Kasz216 said:
Mifely said:
Kasz216 said:
Mifely said:
I certainly believe that the volunteer NPD study was... really messed up. That's basically the point of my post. There are a lot of "The Wii doesn't suffer from in-household competition" posts here on VGChartz that quote that study. I think we've all proven that said study is, in fact totally misleading. |
I don't think it was that messed up. You just need to realize they only used gamers in the first place... not the full US population. Furthermore NPD has no reason to spin things... the total number of gamers including PC and handhelds who own multiple next generation consoles is a comletely worthless statistic and their would be no reason for it to be in the article. |
Um, I think you're totally wrong with regards to the study being on gamers only, and not on a volunteer sample. No where in the article does it state that, despite what you seem to believe. Again, you're going to have to post some quotes, and do some logic legwork based in the English language, to prove your statement. I don't believe you can. As far as spin goes, I agree that NPD doesn't spin things. I am saying that Gamasutra is spinning it, and in a crazy way. Heck, look at you. You are totally confused. =) |
I was wrong about that I was working off a different studies methods page it seems. Regardless... I don't see why Gamasutra would spin it that way either.
|
It takes a brave, and intelligent individual to admit to your error on an open forum. I salute you.
And yeah, I dunno why gamasutra would try to spin the study either. I guess the "2-3%" number seems to say a lot more than the relevant numbers might, and journalists are always lookin' for the good story. I dunno why Gamasutra would be plagued by this kind of journalism though -- they're supposed to be a game dev mag. They don't, as an organization, presumably stand to benefit much from bad-science journalism, but perhaps the individual author might. That 2-3% they're talking about, relevant to the study's scope, actually seems fairly substantial, given a deeper look -- but who knows for certain, and without the real data, we never will.
