Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[Smegger213]

Another week where the reviews ended mostly positive (52% this week, 51% last week). These are the only two weeks since launch in which there have been more positive than negative reviews.

How do you work that out?
I get starting from a Monday:
Monday 13th Oct = 93 pos, 110 neg = 45.8%
Monday 20th Oct = 80 pos, 95 neg = 45.7%

If you want to count from a Thursday as some people want to do you get:
Thurs 9th Oct = 107 pos, 106 neg = 50.2%
Thurs 16th Oct = 101 pos, 101 neg = 50%

So, I am not sure where you get this 52% and 51% from.

 

[AD1730]

Could we say that our criterion for Update 1.3.0 to be awarded a like by this thread is:
The Steam reviews % positive is above 55% for the 30-day period that starts on the first full day that 1.3.0 is available.
Would this be reasonable? If so, please like this message.

Considering that this game needs ~120K positive new reviews (assuming 100% of the new reviews are positive and no one can switch their old review) to get near the score that Civ 6 had, I’d say that benchmark is far too low. If we see 70% positive for a month after release, I think that is a fair standard.

 

[Gorbles]

Considering that this game needs ~120K positive new reviews (assuming 100% of the new reviews are positive and no one can switch their old review) to get near the score that Civ 6 had, I’d say that benchmark is far too low. If we see 70% positive for a month after release, I think that is a fair standard.

The goal isn't "to get near the score Civ VI had". The goal (in-context) is to determine a valid threshold for positive movement / a positive trend in review scores.

I'm sure folks would like the reviews to climb as high as VI, but we're simply discussing what would be required for everyone to agree on a positive trend (vs. endless arguing over single-digit % movement).

I don't even know if 55% is going to work with a single patch. I think the problem is a number of things need to be implemented, to then carry over a majority of users who are on the fence / negative about the game. No one thing is going to do it (apart from maybe whatever they're testing with civilisation continuity across Age Transitions).

 

[Evolena]

I don't even know if 55% is going to work with a single patch.

Anything can work if the goal is the reviews for the 30 days after the patch, there is no being plagued by previous bad reviews.

 

[Gorbles]

Anything can work if the goal is the reviews for the 30 days after the patch, there is no being plagued by previous bad reviews.

If we just take the reviews in that timespan, yeah. I think I misread it as 55% overall, which would require a significant shift.

 

[AD1730]

Anything can work if the goal is the reviews for the 30 days after the patch, there is no being plagued by previous bad reviews.

55% just isn’t a meaningful difference for a game that’s sported scores in the 47% range. 55% doesn’t even get it out of the “gray zone” on Steam. If I was a studio director and my team’s goal was 55% success, I’d probably need to get a new team or I’d find myself out of a job very soon.

 

[Leucarum]

55% just isn’t a meaningful difference for a game that’s sported scores in the 47% range. 55% doesn’t even get it out of the “gray zone” on Steam. If I was a studio director and my team’s goal was 55% success, I’d probably need to get a new team or I’d find myself out of a job very soon.

This is true.

It is also true that it looks like reviews are improving.

Is anyone actually disagreeing with each other here?

 

[Evolena]

55% just isn’t a meaningful difference for a game that’s sported scores in the 47% range. 55% doesn’t even get it out of the “gray zone” on Steam. If I was a studio director and my team’s goal was 55% success, I’d probably need to get a new team or I’d find myself out of a job very soon.

I'm sorry, it's not me who have given that goal, and I've not commented on the value itself either.

 

[Gorbles]

55% just isn’t a meaningful difference for a game that’s sported scores in the 47% range. 55% doesn’t even get it out of the “gray zone” on Steam. If I was a studio director and my team’s goal was 55% success, I’d probably need to get a new team or I’d find myself out of a job very soon.

Again, you keep misinterpreting or misunderstanding "a threshold for CFC posters to decide on what counts as positive momentum" for some kind of Firaxis-mandated studio goal. It isn't a studio goal. We're not discussing the idea of it being a studio goal, or even it staying at 55%.

 

[Siddorm]

Why? What are those numbers are based on?

Nothing. I am just floating this to see if there is any interest.

 

[stealth_nsk]

If we talk about thresholds, the barrier between "mixed" and "mostly positive" is at 70% (if my knowledge is actual). Is it realistic to expect Civ7 to hit that threshold with the patch? I think not. There are still many problems in the game and many new buyers (or new reviewers as you could leave review much later after purchase) still come with previous civ experience, which often leads to negative comparisons (without going into debates of whether it's objective, nearly all negative reviews look at Civ7 in comparison with previous games). And if the recent reviews will not leave "mixed" zone, generally there's nothing really interesting for the company, because without reaching this threshold, the effect of reviews on sales will not change.

So, if we don't look from company standpoint, we could only look from our speculations standpoint and we don't need any threshold to speculate on. We could discuss any change regardless of its scale.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

That's now a 3-week period over 50% (310 positive, 307 negative, 617 total, 50.2%) for the first time. September 9th to September 29th.

As well as back-to-back days over mostly positive (70%) for the first time including the best reviewed day so far (29 positive, 8 negative, 37 total, 78.4%).

Source: SteamDB.

 

[Kumbao]

It shouldnt be surprising that reviews go up. First, the patches improved the game a lot. A lot of complains that people who enjoyed the core concept had are gone now. And second, those who buy the game now make a much more informed decision. At the beginning there were a lot of users who were sceptical when it came to the new core concept but wanted to give Firaxis the benefit of the doubt. Turned out that they really didnt like it. This is mostly gone now. Those who buy the game now know about all those mechanics. Maybe they even watched some streams and know exactly what they buy. So I expect the reviews to go up more and more.

However, I doubt that it will ever reach the positive zone. The changes were too drastic and it burned a lot of good will from the community with its aggressive moneytization. But I really think that we will see it in the 60s rather sooner then later.

 

[tman2000]

That's now a 3-week period over 50% (310 positive, 307 negative, 617 total, 50.2%) for the first time. September 9th to September 29th.

As well as back-to-back days over mostly positive (70%) for the first time including the best reviewed day so far (29 positive, 8 negative, 37 total, 78.4%).

Source: SteamDB.

Okay, in all seriousness, who is just now buying the game and reviewing it who hadn't already done so? That's really the only relevant question here.
Adjust for population size and relationship to previews reviewers, also potential customers.

 

[Kwami]

Okay, in all seriousness, who is just now buying the game and reviewing it who hadn't already done so? That's really the only relevant question here.
Adjust for population size and relationship to previews reviewers, also potential customers.

Well, there are about 800 reviews on Steam in the last month, so someone out there is still writing reviews.

 

[Gorbles]

Okay, in all seriousness, who is just now buying the game and reviewing it who hadn't already done so? That's really the only relevant question here.
Adjust for population size and relationship to previews reviewers, also potential customers.

Would you be asking this question if the reviews weren't improving? Because I don't think you have done at any other point. So I guess the relevant question is: why are you asking this now?

 

[Kev1916]

It shouldnt be surprising that reviews go up. First, the patches improved the game a lot. A lot of complains that people who enjoyed the core concept had are gone now. And second, those who buy the game now make a much more informed decision. At the beginning there were a lot of users who were sceptical when it came to the new core concept but wanted to give Firaxis the benefit of the doubt. Turned out that they really didnt like it. This is mostly gone now. Those who buy the game now know about all those mechanics. Maybe they even watched some streams and know exactly what they buy. So I expect the reviews to go up more and more.

However, I doubt that it will ever reach the positive zone. The changes were too drastic and it burned a lot of good will from the community with its aggressive moneytization. But I really think that we will see it in the 60s rather sooner then later.

Fair points , thou I seriously doubt reviews will tick , with such small numbers (what 100+ a week) , & still over or on the bar negative ( 54% negative ) - to a 60% positive anytime soon.

 

[aieeegrunt]

It will take a lot of reviews to reverse the trend

 

[queenpea]

It will take a lot of reviews to reverse the trend

Just curious if you could be a little more specific by what you mean when you say "trend"?

 

[aieeegrunt]

Just curious if you could be a little more specific by what you mean when you say "trend"?

Maybe “trend” is the wrong term, I was referring to the overall average score of reviews being negative