I noticed, yes. The title matters, though, when reporting on scientific research. If character count limit is the issue, perhaps try “Study says players care less about bugs”.
I don’t like changing the title even if I stop liking it later on, because people get used to it.
I’ll wager a possible explanation here: People who try out a game, and soon dislike it (enough to leave a negative review) don’t like the fundamental aspects of the game, and don’t even try to get deeper in the game and thus notice the bugs. So, they only mention the gameplay aspects of why they don’t like the game. The people who like the basics delve deeper into the game, and start looking beyond the gameplay, thus noticing the little troubles and bugs. They are also the ones who actually want the game to get better, and so bring attention to those bugs.
That said, Steam’s yes/no review system is lacking, IMO. My opinion on things isn’t simply good or bad. I feel there should at least to be a “neutral/contested” option too, but that’s Steam’s problem, not FS’s, ours or the study’s. It does reflect to the study, though. But also reducing a study’s results to simple yes/no statement is rarely useful.
And finally, a reminder that correlation does not imply causation, and even when there is some, the causality may be different than what you think…
Yep, you’re right, and this assumption is even supported by the research itself.
But this is exactly what I am trying to say! Idk how you don’t understand this, that you’re supporting my point of view: gameplay is many times more important for players than bugs; people are going to be pretty satisfied with the game despite minor bugs, if they like it in general.
Yet again, even researches say:
So yet again, players almost exclusively dislike the game only if bugs are so severe, that they can’t play!
Also read this:
So even people, who disliked the game after spending significant time in it, did not care about bugs.
No one cares about any freaking bugs, as long as they are able to play the game! Neither those, who are satisfied with the game, nor those who are not.
If you read the review before posting, which you clearly didn’t do, you would see, that their research involved much more, that finding correlations and building graphics. And the quotes I’ve given prove this once more.
While I didn’t directly state anything about my opinion on this matter, you were correct in inferring that it’s mostly different from yours. I’ll try to elaborate anyway.
General idea and gameplay basics are what makes or breaks a game. Even you wouldn’t be playing this game (and arguing about in in here) if they weren’t there. But bugs, even the non-game-breaking ones, are not insignificant. They are part of good quality. So is customer service, continued support and other things.
When I see a graphical glitch, I get distracted from the game. When I cannot be resurrected because the game reads area boundaries wrong, get stuck in the environment or get shot down from behind a wall, I get frustrated. These are clearly behaviors not intended, and should be fixed. If they are avoidable, I’ll keep playing. If they aren’t, I’ll either avoid that particular place or wait until they get fixed.
If after 200 hours of playtime (quite long life already for a game, btw) I notice that I don’t like a particular mechanic of the game, I recognize that it was a knowing decision from the devs with (probably) good reasoning behind it. That doesn’t mean that my opinion on the issue changes, and it may well be worth it to bring it to the developer’s attention, especially in case of an involved team like Fatshark.
In this particular case, the dust issues likely stem from the fact that Fatshark didn’t consider the final drop rates of different quality items, instead looking at them across the board, while those who play a lot actually spend their time on the high difficulties, collecting higher-level chests. This, combined with underestimating the time and effort people are willing to spend on geting good equipment, creates an imbalance issue. That issue does prevent a vocal and enthusiastic minority of the players from experimenting as much as they want, or just getting to the “perfect” build. But many, many genuine bugs also prevent us from enjoying a part of the game. Remember the state of Skittergate in the first two weeks of launch? Remember Halescourge in the beginning, or complaints of Beam Pyro? No single part of these issues is, in my mind, inherently more important than others. They all contribute to my playing experience. FS is doing the best they can to fix all these issues with a small team, while we discuss these and raise new ones.
True, I didn’t read it. But in that case, reducing it to either/or situation was in your hands, as you were the one presenting this study to us. You may not have meant to do it but that’s how it came out.
Sorry for others about this whole rant, I think I’m out of this thread now.
1 Like
The thing here is: was the severity of the bugs in question taken into account, what games were used for the basis of this ‘statement’ etc.
To be fair, I’d put up with some massive bugs in V2 if the endgame fundamentals were there. Eg. V1 still has some quirky bugs but they don’t irk because while crafting my internal monologue isn’t “omg this is the dumbest #@$%ing system I’ve ever seen in my life” and when I get a red it’s not like “Sweet. My gillionth gd veteran necklace… what a well thought out mechanic that clearly isn’t just lazy skinner box lottery RNG.”
V2’s bugs are only noteworthy in my eyes in that they compound an already extremely abusive system. Ie. Layer upon layer of brutal end game RNG. The last patch seems to have addressed some of the liberties the director was allowed to take which brings the gameplay aspect into a better balance but every other end-game component is still a terrible dice roll so you can try a terrible rice roll for another terrible dice roll, just to be able to experiment with something new or min:max.
1 Like
And that’s fine, but if the game is nearly unplayable due to the bugs/glitches, then it’s more note worthy and I don’t think that was factored into the study.
That’s fair.
That’s why I downloaded the pdf of the study so I could analyze it and see what games they used for samples and such as that also is something that could skew the study
1 Like
I prefer to look at the study myself so I know it’s not being misquoted or the like, just to be sure
Wow… alright then, I guess you know all of us so well that you can make claims such as these. Let me get out of your way, Almighty.
I am beginning to think that this topic is now less about the research and more about you trying to be, as people like to say, “smartass”. No offence. Just one thing: calm your horses.
Thank you for your time.
-Random person
2 Likes
I am sorry to inform you mister “smarter player”, but there is more than one country in the world. However reading your post I kinda have to agree, that you statement has a good point.
Oh, wow, would you look at that another would be forum hero of the day. lol Okay, let me help you out mister strawman old chum : 1) Never said there was only one country in the world. That was just my personal lamentation of my own countries failing educational standards. 2) You really ought to do better, this is just too easy mane. Okay, again, never said anywhere in that post that all science had to be empirical, but was just pointing out what should be the bleeding obvious that this is not that, nor can it really even be considered any actual serious study.
Reading comprehension is your friend here, actually use it next time then you may have had an actual argument to be had mate. 
2 Likes
A great advice actually. I think you should use it yourself and reread your original post to comprehend what you really said there. I think you’ll find out, that that the result is very different from what you wanted to say in the first place.
For example:
Filtering education in THIS country will not help you filter people like me from the forum, since it is international. Can’t touch me. However that is just a logical mistake you made, trying to show your dominance.
But using word this shows how arrogant you are. You didn’t name the exact country, you didn’t use the word my. You said this, as if there is a default country, and everything revolves around it. Or you just can’t recognize the fact, that other countries do exist in the world.
Sorry, no. This is an international forum, there are people from other countries here. And we are having an abstract conversation here, not mentioning any particular country. So saying this country is highly ignorant and completely irrelevant.
And this arrogance can be seen in every line of your text. I think that what makes it so illogical and unreadable. You’re so certain that you’re a superior higher being, that you do not even bother checking your text or editing it. Why bother, when arguing with a “cringe pleb” posting some “bukkake post”, right?
Idk if you’re smart, I don’t think you are, but if I am wrong, such an attitude will bring you down very fast. Cause if you’re the smartest by default, than why even bother working on yourself, right? Right. And by not working on themselves even the smartest person, which, again, you are clearly not, will soon degrade to the idiocratic state.
Can I suggest we all stop arguing with Nik in his various whine-posts? This guy could argue at length with a mirror.
Don’t feed the trolls plague rats.
7 Likes
Whine posts? Trolls? Dude, please. 
This is a purely scientific dispute. Vermintide has not been mentioned here even once, which in turns means, that is was physically impossible to whine about it or show any other attitude. You need to stop being so protective, cause right now it seems you’re ready to find criticism in the most neutral post, if it is related to you favorite game at least somehow.
Still, I love your idea. Guys, please, if you don’t like my topics - just do not participate in them. Save me some time, and save some time for yourself.
LOL
Did you happen to look on what forum you posted in? “Vermintide 2 - Lounge” says it right at the top of your screen.