Can we stop using VGChartz now?

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="-Renegade"][QUOTE="subrosian"]

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]Can ANYONE tell me why VGCHARTS is a BAD source for information? I also need PROOF!-Renegade

Look at the site - VGchartz is one guy, in his basement, publishing his *estimates* as fact, who has *zero* access to insider information, and no means of proving his guesses. VGchartz cannot be shown to be *good information* - it can't be shown to be reliable, in fact, just google, and you will find hundreds of instances where it was off by several hundred thousand units on games sales -again, because it's made up.

Using VGchartz is essentially the same as believing that the white house is made of sphagetti, because some guy on the internet said so - and then demanding that people prove it isn't. Use a little common sense.

-

You have to be absolutely *gullible* to believe VGchartz. It's like believing in psychics, they use a technique called cold reading (google this) and people go "wow, they got it right! look how close they were". Psychics, and VGchartz, exploit the natural tendency for people to forget all the times they *weren't right* and the times they were *way off*. People like to believe this kind of crap, especially when it says something they want to hear, so, there you have it.

Just like to point something out there have been physics who have helped solve police cases.

Well, of course. Physics is always used in police cases.

Oh wait, you mean PSYCHICS. Well, that's something else entirely. By any chance, have you ever seen the TV series, "Psych"?

I think so... I don't watch much TV so I am not entirely sure.

Basically, it's a comedy series about someone with very good intuitive and deductive skills posing as a psychic. Awesome series, and obviously over-the-top, but that's how "psychics" work. They train themselves to pick up on little clues. Think Sherlock Holmes, but with a lot less personal integrity. That, combined with the unreliability of anecdotal evidence, throws a huge question mark on the actual usefulness of so-called psychics.

[QUOTE="Adonymous"]

Sony just announced today that they've shipped 14.41m units...yet on VGChartz...Sony has sold 14.51m PS3s to consumers :|

hmm...

st1ka

and they have made graver mistakes then that, the problem is if we exclude GV charts we are left with nothing but the monthly NPD, at least this way we have some measure of knowing how they are selling

t's better to wait in the dark for dawn than to follow the first light you see towards oblivion...

[QUOTE="SambaLele"]

none of that changes the fact that you were radically biased against vgchartz without giving any trustworthy information in your previous post. we can be biased, but for that we should at least back what we're saying with some credible information.

i'm not saying vgchartz is credible. hell no, i don't go by their data. but you didn't do your homework with your other post, and there's no denying that.

subrosian

http://www.google.com

type in "vgchartz inaccurate" - read

There's absolutely no point in my copy-pasting that here, and trying to teach you several years worth of statistics to actually get into validity, distribution mapping, and modeling would be a futile effort at best.

-

Further, there's no sense in it - a source must be *proven* to be good, I don't have to prove that it's bad. The burden of proof lies on your end, not mine. I can't *prove* conclusively a negative, in the sense that I can't prove that there's not a giant spaghetti monster living just beyond the reach of our telescopes. However, that doesn't mean it exists.

-

Despite all of that, a simple google search will show you the dozens upon dozens of times VGchartz was inaccurate. If you're willing to take it as fact until someone shows you otherwise, that would be the definition of gullibility. Gullible is when I tell you the panama canal was built in 1941, and you believe me until someone links you to a history book.

i agree with everything you said. in fact, i also think that way. and i know how VGchartz is inaccurate. yet, your post had 0 information, and was 100% opinion, which is the type of post you should expect to receive even worst responses than if you actually did back it up. also, legally speaking, the burden of proof relies on the person that accuses someone of something. well, we should end this conversation already since it's not productive at all. you're still saying that you didn't have to prove anything, yet i'm saying that posting only opinion with a radical stance about something as the same convincing strenght as a troll's post. that's it. if you did that because you're tired of backing up information to proved what you think doesn't need to be proven, or any other reason, doesn't change anything.

NOONE can be 100% accurate because noone tracks all sales from all retailers to consumers. The only real numbers we can go buy are from game publishers and hardware developers. We can't really trust NPD, Media Create or Chart Track.

They are good for the history of video game sales... anyways I am going back to practice some more in Soul Calibur. Been getting my *** handed to me online. :?

-Renegade

Well let me ask you this Renegade.

Would you rather trust a corporation that spends millions upon millions of dollars a year, has offices nationwide, collects sales date (i.e. pays for sales data), analyses the data, and sells the analysis'es back to the industry or some guy in his basement blurting out random numbers that are never correct?

This is fun. :|

I pre-ordered a copy of this game, you guys might like it:

This is fun. :|

I pre-ordered a copy of this game, you guys might like it:

-Wheels-

Pc version is superior hur hur

[QUOTE="-Wheels-"]

This is fun. :|

I pre-ordered a copy of this game, you guys might like it:

Adonymous

Pc version is superior hur hur

Ooooo, I guess you're right. It's said that even a hystericallly flailing infant can zip right through the Wii version.

Sony just announced today that they've shipped 14.41m units...yet on VGChartz...Sony has sold 14.51m PS3s to consumers :|

hmm...

Adonymous

The console manufacturers rely on NPD data, so obviously they consider it accurate. Period.

Just because they don't poll WalMart doesn't mean anything. They can easily account for Walmarts market share. Or simply ask developers what percentage of their shipments USUALLY go to Walmarts. It will give you a close enough number.

1. VG Chartz will not disclose what data they have access to, or where they get their data.

source: vg chartz

My speculation would be VG Chartz "employee" (Brett Walton) works at a game store, and has access only to that store's sales data, or is simply pulling publicly available data from the internet.

If his data is so good, why hide it? According to VG Chartz, out of fear of "someone copying his method". If he's generating original sales data, how could it be copied without hard work? The reality is, he's trying to cover up that he's using readily available data. Any good statistician will be happy to share their sampling method, it's the only way to demonstrate that they've done valid research.

2. VG Chartz claims it "does not have access to the retail data for large retailers only a tiny handful of small unnamed retailers", yet this data is publicly available and obviously used by VG Chartz

source vg chartz

speculation: Obviously bull**** given how the numbers magically change to fit NPD and other numbers when they release. Also, data like Amazon's top sellers are readily available, and almost certainly used in VG chartz guestimates. To do otherwise would be stupid, so why lie?

3. VG Chartz lies about how often it adjusts its data. "Do we adjust our data? Not as such."

source: vg chartz

proof: VG Chartz recently adjusted its data by several thousand sales units to match Sony's PS3 sales announcement. If VG Chartz doesn't change their numbers, then why did they do that?

4. "I'm sure we'll be 10-15% different to NPD but so what?"

source: VG Chartz

speculation: Ah, accuracy doesn't matter, which explains all of these (warning, long list of vgchartz screw ups). Forget 10 ~ 15%, try 100%+

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18919

5. This is copied verbatim from an O'Reliy Radar forum posting, and sums up a great deal (not my work, but I agree with what is said):

"vgchartz.com is all about smoke and mirrors. He continually lies to his visitors. I can explain his real history in great detail if you're interested but Brett Walton, the site's founder, is nothing more than a petty manipulator and illusionist. The problem is, he sees nothing wrong with what he's doing. It really does boil down to the fact that his visitors believe what he's posted in his "Methodology" section. For the record, he's lying to his visitors. He doesn't collect data from retailers. All of vgchartz's figures are guesstimates. He TAKES charted information and best sellers lists from online stores like Amazon (this is how he's able to get a ballpark Top 10 list each week/month), and from stores like Wal-mart, Target and Gamecrazy, then fits that data to chart positions, using publicly available historical information from NPD, Famitsu and other reputable firms for reference. In reality, he uses public chart positions, press releases and shipment figures to come up with sales figures. Don't believe any of this? Ask him!

This is NOT Brett Walton's (vgchartz) proprietary information, nor is this information something that a real analyst couldn't compile with a little hard work and common sense but at the end of the day it's all about making it easy. Ahhh, that's why we have to love the Internet. There's no longer a need for integrity. Just point and shoot ... I mean, click.

vgchartz's information belongs to the market research firms and retailers he's lifting it from. He should give credit where credit is due. He's making a name for himself off the hard work of others. Wal-Mart, Target, GameCrazy, NPD, Famitsu, Chart Track, Amazon ... the list is large but not nearly as large as Brett Walton's ego."

6. The real problem:

VG Chartz is being treated as real, accurate data, when it's only accuracy is when it parrots *actual research* by firms like NPD, Amazon, etc. It's using real data that it steals and takes credit for in order to make predictions.

However, where it doesn't have data (and this is not clearly labeled - as vg chartz does not cite sources) it still takes a guess and people make judgements based on data that is nothing more than a guess.

When we talk about games like Disgaea, vg chartz has no idea how they did.

7. What needs to happen:

• 
  -vg chartz needs to cite its sources and how much it estimates off those sources. It's blatant theft to use someone else's work without citing it
  
• -vg chartz needs to leave up its estimates instead of editing them, we should see an estimate, a date, and then the *real data* posted so we can see for ourselves how off they are.
  
• -vg chartz needs to apologize to the people it has been stealing from.

We need to stop using vg chartz until all of this happens, because what is being done here is standing on someone else's hard work and peeing. That is what VG Chartz does - it takes credit for real statistical research, and then it screws it up by making guesses on top of it.

The console manufacturers rely on NPD data, so obviously they consider it accurate. Period.

Just because they don't poll WalMart doesn't mean anything. They can easily account for Walmarts market share. Or simply ask developers what percentage of their shipments USUALLY go to Walmarts. It will give you a close enough number.

TBoogy

The console manufacturers rely on NPD data, so obviously they consider it accurate. Period.

Just because they don't poll WalMart doesn't mean anything. They can easily account for Walmarts market share. Or simply ask developers what percentage of their shipments USUALLY go to Walmarts. It will give you a close enough number.

TBoogy

NPD has access to 60 ~ 65% of the market data, has dozens of trained, experienced statisticians (take an upper level statistics course in college - it gets a lot harder than the intro level stuff), millions in funding, and does statistically valid research based on controlled sampling.

VG Chartz has access to 2 ~ 3% of the market data (or so it claims) and that data isn't a controlled sample. See my above post - read the Gamasutra article, VG Chartz does not have good enough data. Their samples are tainted, and their data is not controlled.

The real reason to stop using VGchartz isn't them being off by a few hundred thousand units on multi-million selling consoles - it's that they've been off by a few hundred thousand units on games that only sold a few hundred thousand units. They've claimed games were at 500,000 when they had broken one million. They've claimed games were at 800,000 that only sold 250,000 copies.

subrosian

They said Kameo sold about 650k, but IGN has confirmed it as a million-seller.

Can ANYONE tell me why VGCHARTS is a BAD source for information? I also need PROOF!dream431ca

Here's on right there in my post.

Subrosian create a new thread posting what you said in the long post (i won't quote it as its huge)

and a mod please sticky it.

Yeah, they were less than 1% off. Massive failure confirmed.mabris

Read the thread. Understand the thread. Pay special attention to Subrosian. Think for a bit. Then stop making up figures as you go.

[QUOTE="mabris"]Yeah, they were less than 1% off. Massive failure confirmed.Grive

Read the thread. Understand the thread. Pay special attention to Subrosian. Think for a bit. Then stop making up figures as you go.

[QUOTE="Grive"]

[QUOTE="mabris"]Yeah, they were less than 1% off. Massive failure confirmed.mabris

Read the thread. Understand the thread. Pay special attention to Subrosian. Think for a bit. Then stop making up figures as you go.

Am I not allowed to respond to the TC without taking into account the entire thread? Can I not point out the silliness of creating a thread to point out a 1% error? I didn't not make up the 1%, BTW. Do the math...

Congratulations, you have made your second absolutely worthless post.

Yes, you can "respond" to the tc and anyone else you want to. Knock yourself out. And we can answer you by noting that your comment has been mentioned before, and it has been answered oftentimes. BTW, it's only four pages. I could understand if I had asked you to read one of those 30+ leviathans, but around 65 posts? c'mon, that's five to ten minutes of your time.

As for your 1%, it's a specific case. That's worthless. By their own admission, they're usually wrong by the order of 15% - and even more - in the things that they have a way to check against reality. These are the same things that are relatively easy to compute (Halo 3, why yes, it will be a multimillion seller). What about the more obscure games we cannot cross reference?

Again, read the thread, understand it, pay special attention to subrosian. You'll understand this is not about their sony predictions anymore (or any specific prediction, in any case). It's about how reliable they are as a source of information, or more precisel, how they aren't.

[QUOTE="Grive"]

[QUOTE="mabris"]Yeah, they were less than 1% off. Massive failure confirmed.mabris

Read the thread. Understand the thread. Pay special attention to Subrosian. Think for a bit. Then stop making up figures as you go.

Am I not allowed to respond to the TC without taking into account the entire thread? Can I not point out the silliness of creating a thread to point out a 1% error? I didn't not make up the 1%, BTW. Do the math...

You're trying to reignite an argument that's over and done with. The entire thread has moved on to VGChartz' much, MUCH bigger problems.