It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
AgentAndre: I started to collect the number of games, achievements and played hours of [a small part of] users in this forum. (...) There is no guarantee that these lists are correct...
avatar
BreOl72: To give you an idea of how "accurate" your statistics are:

Look at the user K1ller. His "hours played" amount to 53099.
Now, 53099 hours divided by 24 hours (= a day) are: ~2212.5 days.
2212.5 days divided by 365 days (= a year) are: ~6.06 years.

The user K1ller is a registered GOG user since July 2015.
Add six years to July 2015 and you are in July 2021...that was eight months ago.

Which means, the difference between the time the user is registered here, and the hours he "spent playing" during this time, amounts to eight months.

8 months divided by 6.06 years = 1.32 months/year.
How many days are that?
1.32 months times 30 (= the mathematical month) = 39.6 days/year.
And how many hours are that?
39.6 days times 24 hours (= a day) = 950.4 hours/year.
And that accumulates to how many hours a month?
950.4 hours divided by 12 (= months/year) = 79.2 hours/month.
Ok, one last time: how many hours per day would that be?
79.2 hours divided by 30 (= mathematical days/month) = 2.64 hours/day.

So - that's 2.64 hours on average per day, during the last six years, that the user K1ller did NOT spent with gaming.

Now, how credible would you rate this number?
Nice analysis.

I recall reading a guide where in order to boost the running stats of his character in Morrowind, a player stuck the joystick diagonally with an elastic band and let his character run in circles all night long.

Could be things like that.
avatar
AgentAndre: I started to collect the number of games, achievements and played hours of [a small part of] users in this forum. (...) There is no guarantee that these lists are correct...
avatar
BreOl72: To give you an idea of how "accurate" your statistics are:

Look at the user K1ller. His "hours played" amount to 53099.
Now, 53099 hours divided by 24 hours (= a day) are: ~2212.5 days.
2212.5 days divided by 365 days (= a year) are: ~6.06 years.

The user K1ller is a registered GOG user since July 2015.
Add six years to July 2015 and you are in July 2021...that was eight months ago.

Which means, the difference between the time the user is registered here, and the hours he "spent playing" during this time, amounts to eight months.

8 months divided by 6.06 years = 1.32 months/year.
How many days are that?
1.32 months times 30 (= the mathematical month) = 39.6 days/year.
And how many hours are that?
39.6 days times 24 hours (= a day) = 950.4 hours/year.
And that accumulates to how many hours a month?
950.4 hours divided by 12 (= months/year) = 79.2 hours/month.
Ok, one last time: how many hours per day would that be?
79.2 hours divided by 30 (= mathematical days/month) = 2.64 hours/day.

So - that's 2.64 hours on average per day, during the last six years, that the user K1ller did NOT spent with gaming.

Now, how credible would you rate this number?
I know people with a hell of a machine, who very often don't close games but let them run idle in the background.
So it could be GoG was tracking several low resource games running at the same time at the same machine.

Or several machines in the same household with the same account.
Not sure what the GoG EULA says, but if it is not the same game but several games on several machines in the same household played by the direct bloodline family, I don't see it as a problem.
Its like giving your kids the gaming CD back in the days.


It doesn't help with the fact, that the numbers you can getting here are highly inaccurate...
Post edited March 27, 2022 by randomuser.833
avatar
SCPM: Bocze is also a GOG employee and owns many upcoming games and tools not available to the public. :)
Having access to more than 100% of the store is a very impressive perk. Thank you for the explanation.
avatar
ciemnogrodzianin: Even with regular games it is possible, I think. Consider only all these games removed from the store, demos of limited availability etc. Also some positions of GOG catalogue are actually bundles (as Ultima 1+2+3, some adventure games split into chapters etc.) which are unpacked after purchase and create >1 position in user's library.
Those are also good points. Thanks.
I always suspected reviews used to get posted to the profile pages, but this is the first time I've seen it. What a pity that no longer works, along with creating a new thread on the forum.
I don't have anything against GOG Galaxy, never tried it, never will.
avatar
SCPM: Impressive work. :) There is one more GOG employee for your list of Top 10 most owned games - Kiddo.Butai with 3919 as of writing:
https://www.gog.com/u/Kiddo.Butai
avatar
Kevin04: Thanks for the lists, I also like statistics. I find them interesting, even if they're incomplete due to the limited public information. Here's another big collector you missed:
https://www.gog.com/u/Antarian
Thank you so much. I updated the list.

avatar
BreOl72: So - that's 2.64 hours on average per day, during the last six years, that the user K1ller did NOT spent with gaming.
Wow. Thank you for this detailed analysis.
avatar
amok: no, we do not know if it is half or not. if it was half, it would be easy, just duobble it up. it can be 1/2, or a1/3, or 3/4, or 1/10, we just don't have the information.
Here are the percentages of my (very limited) statistics:
47.2% of the users have 0 achievements.
30.7% of the users have 0 played hours.
2.9% of the users have 0 games.

So I would guess about 30%-50% of the users do not use GOG Galaxy based on these (not very accurate) numbers.
Post edited March 28, 2022 by AgentAndre
avatar
AgentAndre: Here are the percentages of my (very limited) statistics:
47.2% of the users have 0 achievements.
30.7% of the users have 0 played hours.
2.9% of the users have 0 games.

So I would guess about 30%-50% of the users do not use GOG Galaxy based on these (not very accurate) numbers.
Wow, that's quite surprising for me. I'd never expect such a big share of 0-hours-players.

Is it possible to check somehow this % versus only active users? I guess there might be a lot of old users, who are no longer active GOG customers and that's the reason they've never started to use Galaxy. They should be excluded here, as they had never made a decision to use or do not use Galaxy.
low rated
avatar
AgentAndre: So I would guess about 30%-50% of the users do not use GOG Galaxy based on these (not very accurate) numbers.
A few years ago a GOG employee said in a documentary that way more GOG customers do use Galaxy than those who don't.

Those stats in the OP don't mean anything though, because they aren't counting private profiles, many of which customers do use Galaxy, but won't show up in the OP's stats.
avatar
Magnitus: I recall reading a guide where in order to boost the running stats of his character in Morrowind, a player stuck the joystick diagonally with an elastic band and let his character run in circles all night long.

Could be things like that.
That sure could be.
I don't know how exactly Galaxy clocks in the "hours played" (is it hours actual spent in some game, or hours logged into galaxy, or hours the user is online in general), but one thing is for sure: there's no way that user could have actually spent these hours playing - it's physically impossible.

So, yeah - either the user wanted to boost their stats artificially (like in your example), or Galaxy simply doesn't clock in the actual playing hours properly (which is more probable in my opinion).

However...my point is: there's no point in gathering data like "hours played", if that data is wrong from the start.
That number would most probably be more aptly named:
"time spent online using Galaxy, while not necessarily being present".

But, of course - that doesn't sound as sexy as "hours played".

;)
avatar
ciemnogrodzianin: Wow, that's quite surprising for me. I'd never expect such a big share of 0-hours-players.

Is it possible to check somehow this % versus only active users? I guess there might be a lot of old users, who are no longer active GOG customers and that's the reason they've never started to use Galaxy. They should be excluded here, as they had never made a decision to use or do not use Galaxy.
It seems normal to me as telemetry based stats will always be heavily biased in favour of Galaxy when the very nature of offline installers means they'll always be under-counted as unlike Galaxy, "this user hasn't logged in online for over a year" doesn't mean "this user isn't playing previously purchased GOG games". I can easily believe 1-in-3 don't use Galaxy (given the sheer number of people on the forum with profiles disabled), and there are also plenty of "one-game accounts" here such as someone who only created a GOG account because they got a Witcher 3 GOG code with a GPU purchase, played around 50-100 hours via Galaxy, then once finished stopped using GOG altogether and went back to Steam, will be using GOG far less overall than someone who bought and downloaded offline installers of 50 games in 2012, hasn't logged in online to buy anything new since, but is still regularly playing them (offline) but is excluded from being "counted" for "lack of online activity" when the whole point of why they bought offline installers in the first place, is precisely to not take part in online popularity contests, and will thus always be under-counted...
Post edited March 28, 2022 by BrianSim
avatar
ciemnogrodzianin: Wow, that's quite surprising for me. I'd never expect such a big share of 0-hours-players.
Played time can ONLY be tracked with an active galaxy client AND the game being bound to galaxy.

So it doesn't mean nobody plays but it means many do not use Galaxy.

avatar
BreOl72: That sure could be.
I don't know how exactly Galaxy clocks in the "hours played" (is it hours actual spent in some game, or hours logged into galaxy, or hours the user is online in general), but one thing is for sure: there's no way that user could have actually spent these hours playing - it's physically impossible.

So, yeah - either the user wanted to boost their stats artificially (like in your example), or Galaxy simply doesn't clock in the actual playing hours properly (which is more probable in my opinion).

However...my point is: there's no point in gathering data like "hours played", if that data is wrong from the start.
That number would most probably be more aptly named:
"time spent online using Galaxy, while not necessarily being present".

But, of course - that doesn't sound as sexy as "hours played".

;)
Wrote above how players can get such numbers.
I know people who had 3 games running minimized (menue open usually) for weeks and all that time was counted as "active play time" by Steam.
Don't think Galaxy is working in another way.
low rated
avatar
AgentAndre: So I would guess about 30%-50% of the users do not use GOG Galaxy based on these (not very accurate) numbers.
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: A few years ago a GOG employee said in a documentary that way more GOG customers do use Galaxy than those who don't.
GOG employees have also said that Galaxy will always be optional and that Cyberpunk "My Rewards" being locked behind Galaxy isn't DRM, so it isn't like we should feel a particular need to take them at their word.

That said, even if it is the case more users are on Galaxy, the data is contaminated as Galaxy has continued to be marketed as the "default" and some users may not even know offline installers exist (surely intentional imo).

To tout the contaminated data in favor of Galaxy is like saying the majority of people who installed Flash also installed Chrome or Norton crapware that was automatically checked "on" and had to be manually navigated around.

Separate from all that, I would like to echo the sentiment of another poster or two earlier in this topic...these users may not have wanted attention called to themselves (even if their stats are publicly accessible).
low rated
avatar
Ancient-Red-Dragon: A few years ago a GOG employee said in a documentary that way more GOG customers do use Galaxy than those who don't.
avatar
rjbuffchix: GOG employees have also said that Galaxy will always be optional and that Cyberpunk "My Rewards" being locked behind Galaxy isn't DRM, so it isn't like we should feel a particular need to take them at their word.

That said, even if it is the case more users are on Galaxy, the data is contaminated as Galaxy has continued to be marketed as the "default" and some users may not even know offline installers exist (surely intentional imo).

To tout the contaminated data in favor of Galaxy is like saying the majority of people who installed Flash also installed Chrome or Norton crapware that was automatically checked "on" and had to be manually navigated around.

Separate from all that, I would like to echo the sentiment of another poster or two earlier in this topic...these users may not have wanted attention called to themselves (even if their stats are publicly accessible).
like lootpacks are not gambling but surprise mechanics?
our shitty governments should really start to regulate these companies
Post edited March 28, 2022 by Orkhepaj
avatar
AgentAndre: Top 10 - Played Hours (March 26 2022)

K1ller 53099
o.O Holy shit! This person has more hours in just WC2 alone than I have in all of my games played since I started using time-tracking. Gaming is life?
Attachments:
well_now.jpg (140 Kb)
avatar
BrianSim: ...
avatar
randomuser.833: ...
Sure, I'm aware of that. I'm one of these users who officially played 0 hours on GOG. Once I was even asked by someone "what's the purpose to own so many games if you never play them?" :D

My question was different. It would be great to know how many user are active on GOG and regularly purchase here, but are not Galaxy users. The problem with statistics shown above (which are great! thanks, @AgentAndrew) is that we still know nothing about current-active userbase, which may be completely different (perhaps we're only 20% of a whole 15-years old userbase).

I also think that non-Galaxy users may not be such a big share. Please, note that forum community is definitely not representative for GOG's userbase. I guess there might be a lot of active customers with big share in sales who are not even aware that any forum exists.
avatar
randomuser.833: ...
avatar
ciemnogrodzianin: (perhaps we're only 20% of a whole 15-years old userbase).
Way to high...