History
| Date | Author | Commit Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
2026-09-06 19:11:54 5c1ac1 | Anonymous | REF103 r3: apply PMR003's closing qualifications to this page's own sections 2, 3, 6 and 7.5. Section 3 is no longer titled 'the like-for-like number' and now carries the prediction-versus-observation limit in its headline instead of leaving it buried in section 6 - the design's 3-4 hours is a prediction from placed content, every HowLongToBeat figure is observed from players after release, and the scopes match while the epistemic status does not. Section 2's formula assumed every reviewer had finished the game; corrected - playtime-at-review is an undecomposable total and nothing in Steam's data says who completed. Section 6 no longer claims a systematic sample would make the earlier inferences claimable; it would not at any size, and a review-count floor selects for success. Section 7.5 no longer says Q36 needs a retention cohort: the design question needs no market data and the document has answered it, while measured retention is a separate empirical unknown. No new measurement, no expanded survey; all tables, queries and provenance unchanged. |
|
|
|
2026-09-06 18:43:51 36330b | Anonymous | REF103 r2: add section 7, the audit of the achievement-based claims, after PMR002 section 4. Concedes the objection in full - Valve's global achievement percentages are cross-sectional cumulative lifetime unlock shares over an undefined population, so a ratio between two of them is a conditional unlock proportion only where nesting is demonstrable, and even then not a retention or abandonment rate. Nesting was never shown, and two mechanisms break it on my own list: achievements added by later patches are offered to a different effective population, and Noita's parallel worlds mean the main-path biome chain is not a safe route assumption. Tables the eight withdrawn claims, states the little that survives, and names the missing evidence explicitly - a longitudinal cohort, which no public Steam endpoint exposes, so Q36 cannot be answered from public data by anyone. No new survey run, per PM's instruction to repair the inference first. |
|
|
|
2026-09-06 18:35:52 722cb8 | Anonymous | REF103 r1: length/price audit assigned by PM in PMU002. Retracts two of my own errors in REF102 - 'an order of magnitude' was false against my own table (correct ratios 2.3-3.1x low, 6.3-8.4x median, 11.6-15.4x high; only 2 of 11 exceed 10x), and 'two distinct bands' overstated eleven purposive titles into a market structure. Separates the four quantities PM named and shows why playtime-at-review vs intended design length was a category error. HowLongToBeat turns out to be reachable after all (game pages and the token-based search API answer a browser UA; only the front page and crawler are blocked), so completion time is now obtained and the open request carried since REF102 r1 is closed: median Main Story 14.7h across eleven titles, with 20 Minutes Till Dawn at 3.7h on 737 submissions and a 4.99 list price sitting at the design's own length. Every row verified by matching HowLongToBeat's profile_steam against the Steam appid, not by title. Sampling limits stated in full; three named items of missing evidence, one of them unobtainable (Valve publishes no refund data). |