{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/13/2019 7:54:41 AM
34
If the studio removed cores from infusion it wouldn't cost you all a single player.
Adding cores to Infusion cost the studio tens of thousands of players.
It's pretty unbelievable that as obvious as the studio response should have been to the fallout from Infusion, that here we still are with it submarining any positive content that's added to the game.
English
-
hypocrite
-
Just because someone isn’t all or nothing on every issue doesn’t mean they’re a hypocrite. I’m not familiar with every post Sols has made, but for those I am, he seems to parse each issue on its own merits. We’d all be better off in every aspect of life if we did that. I’m also not saying you’re wrong, taking my own advice. But I would say you’re case is only a case with hard evidence. Otherwise, in isolation, you just seem to be name calling.
-
hes also a streamer why should we trust him?
-
I don’t care for streamers, it’s true. But I do let an individual’a actions and words define my estimation of them beyond what I think initially. While I’ll probably never adhere to the streamer paradigm, there are a couple that have my respect as people. In the end, can’t stand against some person or group devaluing what I have to say wholesale while doing the same to them. That would make me a hypocrite.
-
How is he hypocritical?
-
so for example he defends y1 because he said that was when d2 was at a great point when it never was
-
he always backtracks his opinions so he'll defend the game then complain about problems only when people bring it up plus he gets mad whenever I call him out its funny
-
[quote]If the studio removed cores from infusion it wouldn't cost you all a single player.[/quote]You have no way to prove that.
-
You’d have done better to just say “I’d leave.” That would have proved him wrong, Internet Style, without having to debate statistics and polls.
-
True, but I'm not gonna make shit up to prove a point. That's Sol's job lol
-
ROFL. Please, please tell me really believe a single person would stop playing because they didn't need cores to infuse anymore. 😂😂😂😂😂
-
I really believe that you don't know why every single person that plays, plays. Stop making blanket statements about the community.
-
I'm not going to defend sols, he can do that himself. But you come off as a much worse person on the forums.
-
How so?
-
I stand by my comment. Don't like it, don't read it. Your life will go on.
-
-
[quote]ROFL. Please, please tell me really believe a single person would stop playing because they didn't need cores to infuse anymore. 😂😂😂😂😂[/quote]
-
Edited by SouLFeeS: 5/17/2019 4:25:36 AMHe doesn’t have to. So far, numbers indicate that if everyone who wants to keep cores left this game it would only amount to 12% of the [b]current[/b], engaged population. OTOH, if they were to remove cores, the uptick would be 50-60%. That’s a conservative estimate that doesn’t aggregate similar results. If we’re generous and allow that 500k* people are current, real engagements, all things being equal*, the absolute high end cost of removing cores would be 60,000 players, while the conservative estimate gained would be 275,000. That’s a net of 215,000 players, who are happy btw. *That’s 500k PVE players. *Assuming sufficient dissemination of information given normal mediums and no other actions taken by Bungie to significantly impact engagement adversely. EDIT: Apologies to everyone who voted to keep cores. I used the wrong number. It’s actually 12% not 2.5%!
-
[quote]So far, numbers indicate that if everyone who wants to keep cores left this game it would only amount to 2-2.5% of the [b]current[/b], engaged population. OTOH, if they were to remove cores, the uptick would be 50-60%. That’s a conservative estimate that doesn’t aggregate similar results.[/quote]You just did the same thing Sols did. Learn to state your opinion without making shit up & pretending it's fact.
-
[quote]OTOH, if they were to remove cores, the uptick would be 50-60%.[/quote] What metrics analysis did you use to derive this? How can you prove the intent of a human being? I saw the population of the game double recently with the reintroduction if the Outbreak Pulse rifle. But, assuming you’ll get hundreds of thousands of ppl back soley by removing cores is unprovable. Bottom line, you’re making crap up.
-
[quote]Bottom line, you’re making crap up.[/quote]I'm glad someone else gets it.
-
The population didn’t double. It did increase, but doubling would have put PvE near 700k and PvP over 500k. I am not using metrics. I’m using poll results with over 1500 participants, which is way more than what would be considered standard.
-
Where did you come up with 50 to 60% of ppl would return?
-
Edited by SouLFeeS: 5/16/2019 6:52:06 PMIt’s a weighted estimate of the total number of people who want cores removed. The clean number is 65%, but if you add the number that want cores removed AND want more masterwork options, the number goes up to 75%. The other 2.5% are those who want cores to remain. The latter crowd are more active, so I was comfortable using the 2.5%. The former has to be estimated lower since inactive players are harder to reach, even if Bungie announces a change and every streamer and blogger picks up on it, which is very likely on this issue. I then used a baseline engagement number of 500k. This was a little generous, because 1) we don’t know gambit and D1 PvE numbers and 2) engagement has been...erratic since Zero Hour release. Still, PvE engagement got close enough, and 500k is a reasonable benchmark considering we could be over 1 million easily if everyone was happy with the game. If you disagree with any of that, fine, but you should know, I’m trained to poll. I used to do it for national political campaigns. I stand by what I said. EDIT: +/-5 🤓
-
Edited by ScotchEggsRules: 5/18/2019 5:14:04 PMAnd pollsters are famous for being reliable, right? 😏 You can extrapolate any conclusions from a poll, but they are, in my experience, wrong as often as they're right. Source data being the higgest problem. People lie, people hide their true feelings on subjects. That's why using to polls to predict something is as reliable as trusting a total stranger to tell another total stranger the truth, about something close to them.
