241
Hello, and thanks for clicking on this blog!
I will be attempting to compare how different projects are percieved. The results will be based on their amount of "Feedback" (views/diamonds/favs/comments/etc.) these projects have recieved and will be calculated into ratios.
The feedback data given is from 12PST on January 29th, 2015. I became interested in this to see why one of my current projects seems to be simply paddling along while others get more of a "jump" when updated ot posted.
We will be comparing my four latest projects since I’ve been watching their progress on PMC since their posting.
Update 1.30.2014: I was doing this test as the start of a small test just to see how certain variables were influencing project results, and apparently it's more interesting than I thought based on the feedback and criticism. I'm very interested in doing a larger scale run of this with increased variables taken int oaccount within the near future. Thanks to all who left their throughts!
Projects in Discussion
Ratios
Looking at the Numbers and Presentations
Titles, tallies, and the main image help to draw the initial viewer into the project. Nuummite has the longest title of all. It uses it to help describe certain things such as the map size and update. Tropicana also takes advantage of its title to advertise it’s completely revised instead of an older, smaller update. The Tree Pack only gives a version number for reference and the Cradle is literally just its name.
Current Tallies is defined by the current number of diamonds/favs/downloads/views a project has when someone glances it and time elapsed after the project is made/updated.
Nuummite has by far the highest of the four in regards to everything except downloads for obvious reasons. When it comes to ratios however, the other four win out in nearly all regards. This means a lot of people view the Nuummite project but don’t give any feedback towards it. The other projects are received more favorably in these ratios except for two interesting parts. Views to comments and Diamonds to Favs are the winning attributes of Nuummite.
All four have roughly the same image quality for a title image, with shaders, high render distance, and a key location to draw in the viewer. It's clear a high image quality does wonders for a project, so we won't delve into something that's cemented in truth.
But now they’re in the project, so what do they see?
All four have been given strong descriptions with a mix of images. The latter three are part of a series and have inter-connectivity with image banners linking to each other within their descriptions. Nuummite has the greatest description of the four in regards to attention to detail, size, information given, and organization. It’s extremely easy to navigate despite being such a large description full of images, links, and information. The other three didn’t need this amount though due to their simplistic size.
Cradle and the Tree Pack have very minor additions to their update logs that only fix a few key errors in the world/pack. Tropicana, however, received a completely reworkso its sole update log gave more content than the other two. Nuummite’s, once more, gives far more content update & update frequency and is shown through new images uploaded to give a visual. None have a video, so that point remains uncertain to discuss.
Then finally we arrive at the actual content of the project itself. What do the images show/suggest? What does the description explain? Can we see this after downloading the map?
Two of the four, Cradle and Tropicana, are roughly the same in this regard as they are both terraform projects with an emphasis on giving a showcase for different items of the Tree Pack. The Tree Pack itself is both a world and schematics file repository for people to use to make maps like the former two. Nuummite is a huge work in progress that lacks a download but makes up for it in vast imagery and description. What also separates it from the others is its plan to become an adventure map and its heavy use of mod block decoration.
The Results
Compared to the other three, much smaller projects, Nuummite isn’t doing very well by any means.
Initial reaction to Nuummite and its updates has been sparse and generally uninterested, whereas the other three received nearly double the attention each on their initial launch. This is countered by a steep falloff after their posting, but their reception is still higher than Nuummite’s just based on the ratio scores.
However, what makes things interesting is that Nuummite has a higher ration in comments received and diamonds to favs. What this can potentially be interpreted as, is that when a viewer likes that particular project, they are much more inclined to being very interested in it.
But if Nuummite is the much larger and more heavily detailed project, than why is it suffering more than the other three? I have a number of theories on this.
1) It lacks a download. Being a Work in Progress was a possible point, but even works in progress can be overcome with a presentable description and a “Beta” download file where people can explore what currently exists. Seeing that people can not download it, they are less likely to give feedback.
2) It contains mod blocks. Modded maps may very well do less favorably than normal maps just simply because they’re not vanilla or they require people to acquire the mods in order to visit the world properly. It doesn't apparently matter if the blocks are used extremely sparsely (which is true for Nuummite), jsut the mere mention may drive people away.
3) The Content in Question. The other three are simple, but Nuummite is an adventure map and the story also comes into play with feedback. Because the story can not be posted prior without ruining it, it has to be left in the dark and viewers remain uncertain.
4) The content in question. People may not agree with the topic of the project itself. What brings this possible subject up is an incident involving Pixelmon nearly a year ago and how much it earned negative points with much of the community. If there is something of controversial nature that a project is using, it may be percieved worse regardless of any other idea. This is my current personal theory on it and what I hope isn't true, because that means the community more often puts dislike for a particular subject over giving someone feedback for a quality build. I put my interests aside to give others feedback. I really hope this one isn't true.
Conclusion 1.29
It seems there’s a bit more to diamonds than most people have come to realize. While very “Standard” builds (like structure designs, terraform, combination of both, etc.) remain the norm, the projects that don’t follow this basic guideline have to present themselves differently in an attempt to gain an audience. Simply said here, if you’re making a structure that look good aesthetically, you’re more likely to get higher feedback with less effort than a project that walks on more unusual ideas.
In addition, certain aspects seem to effect how others perceive the build. Subject matter and lack of download seem to make projects take an extra hit to their feedback as opposed to others.
I will update this in the future to either confirm or deny that build concept, ideas, and subjects have an influence on the quality and quantity of feedback given.
Please feel free to give your opinions and start discussion! I would seriously like insight into different viewpoints regarding this. It is entirely possible as a relatively new PMC member that i'm reading too into the data at an early level to form a proper, conclusive base. Time and discussion will tell. I will be updating this blog in a predetermiend time in the future to show how things have changed. This time will be unknown so as to minimize impact on results.
Remember, this is all just theory.
I will be attempting to compare how different projects are percieved. The results will be based on their amount of "Feedback" (views/diamonds/favs/comments/etc.) these projects have recieved and will be calculated into ratios.
The feedback data given is from 12PST on January 29th, 2015. I became interested in this to see why one of my current projects seems to be simply paddling along while others get more of a "jump" when updated ot posted.
We will be comparing my four latest projects since I’ve been watching their progress on PMC since their posting.
Update 1.30.2014: I was doing this test as the start of a small test just to see how certain variables were influencing project results, and apparently it's more interesting than I thought based on the feedback and criticism. I'm very interested in doing a larger scale run of this with increased variables taken int oaccount within the near future. Thanks to all who left their throughts!
Projects in Discussion
Ratios
Looking at the Numbers and Presentations
Titles, tallies, and the main image help to draw the initial viewer into the project. Nuummite has the longest title of all. It uses it to help describe certain things such as the map size and update. Tropicana also takes advantage of its title to advertise it’s completely revised instead of an older, smaller update. The Tree Pack only gives a version number for reference and the Cradle is literally just its name.
Current Tallies is defined by the current number of diamonds/favs/downloads/views a project has when someone glances it and time elapsed after the project is made/updated.
Nuummite has by far the highest of the four in regards to everything except downloads for obvious reasons. When it comes to ratios however, the other four win out in nearly all regards. This means a lot of people view the Nuummite project but don’t give any feedback towards it. The other projects are received more favorably in these ratios except for two interesting parts. Views to comments and Diamonds to Favs are the winning attributes of Nuummite.
All four have roughly the same image quality for a title image, with shaders, high render distance, and a key location to draw in the viewer. It's clear a high image quality does wonders for a project, so we won't delve into something that's cemented in truth.
But now they’re in the project, so what do they see?
All four have been given strong descriptions with a mix of images. The latter three are part of a series and have inter-connectivity with image banners linking to each other within their descriptions. Nuummite has the greatest description of the four in regards to attention to detail, size, information given, and organization. It’s extremely easy to navigate despite being such a large description full of images, links, and information. The other three didn’t need this amount though due to their simplistic size.
Cradle and the Tree Pack have very minor additions to their update logs that only fix a few key errors in the world/pack. Tropicana, however, received a completely reworkso its sole update log gave more content than the other two. Nuummite’s, once more, gives far more content update & update frequency and is shown through new images uploaded to give a visual. None have a video, so that point remains uncertain to discuss.
Then finally we arrive at the actual content of the project itself. What do the images show/suggest? What does the description explain? Can we see this after downloading the map?
Two of the four, Cradle and Tropicana, are roughly the same in this regard as they are both terraform projects with an emphasis on giving a showcase for different items of the Tree Pack. The Tree Pack itself is both a world and schematics file repository for people to use to make maps like the former two. Nuummite is a huge work in progress that lacks a download but makes up for it in vast imagery and description. What also separates it from the others is its plan to become an adventure map and its heavy use of mod block decoration.
The Results
Compared to the other three, much smaller projects, Nuummite isn’t doing very well by any means.
Initial reaction to Nuummite and its updates has been sparse and generally uninterested, whereas the other three received nearly double the attention each on their initial launch. This is countered by a steep falloff after their posting, but their reception is still higher than Nuummite’s just based on the ratio scores.
However, what makes things interesting is that Nuummite has a higher ration in comments received and diamonds to favs. What this can potentially be interpreted as, is that when a viewer likes that particular project, they are much more inclined to being very interested in it.
But if Nuummite is the much larger and more heavily detailed project, than why is it suffering more than the other three? I have a number of theories on this.
1) It lacks a download. Being a Work in Progress was a possible point, but even works in progress can be overcome with a presentable description and a “Beta” download file where people can explore what currently exists. Seeing that people can not download it, they are less likely to give feedback.
2) It contains mod blocks. Modded maps may very well do less favorably than normal maps just simply because they’re not vanilla or they require people to acquire the mods in order to visit the world properly. It doesn't apparently matter if the blocks are used extremely sparsely (which is true for Nuummite), jsut the mere mention may drive people away.
3) The Content in Question. The other three are simple, but Nuummite is an adventure map and the story also comes into play with feedback. Because the story can not be posted prior without ruining it, it has to be left in the dark and viewers remain uncertain.
4) The content in question. People may not agree with the topic of the project itself. What brings this possible subject up is an incident involving Pixelmon nearly a year ago and how much it earned negative points with much of the community. If there is something of controversial nature that a project is using, it may be percieved worse regardless of any other idea. This is my current personal theory on it and what I hope isn't true, because that means the community more often puts dislike for a particular subject over giving someone feedback for a quality build. I put my interests aside to give others feedback. I really hope this one isn't true.
Conclusion 1.29
It seems there’s a bit more to diamonds than most people have come to realize. While very “Standard” builds (like structure designs, terraform, combination of both, etc.) remain the norm, the projects that don’t follow this basic guideline have to present themselves differently in an attempt to gain an audience. Simply said here, if you’re making a structure that look good aesthetically, you’re more likely to get higher feedback with less effort than a project that walks on more unusual ideas.
In addition, certain aspects seem to effect how others perceive the build. Subject matter and lack of download seem to make projects take an extra hit to their feedback as opposed to others.
I will update this in the future to either confirm or deny that build concept, ideas, and subjects have an influence on the quality and quantity of feedback given.
Please feel free to give your opinions and start discussion! I would seriously like insight into different viewpoints regarding this. It is entirely possible as a relatively new PMC member that i'm reading too into the data at an early level to form a proper, conclusive base. Time and discussion will tell. I will be updating this blog in a predetermiend time in the future to show how things have changed. This time will be unknown so as to minimize impact on results.
Remember, this is all just theory.
| Tags |
tools/tracking
3220234
6
how-are-different-projects-perceived-feedback-theory
Rob333
KnockbackNemo
MistFaller
ZC_Gamer
A username is here
Jetra
kettlecooked
Useott
Milly-mei
Ender Sparkle
Escapazition
ShellyD
The Gamers Club
The Sound Of Music
Create an account or sign in to comment.
It should also be noted that when I said you should condense your ideas, I meant you should in future blogs. It's not really needed on a blog that's already become succesful.
- Amount of advertisment done (both in PMC chat and outside). AKA amount of people advertised to
- amount of people present on PMC at time of publishing
- relative fame of the publisher outside PMC (somebody with an active YT/twitch channel will get more views and downloads by default, and often diamonds as well)
- amount of subs of the publisher (people with 500 subs will likely get more attention on their project than those submitting a similar-quality one while having 100 or less subs)
These make it all a lot more complex.I was honestly unaware of your first point. I don't udnerstand why it never clicked before that some do this as well. Would that mainly be PMC chat and youtube or are there other popular outlets i'm still unaware of?
I'm also honestly unaware of the PMC traffic patterns which would definitely influence the results. May I ask when highs and lows are? It'd definitely help for a potential future rewrite!
Extremely valid point.
This one was a definite set by PMC, but currently with this small scale "test" of sorts, and being that all projects were drawn from one source with a set subscriber list, this point was untestable. For a future run i'll definitely have to increase the sample pool if I'm to get any reliable results. If anything, I guess I can see this article is now just a small ship being tested in shallow waters before brought out to high seas. Thanks again!
One other factor you may not have considered is the time of day you uploaded the project. The number of people on PMC varies from hour to hour. During the busier parts of the day, more people are likely to see (and possibly diamond) your project.