Forum Posting Guidelines: ALL Members Must Read!

[browinie]

Well. I'm officially posting here more often if this is the case. I hate the fact that people always source Vgcharts, and rumours as reliable and occurable information, that's always misleading. It's pathetic, despite how often you remind them it's false, they just don't want to hear about it.

[TheTenth]

I'm 100% Ok with VGchatz's un-relialability, they had that in their FAQs about how they get thier numbers :
"How VG Chartz comes up with its figures :Sales figures are determined through two important methods
Data Sampling - VG Chartz gathers random data from a sample of the total number of retailers.
Shipment information - VG Chartz has contacts with publishers who give their best estimates on number of products shipped.
Because the number of retailers selling videogames is quite large, it is possible to attain statistically valid results from a small sample.
It then becomes a matter of working backwards by having:
The approximate number of retailers.
Historical sales figures.
Data from sales tracking agencies as reference points in accuracy."

These words : random, approximate, sample ... seem so reliable!

"There are obvious limiting factors as well - few games have above a 40% attach rate, a game will never sell more than the console user base, publishers do not ship significantly more or less than they expect to be sold" - anybody has any idea what that means?


Their global explanation is they take sales numbers from "some" retailers and "some" game developers, and they multiply that by a factor ... really really reliable.
And guess what? the explanations have changed some months later and is now nowhere to be found.

On the "ban" thing, sadly some people could use VGchartz numbers out of good faith, as many people really believe they're right. I think erasing the problematic thread would be a better choice.

[xtop]

i'm curious are there example threads you could show us so we can get an idea on what you're talking about?

i post quite a few rumor threads and am now curious if i've posted anything questionable lately

[androvsky]

Originally Posted by TheTenth

On the "ban" thing, sadly some people could use VGchartz numbers out of good faith, as many people really believe they're right. I think erasing the problematic thread would be a better choice.

How do people learn if VGChartz threads simply disappear? Banning's the best way to teach the posters that VGChartz is not welcome here, plus it leaves the thread dangling for other people to notice and remember not to link them. Eventually, hopefully, people will stop believing in VGChartz. Besides, it's only a week.

[quexos]

Better not posting any figures at all, it's the only safe way I guess.
In the end who cares for figures. I mean you have your PS3 or your Wii or whatever to use it and enjoy it, what do we care that a trillion others have it or that you are the only one to own the machine ?

The only problem is the more rules the less freedom. Or from a practical point of view, the harder it becomes to post anything without breaking some rule somewhere. I mean this in general, not to this section particularly.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by TheTenth

I'm 100% Ok with VGchatz's un-relialability, they had that in their FAQs about how they get thier numbers :
"How VG Chartz comes up with its figures :Sales figures are determined through two important methods
Data Sampling - VG Chartz gathers random data from a sample of the total number of retailers.
Shipment information - VG Chartz has contacts with publishers who give their best estimates on number of products shipped.
Because the number of retailers selling videogames is quite large, it is possible to attain statistically valid results from a small sample.
It then becomes a matter of working backwards by having:
The approximate number of retailers.
Historical sales figures.
Data from sales tracking agencies as reference points in accuracy."

These words : random, approximate, sample ... seem so reliable!

"There are obvious limiting factors as well - few games have above a 40% attach rate, a game will never sell more than the console user base, publishers do not ship significantly more or less than they expect to be sold" - anybody has any idea what that means?


Their global explanation is they take sales numbers from "some" retailers and "some" game developers, and they multiply that by a factor ... really really reliable.
And guess what? the explanations have changed some months later and is now nowhere to be found.

On the "ban" thing, sadly some people could use VGchartz numbers out of good faith, as many people really believe they're right. I think erasing the problematic thread would be a better choice.

VGshitz make up their figures or they steal them from legitimate sources. I remember when VGchartz was spelled with an s instead of a z, and the site was basically a repository of legitimate sales data and labelled as such. Then they took the labels and notices away and tried to pass the data off as their own so NPD/Enterbrain/GfK threatened to sue them for copyright breaches and so on, so now they use their own figures. No one knows where the site magically obtained sources (apparently the site owner has a brother-in-law who is a RM at a games retailer or somesuch, but that isn't exactly concrete, just what the word is) and no one knows what their formulas are and no one knows how much of the market they actually track.

We know that GfK track 90-95% of the EU market and 70% of the rest of PAL regions, NPD track 60% of the NA market and M-C get ~ 40,000 (I think) retail reports which they then with use weekly shipment data from publishers to calculate their figures for Japan.

What does VGC get, 0.001% of the US market, 0.000001%, who knows? I don't and that's why they are banned on this forum along with the even more laughable nexgenwars (thanks Toxa!).

[quexos]

I'm having a thought: perhaps if "legitimate" sources for figures were more transparent maybe people wouldn't feel the need to check VGChartz and the likes.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by quexos

I'm having a thought: perhaps if "legitimate" sources for figures were more transparent maybe people wouldn't feel the need to check VGChartz and the likes.

They used to be. VGChartz started stealing and adjusting their own "data" to match so NPD and GfK stopped being nice and we are where we are.

If you don't believe me take a look at any GAF NPD thread from a couple of years back, people used to request sales for a specific game and more often than not NPD didn't mind.

Just to show you how bad VGC are, NPD just released to Gamespot that Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts sol 140k LTD in NA, VGC had it at ~ 400k LTD in that region and more for PAL (where I know from my old GfK reports it has sold pretty poorly, no where near 400k), but magically since the NPD figure came out the game sales have been magically adjusted downwards in both regions to reflect the real data.

[quexos]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

They used to be. VGChartz started stealing and adjusting their own "data" to match so NPD and GfK stopped being nice and we are where we are.

If you don't believe me take a look at any GAF NPD thread from a couple of years back, people used to request sales for a specific game and more often than not NPD didn't mind.

Just to show you how bad VGC are, NPD just released to Gamespot that Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts sol 140k LTD in NA, VGC had it at ~ 400k LTD in that region and more for PAL (where I know from my old GfK reports it has sold pretty poorly, no where near 400k), but magically since the NPD figure came out the game sales have been magically adjusted downwards in both regions to reflect the real data.

So you are saying the only reason we don't have official figures anymore is cause VGC uses those figures in their site ? But then by the same token, CNN.com or the likes should stop bringing news cause out of the billions of websites I'm sure someone somewhere pumps the info and puts it in their website.

What I'm trying to say is once data is publicly released it is bound to be taken elsewhere. If they feel VGC is stealing the data, let them sue VGC. But blocking this info seems mean. It's not even a prejudice to their business cause we all know the official sources sell much more detailed data to companies that are interested a few days before the data hits the public domain. So the figures that come public have no business value at the time it is made public. In other words it's only a matter of pride from the official sources. Not sure that justifies depriving the public from the info.

Quite the contrary because if for instance, J6P wants to know how many PS3's have been sold worldwide so far, what choice does he have with what the official sources are doing ? only one: go to VGC where it will say 20 million so far, and you might argue it is a wrong figure and you may be right but with no other figures out there, J6P will continue to see VGC by lack of proper info out there. Am I making sense ?

[jw]

fight the system, it wont get you nowhere

[Maximus]

You are making sense. The problem with that is CNN don't make money selling data to companies for thousands of dollars a month, they make it by advertising. NPD don't have a website (to clarify, not a consumer oriented one) or any real web presence, they are a data and market analysis company. It is easier for them to withhold the information from the public (and give full reports only to the fee paying clients) and make sure no website undercuts their business.

NPD is after all a business out to make money. My company pay a lot (I'm not supposed to say how much, but it is a lot and it is a monthly fee) of money for NPD subscription, but you can bet the accounting department would have said "look there's this website with a funny name that gets all of the NPD figures or near as damn it, so we are cancelling the subscription" if NPD kept playing nice.

Why do it, curry favour with the public and fanboys? That's not going to pay the bills/investors...

[TheTenth]

Originally Posted by quexos

I'm having a thought: perhaps if "legitimate" sources for figures were more transparent maybe people wouldn't feel the need to check VGChartz and the likes.

true that, with the limitation that Microcrap could pay to cheat on the numbers

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by xtop

i'm curious are there example threads you could show us so we can get an idea on what you're talking about?

i post quite a few rumor threads and am now curious if i've posted anything questionable lately

As long as you keep it credible it's not a problem. I haven't really had to edit many of your threads xtop, I wouldn't worry if I were you!

[AranhaHunter]

Good list for the banned sites I must say.

[JR8300]

Wow...they’re really taking themselves a bit to seriously...don’t you think

[pmac]

Maxpowers1987:

Good for you. While a warning is good, you still have the ability to delete posts so these disreputable sites. They do not deserve the hits or revenue just because they are creative with numbers. I am going to guess that you can see what sort of hits these fake stat sites generate to them, when the users link to the source. It musta been high to take this step.

[hardcore_canadian]

Doesn't this seem a bit oppressive? Taking ourselves a bit to seriously no?

[Stephie_is_a_dork]

I don't see why anyone would be upset by this. Hell, if you want fake numbers, I'll make some up for you!

[Blu-Ron]

Originally Posted by JR8300

Wow...they’re really taking themselves a bit to seriously...don’t you think

Yaz hit the nail right on the head!

[j_rocca42]

hmmm... seems understandible, though a bit harsh...