Full Games List
Featured Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Engines
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engine Bulletins
Links
What is Makerscore?
Store
RMN Music Pack
Event History
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Status History
The Latest
RMN TV
#rpgmaker.net IRC
New to RMN?
rpgmaker.net needs your help (again)!
PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT A HALF ASS / BAD REVIEW
Posts
iddalai
1000
iddalai
CloseI'm not sure if you're joking or not, but Iddalai is actually the name of a project I have since 2001...
author=iddalai
Games in general should not be reviewed using scores, they should use comparisons with other games instead.
Chances are that even if a game get's awful reviews it will still be fun to play for someone.
That and every reviewer is indirectly biased by their preferences.
Yes. Absolutely. Positively. The scoring of games is a mostly useless practice that does little to serve what should be the goal of a review system--to match games with their target audiences.
A recommendation system should be considered instead. For instance, even that mediocre zombie survival game that most of us are sick of seeing can be "Recommended to hardcore zombie fans". This tells everyone what they need to know. Hardcore zombie fans know to play the game and the rest of us know to avoid it.
Rating systems are overrated. Especially the ubiquitous scale of 1 to 10 rating system. If I had to rate the scale of 1 to 10 system, I'd rate it a .5.
Darken
981
author=flowerthief
A recommendation system should be considered instead. For instance, even that mediocre zombie survival game that most of us are sick of seeing can be "Recommended to hardcore zombie fans". This tells everyone what they need to know. Hardcore zombie fans know to play the game and the rest of us know to avoid it.
http://rpgmaker.net/games/?engine=&status=&tag=HOR&rating=&sort=
ok
author=kentona
http://rpgmaker.net/search/?query=zombie
I find it sad that Befuddle quest Zombie isn't in this list.
Thank you. My zombie example admits defeat.
Enough of offering half-baked suggestions and back to whining... :P
So I have serious doubts that the scoring of games does much good...or even any good...or even less harm than good. The very premise that some random game must have enough in common with some other random game that you can make a meaningful comparison through the practice of scoring is a questionable one. I think that diversity in games and gaming tastes closer approaches diversity in musical tastes than diversity in movie tastes, and even movie critics don't use the scale-of-1-to-10 system. (at least not the ones I read)
It's a silly practice imo that is only going to become sillier as more and more genres are invented. Already it's sort of a joke within the industry. Like everybody knows this makes no sense but we keep doing it anyway.
Enough of offering half-baked suggestions and back to whining... :P
So I have serious doubts that the scoring of games does much good...or even any good...or even less harm than good. The very premise that some random game must have enough in common with some other random game that you can make a meaningful comparison through the practice of scoring is a questionable one. I think that diversity in games and gaming tastes closer approaches diversity in musical tastes than diversity in movie tastes, and even movie critics don't use the scale-of-1-to-10 system. (at least not the ones I read)
It's a silly practice imo that is only going to become sillier as more and more genres are invented. Already it's sort of a joke within the industry. Like everybody knows this makes no sense but we keep doing it anyway.
...and then there are entire site dedicated to scoring movies, and generating aggregate and average scores, and Certified Fresh, and user rating on IMDB, etc etc... And then you have scoring for music albums and then there's the reviews with scores on sites like Amazon for books, and not to mention scores of gaming websites rating games with scores.
While it seems logical to assume "there's got to be a better way", you gotta acknowledge the ubiquity of scoring systems for rating items, and that there's something to it.
While it seems logical to assume "there's got to be a better way", you gotta acknowledge the ubiquity of scoring systems for rating items, and that there's something to it.
Darken
981
The point of the scoring system is generally to bump up the game higher than others if more and more people write positive reviews . If one were to write a 5 star review for an unreviewed game, that game gets shot up the charts. Thing is, that game now has immediate attention and if someone else disagrees he can lower that average score provided he writes a passable review. THIS IS FINE, believe it or not. It allows for unnoticed games to receive that deserved attention. The only weakness is that there isn't quite a big sample size (compare the people who have enough motivation to play and write reviews to the people who don't have accounts and just play games) in order to make the metadata or whatever work.
But you have to keep in mind that this is the closest you can possibly get to merging subjectivity and objectivity. If you made it so that it was out of 3 stars or just plain thumbs down or thumbs up, the same general problems persist (or other problems come into play) because there is no completely perfect way to judge games on a concrete level. I hate to break it to you but, the rating system has a beneficial impact to how people find games they want to play.
You know that joke only applies to the celebrity side of review sites right? This doesn't really have a place in the RM community since reviews are mostly made by PEOPLE who aren't being paid or given maximum credibility. Metacritic or Rotten tomatoes is really the only mainstream example. And i like sites like those because users can offer a HUGE contrast on the general opinion of a product is: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/mass-effect-3
I'm wondering if your complaints are just based on vague conceptions of gaming media and the hatred towards a number based way of marking quality but you can easily just... ignore the rating a review gives and read it yourself. Chances are people who are easily swayed by numbers are hopeless anyway. By the by, the rating system isn't the only venue for exposure or recommendations, you can sort by most views, most downloads, find which genre you want, judge based on screenshots or comments, look at the frontpage etc. Any suggestion will either sit next to the rating system or become just another alternative with the same general pros and cons.
But you have to keep in mind that this is the closest you can possibly get to merging subjectivity and objectivity. If you made it so that it was out of 3 stars or just plain thumbs down or thumbs up, the same general problems persist (or other problems come into play) because there is no completely perfect way to judge games on a concrete level. I hate to break it to you but, the rating system has a beneficial impact to how people find games they want to play.
author=flowerthief
It's a silly practice imo that is only going to become sillier as more and more genres are invented. Already it's sort of a joke within the industry. Like everybody knows this makes no sense but we keep doing it anyway.
You know that joke only applies to the celebrity side of review sites right? This doesn't really have a place in the RM community since reviews are mostly made by PEOPLE who aren't being paid or given maximum credibility. Metacritic or Rotten tomatoes is really the only mainstream example. And i like sites like those because users can offer a HUGE contrast on the general opinion of a product is: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/mass-effect-3
I'm wondering if your complaints are just based on vague conceptions of gaming media and the hatred towards a number based way of marking quality but you can easily just... ignore the rating a review gives and read it yourself. Chances are people who are easily swayed by numbers are hopeless anyway. By the by, the rating system isn't the only venue for exposure or recommendations, you can sort by most views, most downloads, find which genre you want, judge based on screenshots or comments, look at the frontpage etc. Any suggestion will either sit next to the rating system or become just another alternative with the same general pros and cons.
@kentona
I suspect that a big part of the ubiquity can be attributed to "people like scoring things". It's fun. I used to be the type to get involved in those kinds of sites, scoring movies, games, books, etc. Then I realized that what I had pretended I was doing for the sake of others I was mostly doing for myself.
I tend to think a lot of scoring systems exist to satisfy a masturbatory urge on the part of critics and wannabe critics. It may not be their stated purpose but....
@Darken
You're right that I didn't have RMN in mind. Myhatred criticism ("hatred" is a strong word!) of the practice is general. Gametrailers is a good example; they do quality reviews which are helpful to me in picking games to play, but their scoring system is nonsensical. I'd like to see the industry move away from scoring to something more like recommendations tailored to specific tastes (or comparisons of similar games like Iddalai suggested).
Do free games need to be judged?
But does it help them find games they should play? Meaning, of course, games that they would enjoy because it matches their tastes? Or does it just help them find whatever has mass appeal?
If you like them for the HUGE contrast, then how much does the aggregate score matter?
I suspect that a big part of the ubiquity can be attributed to "people like scoring things". It's fun. I used to be the type to get involved in those kinds of sites, scoring movies, games, books, etc. Then I realized that what I had pretended I was doing for the sake of others I was mostly doing for myself.
I tend to think a lot of scoring systems exist to satisfy a masturbatory urge on the part of critics and wannabe critics. It may not be their stated purpose but....
@Darken
You're right that I didn't have RMN in mind. My
But you have to keep in mind that this is the closest you can possibly get to merging subjectivity and objectivity. If you made it so that it was out of 3 stars or just plain thumbs down or thumbs up, the same general problems persist (or other problems come into play) because there is no completely perfect way to judge games on a concrete level.
Do free games need to be judged?
I hate to break it to you but, the rating system has a beneficial impact to how people find games they want to play.
But does it help them find games they should play? Meaning, of course, games that they would enjoy because it matches their tastes? Or does it just help them find whatever has mass appeal?
And i like sites like those because users can offer a HUGE contrast on the general opinion of a product is.
If you like them for the HUGE contrast, then how much does the aggregate score matter?
Do free games need to be judged?Yes. You are assuming that the only cost is monetary. The cost you are forgetting about is time.
No one should play a certain game.
Games that have mass appeal are desired because of the higher chance that the potential player can be in that mass. Can't really fault them for that.
If you can come up with a quick, easy to disseminate and easy to understand system for identifying a game's appeal, please share it. I'd like to see if it is workable, or steal ideas for RMN.
Even considering time, do free games need to be judged?
If they're going to play games, they should play games they will enjoy.
But mass appeal is a very blunt instrument for finding games suited to one's tastes. It lets one down time and again. (I really don't care for Call of Boredom: Modern Shooting. I'd rather play the "worst" game on RMN than it)
I don't know what's best for RMN, but I guess I can think about it.
If they're going to play games, they should play games they will enjoy.
But mass appeal is a very blunt instrument for finding games suited to one's tastes. It lets one down time and again. (I really don't care for Call of Boredom: Modern Shooting. I'd rather play the "worst" game on RMN than it)
I don't know what's best for RMN, but I guess I can think about it.
Avee
846
author=flowerthief
But mass appeal is a very blunt instrument for finding games suited to one's tastes. It lets one down time and again. (I really don't care for Call of Boredom: Modern Shooting. I'd rather play the "worst" game on RMN than it)
In my opinion, gameplay videos are infinitely more reliable than written reviews and scores when trying to make up your mind whether you want to play/buy a game or not.
An individual can therefore see for himself how the game is played and if it suits his/her interests, rather than half-blindly trusting another individual's subjective experience.
I got to play amazing underrated games thanks to youtube videos, so I totally appreciate that RMN is getting a lot of LPs lately.
Okay, I got one. You probably already know of the Music Genome Project which powers Pandora Radio. It's a database of hundreds of traits found in music used to match listeners with music possessing traits in music they enjoy. For example, a random song might possess Melodic songwriting, Layered Electric Guitar Riffs, Heavy syncopation, and Minor key tonality. (the listeners themselves don't have to be conscious of what these traits are)
What if the idea were applied to games? For instance, some players don't like random enemy encounters. But some players do. So presence of random enemy encounters could be one trait in the database.
We could come up with a big list of these. Puzzle-solving, No puzzle-solving, Turn-based combat, Real-time combat, No combat, Linear story, Non-linear story, No story, Large cast, Small cast, Orchestral soundtrack, Rock soundtrack, Substantial hidden content, Unusual art style, Event CG, Mini-games, Online support, Story-telling through use of cutscenes, Checkpoint or auto-save system, Manual save system, No save system, etc.
I'm not saying it would be worth doing. It probably wouldn't. I'm sure it would be a hella pain to implement, and RMN's tags and filter options are advanced as it is. But I'm not aware of any game site having attempted a system like this; whoever does would probably be the first.
What if the idea were applied to games? For instance, some players don't like random enemy encounters. But some players do. So presence of random enemy encounters could be one trait in the database.
We could come up with a big list of these. Puzzle-solving, No puzzle-solving, Turn-based combat, Real-time combat, No combat, Linear story, Non-linear story, No story, Large cast, Small cast, Orchestral soundtrack, Rock soundtrack, Substantial hidden content, Unusual art style, Event CG, Mini-games, Online support, Story-telling through use of cutscenes, Checkpoint or auto-save system, Manual save system, No save system, etc.
I'm not saying it would be worth doing. It probably wouldn't. I'm sure it would be a hella pain to implement, and RMN's tags and filter options are advanced as it is. But I'm not aware of any game site having attempted a system like this; whoever does would probably be the first.
