Analytics should not drive the direction of the game...

[Astralporing.1957]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:Do you actually think the Devs are going to remove maps/content after the Living World Season 1 outcry?

Unlikely, no matter how much it is played, or not played.

What they should have done (but probably won't) is not to remove the LS3/4 maps. It's to remove the assumption they had that those maps cannot be referenced by practically anything outside of their own LS chapters. It is exactly what killed those maps.I mean, removing that assumption now will not help those maps all that much (because it is baked in into the very map design, to the point where removing it would likely mean redesigning the maps whole), but returning there, adding new stuff etc might breathe just a little bit of new life into them.

Too bad the current LS maps still seem to follow that design. They may be not as self-contained within a single episode, but they are still definitely self-contained within the season. And while some of them might be shared between episodes, they are still designed as completely independent ecosystems, not a part of a greater world (the map-specific masteries are the worst, but not the only offender here).

[maddoctor.2738]

@"FrizzFreston.5290" said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In GW2, not everything is repeatable, and some things are more rewarding when repeated and thus more alive. This does not in any way mean that "dead content" is less favourable necessarily, but instead just lacks replayability.

True. Content that can be replayed will have a lot more players running it, thus inflating their statistics.

Like living story for example. I bet lots of people mostly play through it once or twice. Andonce played through, how many do return to it? I doubt that many. Yet Arenanet has been expanding on it and spend loads of resources on something that essentially always will be dead content at some point.

Yes players don't usually repeat the living story 100 times. But this begs the question: The fact that players finish the story mean it's enjoyable? Is story completion a good enough metric to show enjoyment? Can it be that players might simply finish the latest story because it's the next part, like watching that bad episode in the middle of a series, just so you don't lose track of what's going on. And then go to episodes you actually enjoy. In that case the "bad episodes" will also be watched a lot, even if they are bad. What I'm getting at, and what I initially said, is that enjoyment cannot be found in data/analytics, only if you ask the players.

[Etria.3642]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"FrizzFreston.5290" said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In GW2, not everything is repeatable, and some things are more rewarding when repeated and thus more alive. This does not in any way mean that "dead content" is less favourable necessarily, but instead just lacks replayability.

True. Content that can be replayed will have a lot more players running it, thus inflating their statistics.

Like living story for example. I bet lots of people mostly play through it once or twice. Andonce played through, how many do return to it? I doubt that many. Yet Arenanet has been expanding on it and spend loads of resources on something that essentially always will be dead content at some point.

Yes players don't usually repeat the living story 100 times. But this begs the question: The fact that players finish the story mean it's enjoyable? Is story completion a good enough metric to show enjoyment? Can it be that players might simply finish the latest story because it's the next part, like watching that bad episode in the middle of a series, just so you don't lose track of what's going on. And then go to episodes you actually enjoy. In that case the "bad episodes" will also be watched a lot, even if they are bad. What I'm getting at, and what I initially said, is that enjoyment cannot be found in data/analytics, only if you ask the players.

So, weird thing. I complete the living stories on my main. He does everything. I have learned my lesson from Season 2 and HOT and that is to only ever do the stories on one singular character because completing them on alts generally counts for nothing for achievements.

This means that one has done them all as many times as it takes for the achievements, while the others have done few, and certainly are not "caught up" enough for me to replay the ones I like. Thanks to the cool books and tomes etc, I can just pop alts into the maps for completion there, or gathering, or whatnot.

Why on earth did they make doing the stories on alts not count toward achievements? To this day I seethe at having completed season 2 on another character and having nothing count. Whenever someone in guild or a friend asks if they can get help with the story, or this or that achievement, I have to log onto that one character, since I haven't yet completed everything 100%, there are still a couple achievements in each I need. I would far far far far far far rather be able to take an alt along to further their story, but no. I would even say this has made the stories even less "fun" and enjoyable for me, even though I do look forward to each new chapter. I just occasionally wish I could complete them on someone who isn't who it must be. And no, I refuse to trudge another alt through the ones I dislike just to catch her up so she can be eligible.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"Etria.3642" said:So, weird thing. I complete the living stories on my main. He does everything. I have learned my lesson from Season 2 and HOT and that is to only ever do the stories on one singular character because completing them on alts generally counts for nothing for achievements.

This means that one has done them all as many times as it takes for the achievements, while the others have done few, and certainly are not "caught up" enough for me to replay the ones I like. Thanks to the cool books and tomes etc, I can just pop alts into the maps for completion there, or gathering, or whatnot.

Why on earth did they make doing the stories on alts not count toward achievements? To this day I seethe at having completed season 2 on another character and having nothing count. Whenever someone in guild or a friend asks if they can get help with the story, or this or that achievement, I have to log onto that one character, since I haven't yet completed everything 100%, there are still a couple achievements in each I need. I would far far far far far far rather be able to take an alt along to further their story, but no. I would even say this has made the stories even less "fun" and enjoyable for me, even though I do look forward to each new chapter. I just occasionally wish I could complete them on someone who isn't who it must be. And no, I refuse to trudge another alt through the ones I dislike just to catch her up so she can be eligible.

A bit off topic here, alts do count for achievements. You need to unlock them first just like with your main, once you play the story on your alt, you'll be able to do achievements on them just fine.

[Linken.6345]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Etria.3642" said:So, weird thing. I complete the living stories on my main. He does everything. I have learned my lesson from Season 2 and HOT and that is to only ever do the stories on one singular character because completing them on alts generally counts for nothing for achievements.

This means that one has done them all as many times as it takes for the achievements, while the others have done few, and certainly are not "caught up" enough for me to replay the ones I like. Thanks to the cool books and tomes etc, I can just pop alts into the maps for completion there, or gathering, or whatnot.

Why on earth did they make doing the stories on alts not count toward achievements? To this day I seethe at having completed season 2 on another character and having nothing count. Whenever someone in guild or a friend asks if they can get help with the story, or this or that achievement, I have to log onto that one character, since I haven't yet completed everything 100%, there are still a couple achievements in each I need. I would far far far far far far rather be able to take an alt along to further their story, but no. I would even say this has made the stories even less "fun" and enjoyable for me, even though I do look forward to each new chapter. I just occasionally wish I could complete them on someone who isn't who it must be. And no, I refuse to trudge another alt through the ones I dislike just to catch her up so she can be eligible.

A bit off topic here, alts do count for achievements. You need to unlock them first just like with your main, once you play the story on your alt, you'll be able to do achievements on them just fine.

Correct but its only season 2 you have to replay episode twice to do achievements 3+ it was changed so even first time through you can get the achivs by playing on any character.

[Etria.3642]

"once you play the story on your alt, you'll be able to do achievements on them"

... I don't want to play through ANY of it twice on the same character. Achievements should be gained as soon as you achieve them.

This may have changed, but like I said, it wasn't for HOT and season 2, I still need achievements for those, playing through anyone else to catch them up is a waste of time currently, therefore I am going to continue doing the story on the main. At least until the achievements are complete. ie, the achievements I have remaining are on the difficult side. It would really grind my gears to achieve them on a toon that it wouldn't qualify on. I would likely throw a tantrum as bad as a two-year-old.

But all of that isn't on-topic. Someone had made the point that just seeing which activities have been completed don't necessarily demonstrate enjoyment of those activities. But if there is no reward, even if something IS enjoyable doesn't mean people will do it. It's a trade off. I can do this meta which is so-so for enjoyment(Casino coins) and gain a for sure amalgamated, 3 rares and a lottery chance at a cool infusion OR I can do Wing 4 with friends. I have already done wing 4 this week, so the rewards are extremely low, but it's with friends. Chances are I'll do the casino coins though and just stay in voice with them unless they can't find a fill.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In limited amounts, by observing what players are doing and under which conditions, how popular something is, taking into account what the rewards are, how old the content is, how long people take breaks.

Ofcourse, it will be more based on statistical guesses without actually knowing that every single player is enjoying themselves, but broad lines are definitely visible through data alone.

Ofcourse, paying attention to forums reddit facebook etc is also hugely important.

[Captain Kuro.8937]

Based on analytics , a person who does : 1x raid per week , 4x daily Fractals ,3x fast daily achievements (5 min job - 2 gold)and then moves any other mode he loves (or farm spots) , In my eyes is a ''balanced player'' .

Now the question is :
Why people , can't/won't do 1x Raid per week , so we can justify the faster releases of the Raids ?Only once per week , is needed . And preferably 8.000-10.000 people .Its the company job to split the gold rewards in half and put a 3 day reset , rather than a weekly , increasing participation

[Etria.3642]

@Captain Kuro.8937 said:Based on analytics , a person who does : 1x raid per week , 4x daily Fractals ,3x fast daily achievements (5 min job - 2 gold)and then moves any other mode he loves (or farm spots) , In my eyes is a ''balanced player'' .

Now the question is :

Why people , can't/won't do 1x Raid per week , so we can justify the faster releases of the Raids ?Only once per week , is needed . And preferably 8.000-10.000 people .Its the company job to split the gold rewards in half and put a 3 day reset , rather than a weekly , increasing participation

Part of it is the misinformation out there about raids. Folks believe they have to do them all in one go, that they have to parse to snowcrows numbers, that they can't play a class they are comfortable on, that raiders are going to make them feel inferior, or....or that raids just aren't a big enough reward in the time management thing, and they would just simply rather do something else that to them is more reward for their time and enjoyment. Perhaps a mix of both.

[maddoctor.2738]

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In limited amounts, by observing what players are doing and under which conditions, how popular something is, taking into account what the rewards are, how old the content is, how long people take breaks.

Ofcourse, it will be more based on statistical guesses without actually knowing that every single player is enjoying themselves, but broad lines are definitely visible through data alone.

Ofcourse, paying attention to forums reddit facebook etc is also hugely important.

Paying attention to community reactions is indeed a much better way to gauge enjoyment. As for analytics data, I liked the story of Daybreak and the visit to the First City, meanwhile I didn't really like the story of Long Live the Lich. I played both an equal amount of times though, both to continue the story on multiple characters and to complete some achievements that were better suited for one character build than another. As far as in-game data is concerned, Anet would think that I enjoyed both the same, because I played them the same amount of times. I'm not sure what kind of observational data would show my preference of one over the other. But as I said I might be missing something or I simply can't think of an actual metric that would show that I liked one and disliked the other.

Outside my own forums posts on the subject of course.

[Bladestrom.6425]

If you read the OP. Post again, it has nothing to do with analytics, its actually the age old argument that was started by raiders at wow wotlk - 'I want raids to be exclusive. Get good if you want raids' . It was and is a selfish viewpoint. Non raiders (vast majority of the player base). Wanted to raid, but not that STYLE of raiding, I. E difficulty was not the prerequisite for pleasurable gameplay. Blizzard recognised this and created raid content for the masses. I was a hardcore raider back then, I hated the idea that nax was 'trivialised' however I eventually realised I was wrong as the game flourished and more importantly everyone had access to new content. Normal raiders had a dragon, I had an undead icy dragon win win.

[Astralporing.1957]

@"Captain Kuro.8937" said:Based on analytics , a person who does : 1x raid per week , 4x daily Fractals ,3x fast daily achievements (5 min job - 2 gold)and then moves any other mode he loves (or farm spots) , In my eyes is a ''balanced player'' .

Now the question is :

Why people , can't/won't do 1x Raid per week , so we can justify the faster releases of the Raids ?Only once per week , is needed . And preferably 8.000-10.000 people .Its the company job to split the gold rewards in half and put a 3 day reset , rather than a weekly , increasing participationWhat makes you think that people that didn't want to do raids 1/x week would want to do it 2/week?

Also, think harder about the question you asked. Why people don't want to do raids even once per week?

Remember also, that the answer to the "problem" of why players don't do a specific content is never to change the players. It's always to change the content.

[Bladestrom.6425]

'Remember also, that the answer to the "problem" of why players don't do a specific content is never to change the players. It's always to change the content'

Absolutely hit the nail on the head

[Psientist.6437]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

When someone applies themselves to a task, we need to assume that they have done some level of mindful calculation and have determined that they want to do the task. Often, watching someone will give a much more accurate picture of someone's mind then asking them. People lie or lack self awareness. In the video linked early in this thread, a WoW developer states that a 25ish% increase in gear stats is optimal. The gear treadmill makes their raids more popular because many find pleasure in the gear treadmill. Many people find pleasure in min maxing. Many people even enjoy farming or grinding. Honestly, I think some of the resistance to the strength of analytics is because it shows us what players really want. Or more accurately, it shows us our reptilian brain at work.

We are discussing the principle of revealed preference that holds that people spend their resources on things they want and that they employ a mindful approach to self interest. This principle can break down or deliver cruel results. Does someone who spends their resources on their opioid addiction practice a mindful approach to self interest? If the supply of a resource is made too complicated, can someone practice mindful self interest? Imo, there are many examples of the studio selling into our less than rational lizard brain, but I also think what many people call fun is that feeling when the lizard brain takes over and starts pumping happy chemicals. Revealed preference isn't black and white but the studio can't begin to respect their players without employing it.

[Psientist.6437]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In limited amounts, by observing what players are doing and under which conditions, how popular something is, taking into account what the rewards are, how old the content is, how long people take breaks.

Ofcourse, it will be more based on statistical guesses without actually knowing that every single player is enjoying themselves, but broad lines are definitely visible through data alone.

Ofcourse, paying attention to forums reddit facebook etc is also hugely important.

Paying attention to community reactions is indeed a much better way to gauge enjoyment. As for analytics data, I liked the story of Daybreak and the visit to the First City, meanwhile I didn't really like the story of Long Live the Lich. I played both an equal amount of times though, both to continue the story on multiple characters and to complete some achievements that were better suited for one character build than another. As far as in-game data is concerned, Anet would think that I enjoyed both the same, because I played them the same amount of times. I'm not sure what kind of observational data would show my preference of one over the other. But as I said I might be missing something or I simply can't think of an actual metric that would show that I liked one and disliked the other.

Outside my own forums posts on the subject of course.

If you played both equally, it would be hard for analytics to determine which story you liked more. However, since the story will always deliver episodes that you like more than others it isn't terribly important which story episode you liked more. A story will always have to present widely different episodes that will clash with someone's taste. That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't. We all have tells. I am sure that, in aggregate, more players complete achievements for episodes they like. As well, doing all achievements for a story you don't like displays you care enough about achievements.

edit: For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Psientist.6437

That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

[maddoctor.2738]

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:If you read the OP. Post again, it has nothing to do with analytics, its actually the age old argument that was started by raiders at wow wotlk - 'I want raids to be exclusive. Get good if you want raids' . It was and is a selfish viewpoint. Non raiders (vast majority of the player base). Wanted to raid, but not that STYLE of raiding, I. E difficulty was not the prerequisite for pleasurable gameplay. Blizzard recognised this and created raid content for the masses. I was a hardcore raider back then, I hated the idea that nax was 'trivialised' however I eventually realised I was wrong as the game flourished and more importantly everyone had access to new content. Normal raiders had a dragon, I had an undead icy dragon win win.

I didn't respond to the OP, I responded to this:

@"Rasimir.6239" said:The numbers are able to show what people enjoy, as well as what people see rewarding.Nothing really to do about Raids. But I guess it was my mistake to respond to a comment on a thread that includes the word "Raids" in the OP, as everyone that responded to me since then was avoiding the argument at hand and simply told me that "I play this and that because I like it". Which didn't really answer my initial argument the least bit.

I'm still waiting for someone to show me what those numbers that show player enjoyment are.

[Psientist.6437]

@maddoctor.2738 said:@Psientist.6437

That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

Facebook. I am not going to argue the position that analytics can achieve perfect resolution of mindfulness. I am not going to argue with someone who claims there aren't countless examples of successful analysis of behavior.

If the average player is engaged or stimulated with the story they are more likely to sit down and play. Thereby completing achievements faster. I hope you are not taking positions just for the sake of arguing.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Psientist.6437 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:@Psientist.6437

That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

Facebook. I am not going to argue the position that analytics can achieve perfect resolution of mindfulness. I am not going to argue with someone who claims there aren't countless examples of successful analysis of behavior.

If the average player is engaged or stimulated with the story they are more likely to sit down and play. Thereby completing achievements faster. I hope you are not taking positions just for the sake of arguing.

So finishing achievements faster means you like content more. I suppose the not finishing them quickly means you didn't like it? That's a ridiculous metric and i think you know it. Not to mention not all achievements are actually quick to complete in the first place. I wonder if all those that posted above claiming they play for fun if they agree that finishing achievements quickly means they enjoyed it

[Bladestrom.6425]

@Psientist.6437 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:@Psientist.6437

That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

Facebook. I am not going to argue the position that analytics can achieve perfect resolution of mindfulness. I am not going to argue with someone who claims there aren't countless examples of successful analysis of behavior.

If the average player is engaged or stimulated with the story they are more likely to sit down and play. Thereby completing achievements faster. I hope you are not taking positions just for the sake of arguing.

Agree, analytics is simply the collation of behavioural staistics, its not a magic bullet but it will indicate trends, such as the popularity of an activity.or replability of an activity.or how long a player plays an activity before they do something else etc etc.

For example If 9 out of ten players are not attracted to an activity then thats objective data that is worthy of consideration

[kharmin.7683]

People seem to be arguing that Anet only uses one, specific set of data for their analytics. I'm sure that they gather a lot more than they could possibly use.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"vesica tempestas.1563" said:Agree, analytics is simply the collation of behavioural staistics, its not a magic bullet but it will indicate trends, such as the popularity of an activity.or replability of an activity.or how long a player plays an activity before they do something else etc etc.

Once again you missed the whole argument there, it was never about analytics showing popularity but rather about analytics showing enjoyment. I even asked a very specific question about how analytics could show the difference in enjoyment between two separate story episodes and all I got was "if you do the achievements quickly it means you liked it". So instead of going off argument, to prove a non-existent point, why don't you respond instead to whether you agree finishing achievements quickly means you thoroughly enjoyed content or not.

edit

For example If 9 out of ten players are not attracted to an activity then thats objective data that is worthy of consideration

If 9 out 10 players are attracted to an activity, does it mean that activity is the most "enjoyable" one? If only 1 out 10 likes another activity, does it mean it's not an enjoyable one? To stay on the argument you responded to, does popularity equal enjoyment according to you?

@kharmin.7683 said:People seem to be arguing that Anet only uses one, specific set of data for their analytics. I'm sure that they gather a lot more than they could possibly use.

You said above:

@kharmin.7683 said:I often visit S3 maps because of the lower population on them. It has nothing to do with the rewards or meta. It can be more immersive to me to explore without a fully-populated map.

So to stay a bit on topic, you visit S3 maps when they have lower population on them because you find it more immersive. When do you finish your story achievements though? After the population is lowered? Or you go there when the episode is released? Do you think that finishing achievements quickly means you enjoyed that story episode more than another?

[FrizzFreston.5290]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Psientist.6437 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:@Psientist.6437

That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

Facebook. I am not going to argue the position that analytics can achieve perfect resolution of mindfulness. I am not going to argue with someone who claims there aren't countless examples of successful analysis of behavior.

If the average player is engaged or stimulated with the story they are more likely to sit down and play. Thereby completing achievements faster. I hope you are not taking positions just for the sake of arguing.

So finishing achievements faster means you like content more. I suppose the not finishing them quickly means you didn't like it? That's a ridiculous metric and i think you know it. Not to mention not all achievements are actually quick to complete in the first place. I wonder if all those that posted above claiming they play for fun if they agree that finishing achievements quickly means they enjoyed it

Dude, everything in statistical data is a bellcurve, I'm sure you know. Pointing out the edge cases where something isnt true doesnt disprove it.

Hypothetically speaking, there will be more players that completed it fast than that completed it slow.

Ofcourse there is always those players that do complete it slow, but, again hypothetically speaking, they would be like 5-10% or something.

Ofcourse I'm just making those numbers up, ideally it would be compared with other datasets, the numbers could be somewhere else entirely and depend on so many variables which can also be filtered and sorted.

But the point is that data can be taken as a meassure of overall enjoyment. But its more complex than high number x means high enjoyment. And maybe thats why you dont seem to get it and we fail to provide meaningful examples.

[maddoctor.2738]

@"FrizzFreston.5290" said:Hypothetically speaking, there will be more players that completed it fast than that completed it slow.

Which brings the other question, what is fast and what is slow? A player rushing through the episode, ignoring all dialogue will count as someone that "enjoyed" it, while a player that didn't go to play the story the moment it was available because he was role playing in LA will appear as "not enjoying it". I guess I didn't like Long Live the Lich story at all, because to this day I haven't finished the Dexterous Dodger achievement, or is it only very specific achievements that "count" for enjoyment?

But the point is that data can be taken as a meassure of overall enjoyment. But its more complex than high number x means high enjoyment. And maybe thats why you dont seem to get it and we fail to provide meaningful examples.

Maybe. I still believe the only way to get some "enjoyment analytics" is by either polling the community directly, forum posts or responses on social media and it's not something that can be done by statistics gathered in-game. Those can show popularity, but popularity and enjoyment can be very very different.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"FrizzFreston.5290" said:Hypothetically speaking, there will be more players that completed it fast than that completed it slow.

Which brings the other question, what is fast and what is slow? A player rushing through the episode, ignoring all dialogue will count as someone that "enjoyed" it, while a player that didn't go to play the story the moment it was available because he was role playing in LA will appear as "not enjoying it". I guess I didn't like Long Live the Lich story at all, because to this day I haven't finished the Dexterous Dodger achievement, or is it only very specific achievements that "count" for enjoyment?

Thats all the right questions you should be asking while analyzing the data.

But the point is that data can be taken as a meassure of overall enjoyment. But its more complex than high number x means high enjoyment. And maybe thats why you dont seem to get it and we fail to provide meaningful examples.

Maybe. I still believe the only way to get some "enjoyment analytics" is by either polling the community directly, forum posts or responses on social media and it's not something that can be done by statistics gathered in-game. Those can show popularity, but popularity and enjoyment can be very very different.

I believe its both. Polls forum social media are also just an abstract of the more passionate people taking time to share their experience and don't account for the majority that doesn't. If looking at only either or the other, you ignore valuable information. Its necessary to social data s with ingame statistics to see if they match up with eachother.