews.
SteamDB = all the reviews.

For reviews and their impact I would assume that the review percentage in the upper right corner on the Steam page (All and Recent) have the most impact on potential consumers. You are free to use reviews from all sources, of course, but it might be missing the forest for the trees when going to SteamDB and including all reviews (such as key purchasers) when those reviews will not be factored into the Steam store. While it provides a larger picture of how purchasers are receiving Civ 7; all those 3rd party key purchasers will have zero impact on the Steam Store aggregate.

I don't mean that as a criticism or minimizing positive reviews. I just suspect we have waded too far into the weeds and lost sight of the review aggregate that really matters to many consumers: Steam store percentage which omits key purchasers. That is what the vast majority of consumers are seeing.

And I do suspect the Steam Store aggregate will trend upwards if Firaxis keeps pushing community pleasing updates.

 

[Bug Repellent]

I wonder how many times I will need to repost this graph?

If you put proper error bars you'll notice no trend. The number of daily reviews is far too low for the graph to mean anything. Remember that if you see 25 reviews in a day, the associated standard deviation is sqrt(25)=5, or ±20%.

 

[Smegger213]

View attachment 745684

I wonder how many times I will need to repost this graph?

Please don't subject us to your pointless graph that proves nothing.
We can all see that you are basing your so called 2 weeks of positive reviews on a week that starts on a Thursday.
As others have pointed out, you can get totally different numbers depending on what day you start from.
The release date according to Steam was 10th Feb. That was a Monday.
So, its more accurate to count weekly numbers starting on a Monday.
Which is what I did. I proved that for the last 3 full weeks starting on a Monday, only 1 week had more positive reviews. But it was only positive by 6. The next week was negative by 6. So that positive week got cancelled out by the very next week. When you count from a Monday.
But, hey, lets move the weekly start date on our counting, until we get 2 positive weeks eh?

 

[Nikolai II]

Moderator Action: Please treat each other with respect and dignity.

 

[Siddorm]

I think that @IntelligentDisk 's graph is a good way to show an overview of the reviews data. It does not need error bars; we can see how noisy or smooth the graph is. We have no way of making inferences or predictions from this scientifically because we (for example) do not know how comparable the populations of reviewers from different time periods are.

 

[Smegger213]

I think that @IntelligentDisk 's graph is a good way to show an overview of the reviews data. It does not need error bars; we can see how noisy or smooth the graph is. We have no way of making inferences or predictions from this scientifically because we (for example) do not know how comparable the populations of reviewers from different time periods are.

What about the issue with the fact that you can get a totally different graph, by starting the counted week on a different day?