Protecting your "PRECIOUS" economy ain't working so give up and fix desync instead

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

Goetzjam:
That's hilarious. Ultimate ad hominem right there, because when you asked for evidence, you didn't like what was given. Further, why would my in-game activities be any business of yours? Hint: They're not. You only wanted to find that information in an attempt to commit another ad hominem. Stick to the argument, if you can. By the way, your arguments ARE childish. It is you who is ignorant.

For everyone else:
I don't care if you are a Steam user or not, but those two sets of data show that for any given day, you can expect at least 6k players and at most 70k players for the peak of any given day. But what Steam data does show is the average peak values over time, and how those have deteriorated over the last year. It doesn't matter if Steam users make up 1/2 or 1/10 of the player base, the ratios will be consistent. It means that whatever % of players Steam shows the game losing over time is roughly the same % of users the game as a whole is losing.

Furthermore, for the same reason that people claim you can't trust Steam numbers (not knowing how much of the player base does use Steam), you can't claim that Steam users are a minority. Steam played a large role in this game's growth because of accessibility and features, as well as just "getting the name out there."

A range 6k-70k out of 3.7m is very small indeed, but the game is losing players, so you probably won't see that 70k again until Act 4 comes out. Then we'll see if/how the numbers change. The game always spikes when a new season comes out, and I would bet lots of players return to see what the new content has to offer. This is a great move by GGG, but I think it will struggle to retain players in the long term for the same reason it is in the state it is now... desync.

And Xav:
While I understand what you are saying about concurrent players vs active players, daily concurrent players is the only metric we have for player activity because of how averages work. Let's say you don't play for 2 or 3 days at a time, but are otherwise active as a player. Someone else is likely doing the same thing, but with a different set of days than you. Thus, your inactivity is averaged out by that other person's activity. I think you can see how it works. =D

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

If it didn't hurt the game population and in-game experience so much, I would totally agree with you.

"

Vincendra wrote:

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

If it didn't hurt the game population and in-game experience so much, I would totally agree with you.

Source?

"

Vincendra wrote:

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

If it didn't hurt the game population and in-game experience so much, I would totally agree with you.

Source?

"

goetzjam wrote:

Yes people make claims like PoE is constantly losing players from Desync, you have have all the topics you want with all of the conversations going back and forth, but that is just people posting back to others that are trying to make a point.

Some of those videos you listed are from 2 YEARS ago, how is that really that relevant to the discussion at hand, specifically trusting the client because the "economy doesn't matter"

No one is disagreeing desync is an issue, people are disagreeing on the impact it has on the game. Saying XXX players left from desync when it can be a number of reasons is asinine. They might of left because of not finding good loot, might have left because QoL features, might have left because any number of reasons other then desync.

Using steam metrics as a comparison as PoE as a whole is asinine, so unless you have access to data that we don't but GGG does you can't come up with a valid source.