pokoko said:
mornelithe said:
Pretty much this. Invalid and fake do not mean the same thing.
|
No, but it's not invalid, either. A statistic is a statistic. Just because it includes information that goes outside the scope or interest of a forum like this does not mean that it holds no value. It's only irrelevant for our purposes, not overall.
The only thing that annoys me is when people try to use the statistic without context, either to further their own agenda or because they don't understand that context themselves. Mass media is especially bad for that but, honestly, they don't usually care about providing context for anything unless it makes a situation look worse.
|
I clicked on theESA.com to read the study and get more detail- althogh they had more detail than what the cited article for this OP inclded, i was disapointed with the amount of specifics and depth/detail of context. There were some of both but not nearly enough overall- So some of the statistics they presented that might seem surprising at first become less so
I wish they would have added % s (age, gender etc) re the top 20 console games in 2014 and top 20 PC games (they had stats for both of those but did not have top 20 mobile games or similar )
So most of their stats combined people/their gaming habits who play games on devices that were primarily purchased for NON gaming reasons with people who play games on devices that were purchased primarily FOR gaming reasons- which makes a big difference
Honestly i was expecting a much better, more in depth and detailed study with far more definitions and context- They surely had the ability to do one (maybe they did but have not published it - who knows)
0