362 réponses à ce sujet

[Samtheman63]

Good work

[MikeC99]

Flextt wrote...

Doesn't the focus on BSN allow for Bioware to ignore us even more easily?

 I don't think it's a game breaker - but that's obviously just my opinion. And this is where they posted 'we are listening'. And if Bioware would like to tell me any where else we should look to get the opiniuons of those who don't like the currentr ending, well, I'm listening!!!!

Yes - there's a good chance Bioware won't take any of this into account. But as I said here before, one sure way to ensure nothing happens is to do nothing. Trying and not succeeding is not the same as failure.
cheers
MikeC

[Rothgar49]

Any luck of getting a PDF repost? I'd like to read the whole thing in full

[AlienSpaceBats]

Fantastic work, well-put together document - am reading it now, I hope someone from BioWare reads it or comments on it.

[DazenCobalt17]

Good job!

[MikeC99]

Flextt wrote...

Omg this is beyond my expectations when I filled out the survey! Seriously good job and looking forward to a reaction. Do you consider sending a copy to supporting media?

Yes - working on that. But the man responsible for all this - ofish - is either asleep or involved in something equally frivolous - like working.... selfish so and so....    I'm in Australia ... god don't even know what the relevance of that is now ... except wow - I need some sleep as well!!! Anyway - media - yes indeed. Any ideas?
cheers
MikeC

[MikeC99]

Rothgar49 wrote...

Any luck of getting a PDF repost? I'd like to read the whole thing in full

Link is at top of ofish's origional post, but here is link:

http://www.mediafire...qh4q7nkn1h9v72w

Any thoughts on where we should take this next would be appreciated - also any feedback on report. Manyt hanks
cheers
MikeC

[Trebor1969]

Great work

[win746]

Incredible work and effort put into this, and the least Bioware could do is acknowledge this work.

[Baronesa]

Excellent Job!!!

But now I have a question..

Who the heck are the other 2 Chileans O_O ???

[MikeC99]

Baronesa wrote...

Excellent Job!!!

But now I have a question..

Who the heck are the other 2 Chileans O_O ???

LOL!!!! I have another question - what country do the 319 'Others' come from ... Dark Space???

BTW - I'm 1/16th Chilean. Think merchant vessel. Australian Port. Shore leave........ but it was a looooonnnnggg time ago. Gee - could we be related????

[Unfallen_Satan]

MikeC99 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

This is a lot of hard work, so kudos! However, I have two concerns: one regarding the validity of the results and one regarding the relevance of the study...

I was going to cut out just the most relevant points but decided to leave the whole quote so as not to risk putting things out of context.

First off - sincere thanks for reading and taking the time to seriously consider the report.

Quick background on me - not a professional statistician or a student. Just done a lot of stats for research over many years. So my first acknowledgement is: believe me I don't know far more than I do know! So  I try to stick to the simpler analyses.

OK - your points as I understand them:

Peer review. Yes, and no. Peer review is required for scientific publication, and should be undertaken for published work. As this is neither, there is no requirement for peer review. Also, the purpose of the statistics is mainly to inform understanding - this is not a technical paper or scientific endeavour, but an attempt to make sense of a broad ranging debate about what poeple don't like about the ME3 ending.

Demonstration of committment and understanding. Fair comment - IF the report was solely relying on the actual statistics to deliver all the information. Statistics are tools - that's all they can ever be. Tools don't build things - people do. The stats are in the report to try to provide some transparency, rigour and objectivity. But they are tools to do this. The demonstration of committment and understanding comes from the fact that folks took time out to actually so the survey. Understanding is from the fact that the vast majority of them chose to select all options for each question. Your point is valid - these are not things that are derived from the statistics - I totally agree. But as I said this is a report based on a survey that uses statistics to inform the understanding of the results.

Validity of the survey as regards the wider ME community. Hmmm - this is a misconception as to the purpose of the survey and report. To quote: "The purpose of this poll was to examine the issues people had with the ending of Mass Effect 3...".  The statistical population the sample relates to is not the 1,3 million ME users, but specifically those who don't like the ending. As also stated in the report "The objective is not to balance dissatisfied with satisfied ... the purpose is to clarify why people are dissatisfied".  Also we tried to be clear that the purpose was to at least attempt a general consensus of the reasons why people didn't like the ending - not to poll yet again if they liked the ending.  The notion of random sampling gets over used and abused I'm afraid. Sampling does not have to be random - but if it's not there are severe constraints and caveats on how you can deal with the data. In the end, statistics are used to try and model the reality you are trying to define for the whole population. Any statistical analysis is wrong. Can I repeat that - wrong. Stats can inform you - and inform you very well - and assist greatly in making decisions about things, in determining the nature of things, but they are NOT THE THINGS themselves. Atsome point you extrapolate from the incorrect model to reality. The smaller the sample inrelation to the total population the more risk. It's not more wrong or right - just greater risj that it might be more wrong than you want it to be. The report does not purport to be science. It's what I term a 'soft' report in that it does not have the signifcant constraints required for a fully random, normal distribution based etc etc analysis. Apologies if this wasn't made clear - I did try to insert caveats, and warnings and statements about limitations at every opportunity!

The issue of BSN participants being a biased sample has been raised in these forums before. People misunderstand 'bias'in this sense. What information is there that says BSN users are negative per se? They areinterested parties - absolutely. But if you are undertaking an analysis to determine patterns within this population of ineterested parties, then them being ínterested parties'is not a bias at all - it's just a condition of the population you aresampling.  We did not set out to sample BSN - it just happens that most of the respondents came from BSN.

In summary - in theory all your points are valid, and I sincerely thank you for raising them. In practice, the report is not a technical statistical report. As stated in the report: the 'poll was designed to primarily to help focus and simplify the range of issues'. I'm happy it has succeeded at that.

Hope this answers your questions? It's a bit hard to keep track of things while writing in this confined text box!!!!!!
cheers
MikeC

Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns. However, I am still not completely satisfied on some points.

To start, I disagree with you on the point of peer review, but I was also not 100% clear. I see peer-review as an effective way to test the validity of any scientific or engineering study; I am including statistics because there is a general consensus on the proper methods to gather data, present them, synthesize results, and ultimately draw conclusions. While you are not submitting this study for publication, and therefore certainly not required to go through peer-review, its content and structure and language do resemble a scientific paper. Intended or not, many people will treat it as such. That effect warrants, if not demands, that your study be examined by others educated in statistics to determine whether you are justified in drawing any of the conclusions presented in your paper. I am certainly not expecting you to go through the rigorous peer-review for scientific journals. These are forums, after all. Given a reasonable amount of time, some qualified users may come forward.

Hopefully, the majority of respondents to your survey have the commitment and understanding you say. What are your notions of commitment of understanding in this case? I was hoping for an answer. I find it hard to believe that a long time researcher such as yourself can base such terms on so flimsy an indicator as a 2.5 minute polling time. Statistics does not factor into this issue at all. Statistics provides tools to analyze data. I do not think you have the data on commitment and understanding, but that is mostly a difference of opinion.

It sounds like I am arguing every point now, doesn't it? I confess I dropped the ball on understanding the purpose of your study. I feel the number of possible reasons you provided for not liking the ending was quite exhausive and the spirit of the study commendable when examined in this context. I got side-tracked by the mention of the other BSN poll and your proposal to launch another survey to find possible solutions. I do not think any action is warranted by the results of this study if the respondents to your poll do not represent a significant portion of ME3 player population (significant as defined by anyone who wants to use your results to justify action). My comments on sample validity only apply to that other BSN poll instead of yours. However, my position on peer review of your study even in this context remains unchanged.

I did not understand your comment about "BSN participants being a biased sample." My concern was with the bias in your poll (which isn't a concern now that I understand its true purpose) and the other BSN poll, which you are certainly not obligated to address.

One final point that you did not answer is why you believe the results of your poll warrant an additional poll to discover possible solutions (i.e. actions related to the ending). I see no data regarding whether even the majority of people dissatisfied with the ending want a new one or believe a satisfactory new ending for a reasonable majority of ME3 players is possible.

On the other hand, even for purely discovery purposes on a limited minority, another poll is still good to have.

I am most grateful for your taking the time to address my concerns. I hope your future endeavors on this topic are even more fruitful. Unfortunately, I am not really interested in discussions confined to the dissatisfied player population. Unless new claims are made that the dissatisfied population (sufficiently dissatisfied to demand action beyond the current extended ending DLC) in fact represent a majority of ME3 players or a minority significant enough to warrant BioWare's concern, I would like to leave the debate to the more apropriate circles.

Sincerely,
Isaac

[MikeC99]

OK. Me. Bed. Sleep. Now. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Stay tuned - further things afoot over the next couple of dayssszzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Rothgar49]

MikeC99 wrote...

Rothgar49 wrote...

Any luck of getting a PDF repost? I'd like to read the whole thing in full

Link is at top of ofish's origional post, but here is link:

http://www.mediafire...qh4q7nkn1h9v72w

Any thoughts on where we should take this next would be appreciated - also any feedback on report. Manyt hanks
cheers
MikeC

Thanks, did see that, but when i try to use it, it just seems to hang and nothing happens.

[Biotic_Warlock]

Were the surveys collected online?
If so then i question the reliability of the data.

Despite that this study is very in depth and well executed, so well done OP

[Orumon]

Brilliant survey. hopefully they'll take it into account.

[ofish]

Rothgar49 wrote...

MikeC99 wrote...

Rothgar49 wrote...

Any luck of getting a PDF repost? I'd like to read the whole thing in full

Link is at top of ofish's origional post, but here is link:

http://www.mediafire...qh4q7nkn1h9v72w

Any thoughts on where we should take this next would be appreciated - also any feedback on report. Manyt hanks
cheers
MikeC

Thanks, did see that, but when i try to use it, it just seems to hang and nothing happens.

Open the link in another window, you will then be able to download it by manually clicking "download".  I don't think you can right click and save as.

Modifié par ofish, 19 avril 2012 - 03:25 .

[ImmovableMover]

Might I suggest not having the "Quick summary section" and the "Conclusions" section not having identical information expressed in exactly the same way? Those conclusions need only be stated once in the same manner, Generally end conclusions are used to expand more fully (not bulletpoints) on any previous Summary, rather than simply copy/pasting them.

Modifié par ImmovableMover, 19 avril 2012 - 03:29 .

[Grimwick]

Oh wow this is a very impressive report from what I have read so far. I hope this information will be used and analysed and maybe BW will show some sort of understanding to the concerns highlighted here.

Back to reading!

[ofish]

Biotic_Warlock wrote...

Were the surveys collected online?
If so then i question the reliability of the data.

Despite that this study is very in depth and well executed, so well done OP

The paper details what websites the respondents came from when they arrived at the survey(and the numbers from each of them), what countries the respondents that clicked on the link were from, and how many clicks per day the survey was open for responses.  See Attachment 1, 1.1, 1.2 for the tables.

[Cazychel]

Good and extensive work.

I hope that it reaches Bioware and anyone there acknowledges it. Deserves attention!

[ArchDuck]

Nicely done, very impressive amount of work.

[Beernun]

This is fantastic. Thank you for taking the time and doing this! great job!

[Vigil_N7]

Great job - its a shame the sample size is very small

[ofish]

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

This is a lot of hard work, so kudos! However, I have two concerns: one regarding the validity of the results and one regarding the relevance of the study.

This is from
3. Purpose in the paper...

"The objective
of the poll was not to balance dissatisfied with satisfied, not because being satisfied with the current state of play with ME3 ending is not a legitimate perspective, but because the purpose of this process is to clarify why people are dissatisfied. Consequently, this survey targeted only the segment of the population that had problems with the ending of the game."

There are lots of surveys on BSN that have numerous choices regarding the ending, they end up with numerous choices all having 5-10% of the vote, thats why we went in the opposite direction. 

from 4. Survey Design...
"Using ranked or preferential voting we attempted to establish whether or not there were any consensus issues with regard to community dissatisfaction or whether it was too generalized or spread out among so many individual issues that a consensus was not possible."

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

Of the 92% respondents of that poll who were unhappy with ME3's ending, what was the distribution of the degree of unhappiness?

take a look at the poll, http://social.biowar...06/polls/28989/

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

"What proportion of those unhappy with ME3's ending feel a new ending is warranted? What proportion of those unhappy have reasons to believe that there is an ending that will satisfy the majority of ME3 players? These and no doubt questions by others need addressing to more accurate interpret the result of your poll and the other one, especially if you conclude that the results justify further action."

our followup poll we're working on, will likely involve rating choices from 1-10, if this then will you be satisfied, if that then will you be satisfied.  As always the more data the better, we just felt it was best to get what we had so far out as soon as possible.

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

"This point came to me a little late. In light of BioWare's recent announcement to offer an extended ending DLC. What proportion of players still believe it is necessary to take additional pre-emptive action? What about those that now prefer to wait and see how the DLC will turn out?"

The poll took place after the extended cut announcement. (announcement on 5th, poll started on 7th)

The poll tried to establish whether or not there were any consensus issues with regard to community dissatisfaction of the ending of ME3, not what courses of action people might or might not take in response to them.

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

Please forgive my forwardness with my concerns. I have read hundreds of papers from scientific journals and critiqued dozens of them over my college and grad school education. I make it a habit to critically view all papers of a technical nature. I think we will all be better for it.

We're glad to answer any and all questions to the best of our ability.  Open honest debate is always a good thing.  As I said earlier I'll mention this to MikeC99 and he can hopefully touch or elaborate on anything I missed regarding the conclusion(s).

Modifié par ofish, 19 avril 2012 - 06:04 .