|
On August 05 2011 06:53 zul wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 06:34 coddan wrote:
Some very crude math suggests there may have been just around 700,000 unique viewers. I base this on that the stream views reported for Columbus were 22,5 million and the unique views we're 450,000. 22.5 million is about 64% of 35 million, so if you assume that the unique viewers increased at the same rate as stream views did, you end up around 700,000. Note that this is extremely unreliable though and just speculation on my part. I doubt your math is correct - in Cbus you could open 2 streams at once, but MLG changed it. During MLG Anaheim you had to switch between streams all the time and therefore its logic the streamnumbers are higher. Unique Viewers is a much more reliable stat.
That's not true though, I ran both streams without problem through the whole event.
|
On August 05 2011 07:20 coddan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 06:53 zul wrote:On August 05 2011 06:34 coddan wrote:
Some very crude math suggests there may have been just around 700,000 unique viewers. I base this on that the stream views reported for Columbus were 22,5 million and the unique views we're 450,000. 22.5 million is about 64% of 35 million, so if you assume that the unique viewers increased at the same rate as stream views did, you end up around 700,000. Note that this is extremely unreliable though and just speculation on my part. I doubt your math is correct - in Cbus you could open 2 streams at once, but MLG changed it. During MLG Anaheim you had to switch between streams all the time and therefore its logic the streamnumbers are higher. Unique Viewers is a much more reliable stat. That's not true though, I ran both streams without problem through the whole event.
You probably didn't pay for premium? When you entered your premium code you got problems watching both streams at the same time and you had to do some nifty workarounds to get it working with two streams.
|
oh so the stream randomly going black all the time so that u have to refresh it was to get more of these views. interesting
|
Im sorry, but this stats are intentionally misleading. It's great to see MLG getting better event after event but this doesn't tell anything about the actual viewers the event had.
For example, in a website I may have 50,000 page views, and if I ever need to "show off some stats" I would really emphasize the fact that I had this 50,000 page views, when if you dig deeper you'll find that out of those I had only 15,000 visits, and out of those, I had 12,000 unique visitors... the same thing applies here.
If you have an unstable stream, which many times is necessary to refresh (I don't have adblock and still had this problem) your stream views will just explode, but how many absolute viewers were? I'd say that more than Columbus, but it just really sounds bigger if I say 35 million stream views, even if that doesn't really mean anything at all.
As I said at the beginning, this is in no way a rant to MLG or anything like that, in fact, I've loved more and more this events because they've improved a lot and keep doing it, but it would be better to see more informative stats, for instance, the peak of viewers at one match or something like that, or what match had the most viewers... those would be cool stats to hear.
|
At Columbus, I was able to watch one stream and it didn't randomly become black, meaning I didn't have to f5 every 15 minutes.
At Anaheim, I probably initiated the stream 30 times more than Columbus, meaning that if everyone was in my position, there were less viewers for Anaheim than Columbus. Obviously, not everyone had the black screen problem so we never know. But it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that Columbus was more successful. We had tastosis, idra drama, MC drama, first time seeing the Koreans, it had more hype. The LR threads were longer, the stream didn't turn black.
The statistics mlg have released in no way show a 50% increase in views, and less views may even be possible.
|
Sick statistics, MLG is definately NOT killing ESPORTS!
|
On August 05 2011 03:59 Frogsox wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 03:46 hmunkey wrote:
How many people watched though? They said 35 million views at one point and said average view time was 3 hours, but there's no way 35m people watched for 3 hrs.
I wish organizations would release relevant numbers sometimes. :\ There weren't 35 million people watching. If you reread the article you'll notice that there were 35 million "views" of the event across the streams. That means that there were 35 million different "clicks" to view streams. That would include every time someone refreshed, reopened etc a stream. To put that into perspectice, I was watching both the Red and Blue almost all weekend and had to refresh/relog my computers now and then which would contribute a fair few views. Especially when you factor that I also flipped back and forth to the FPS streams when they were showing the same match on both Red and Blue at times. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if I contributed 50+ views easily over the course of the weekend. Furthermore, I watched almost every minute of both streams, so that's well, well over the 3 hour average per view. The numbers are actually relevant, I just think you misread or misinterpreted what was written in the article.
No that's my point. The numbers they released are completely meaningless. If they arrived at the figure that people watched at 3 hours average, they have to first be able to find out how many people did that.
Of course like every other organization they instead chose to give us bullshit data that is not relevant to anything.
|
On August 05 2011 07:48 hmunkey wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 03:59 Frogsox wrote:On August 05 2011 03:46 hmunkey wrote:
How many people watched though? They said 35 million views at one point and said average view time was 3 hours, but there's no way 35m people watched for 3 hrs.
I wish organizations would release relevant numbers sometimes. :\ There weren't 35 million people watching. If you reread the article you'll notice that there were 35 million "views" of the event across the streams. That means that there were 35 million different "clicks" to view streams. That would include every time someone refreshed, reopened etc a stream. To put that into perspectice, I was watching both the Red and Blue almost all weekend and had to refresh/relog my computers now and then which would contribute a fair few views. Especially when you factor that I also flipped back and forth to the FPS streams when they were showing the same match on both Red and Blue at times. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if I contributed 50+ views easily over the course of the weekend. Furthermore, I watched almost every minute of both streams, so that's well, well over the 3 hour average per view. The numbers are actually relevant, I just think you misread or misinterpreted what was written in the article. No that's my point. The numbers they released are completely meaningless. If they arrived at the figure that people watched at 3 hours average, they have to first be able to find out how many people did that. Of course like every other organization they instead chose to give us bullshit data that is not relevant to anything.
Hmmm is that really where the numbers come from? I was watching both streams 100% of the event and had to refresh both after every commercial at least, sometimes in the middle of games. I would not be surprised either if I "hit" the stream 200+ times alone. Either way I think the numbers are impressive even with that taken into account. Though it would be nice to have a unique viewer count for the event.
|
I prefer unique IP viewers. Number of page loads (with 2 streams - blue and red) simply means the stream disconnected very often and people had to reload and reload (as I did). In addition, when the stream was lagging, it would buffer instead of renew, so in order not to lag too much behind the real time of the event, one would have had to regularly reload, even when the connection didn't drop yet.
That said, Anaheim was great and I'm certain it was one of the top SC2 events ever, just this particular cited statistic isn't necessarily a positive one. MLG fighting! ;-)
|
Pls get the thread:
MLGSundance already said: well once we get the all in numbers from our distribution partners (IMG, Justin and others) we will release that as well.
|
2.6 million hours of video viewed, there was about 30ish(?) hours of video (per stream), so at any given time during the stream there is 86,666.666~ viewers. I am sure the spikes are going to be way higher than that, and there was a fair amount of downtime and stream switching involved... but that might give a closer idea on the viewers at any second. Unique viewers are probably way over 1 million
|
well done, good news even if the figures arent to clear
|
|
|
Throughout the course of MLG, I probably loaded a stream 75 times or more.
10 or so were loading the stream throughout the day after long breaks, the other 65+ were from me refreshing the stream after every ad because it wouldn't load back up (and yes i turned off ad block). I'm eagerly awaiting the actual number of unique viewers.
|
just want to know why they dont release individual game statistics. does halo/cod really do that bad in terms of viewership? lol
|
it's good to see that there are alot of views, but i guess we have to take a step back to see how many unique views there are, and statistical views of number of people per game, (halo/cod/sc2). i personally had to refresh my stream almost every match as well.
|
On August 05 2011 12:55 carebear91 wrote:
it's good to see that there are alot of views, but i guess we have to take a step back to see how many unique views there are, and statistical views of number of people per game, (halo/cod/sc2). i personally had to refresh my stream almost every match as well.
i honestly think sc2 had like 80-90k concurrent viewers while halo/cod had 10k combined. which is why mlg doesn't release those statistics. thats my assumption =)
|
MLG gives a great tournament. Free VODs with English commentaries and even replays. So much better than GSL IMHO.
|
On August 05 2011 13:12 bonedriven wrote:
MLG gives a great tournament. Free VODs with English commentaries and even replays. So much better than GSL IMHO.
VODs are free?
|
On August 05 2011 07:05 Hellspawnl wrote:
I am first and for most an "E-sport journalist" who's actually doesn't just take what people, organizations or tournament organizers say for granted, I try to have an objective and critical approach as I know from my knowledge of the scene that it's needed.
OK, granted, but isn't every company out there doing these tricks with numbers? Is it new for you that ads have numbers like these? Heck, forget about the ads and companies, even in science, they try to "sell" their research with fancy numbers, don't they?
Crazy numbers, yes, but it would be appropriate to react differently. Like asking "hey guys, would you be also kind to post the number of unique views, as it is more important and telling in this case?"
Because in the position you are, your statements make you look like jealous and butt-hurt.
That said, would you please post the numbers for DreamHack, even if it is comparably laughable? Thanks.
PS You could post the total number of views or unique views for all I care 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
