report

report

For this case, I would not rush to judgement until the full paper is available – note that this is published and peer reviewed scientific research, not some random newspaper survey. Usually they are cleverer about these things. (E.g. burying the videogame question in some irrelevant ones, etc)

And therein lies the problem. See, what would the internet, especially the gaming community of the internet, be without rash, mindless races to defend the Hobby?

By the time the article comes out, the internets will have forgotten about it and so will all the Adonises with their spectacular bodies, social lives, AND Call of Duty skillz. Or the internet scientists that know the one and only important rule of statistics, that correlation does not equal causation!!11

Ars Technica has already provided a post which outlines the fact that most of the reporting on this study was garbage and missed several key points, including the fact that the writers acknowledge the flaws – such as the geographic location and source of responses. They’re careful to caution against assuming too much with the data (which the media apparently ignored). And the quote at the end of the MSNBC article says that this study may warrant further research (read: larger survey, across a wider georgraphic area), not that this is the be-all end-all study on the fitness of gamers’ body and minds.

Kotaku is starting a recurring survey series that hopefully will show longer term feedback on games.

Yea, Kotaku is the place I look to for solid research and insightful analysis.

report

report

Everyone knows that Contact/SC could only operate from a post-scarcity society! Without the socialist utopia to back it, what possible way could it exist!?

report

I couldn’t agree with you more on this, not to mention that surveys and statistics rather than proper examination and study over time haven’t ever really counted as Scientific evidence for a reason.

…

And that’s the problem with surveys and statistics, they’re very generalised, often very biased, and at the end of the day they pretty much only ever say what the person utilising them wants them to say, as there’s no form of information that can become more biased than statistics, especially statistics based on surveys written by those who’ll use said statistics.

Um, what? No form of information that can become more biased than statistics, really? They only ever say what the person utilising them wants to say?

I assure you, sir, that while statistics, like many things, can be misused, there do exist correct ways to do them. And with bad statistics, as long as people are open about them, there are plenty of ways to check and subject them to rigour. However the quote goes, the reality is that only with the numbers open to you (and hopefully the process being open as well), can you really get to the bottom of what’s going on. Usually, the presence of statistics does not indicate a lie, and contrarywise, the absence of numbers are what usually suggests that someone is hiding something.

I’d take my poll over your anecdote and armwaving and teary interview any day of the week. (Within a margin of error, anyway) For this case, I would not rush to judgement until the full paper is available – note that this is published and peer reviewed scientific research, not some random newspaper survey. Usually they are cleverer about these things. (E.g. burying the videogame question in some irrelevant ones, etc)

Disclosure: I study statistics.

report

So why are you reading the review at all? What is 7/10 if not a value judgment? ;)

The rest of my post ^^ addresses both of these points. ‘Value’ and ‘quality’ are not synonyms.

report

Pricing should always be evaluated separately. I would even suggest different buying price recommendations for different player groups: serious, casual, genre fans, budget conscious, etc. Whatever is appropriate to the title at hand.

The other side of reviews is that they tend to all drop at release time, or trickle out after that, and then cease. Hype is too strong a factor with front-loaded reviewing (remember GTA4?). We really should consider quality over time (which tends to increase with patching, support, etc), active player base (especially for multiplayer), community strength, modding, competing games, and so forth.

Kotaku is starting a recurring survey series that hopefully will show longer term feedback on games. There is definitely room for a serious post-release community feedback style of website (besides MMOs, which seem to have that covered).

I guess this also goes to highlight the gap between the “dump out a new rehash every year” style and “it’s great and we’ll support it indefinitely” studios. I know which I prefer.

report

Apparently only love can break your heart…

report

Congrats!

P.

report

*Based on a survey of 500 people**, 260 of whom preferred the Burger King burger.

**All of whom were randomly selected from people leaving a Burger King restaurant.

report

report