Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
FOUR STARS...FOR WHAT ??
Posts
Liberty
View playlists
CloseBut 300 words is not long.
I'm seriously considering championing for that amount to get upped to 500 words at least. Maybe then people will stop bitching? (Then when they do we can lower it back to 300 words and see just how they like that. FFS, I've written longer posts in reply to a thread. Hell, some of the replies in this thread are about 300 words if not more!)
I'm seriously considering championing for that amount to get upped to 500 words at least. Maybe then people will stop bitching? (Then when they do we can lower it back to 300 words and see just how they like that. FFS, I've written longer posts in reply to a thread. Hell, some of the replies in this thread are about 300 words if not more!)
author=Liberty
But 300 words is not long.
I'm seriously considering championing for that amount to get upped to 500 words at least. Maybe then people will stop bitching? (Then when they do we can lower it back to 300 words and see just how they like that. FFS, I've written longer posts in reply to a thread. Hell, some of the replies in this thread are about 300 words if not more!)
tl;dr
RyaReisender
200
Graphics 3.5/5 - Uses default RTP, but mapping is nice so I'll put it above average.
Music 1/5 - Game didn't have any music or sound effects and I felt it could really need some.
Gameplay 2/5 - Gameplay outside of combat is nice, but battles are really boring and the balance is horrible.
Story 4.5/5 - Really interesting story, it was probably the only thing that really kept me going.
Total 3/5 - Game is mostly ruined by lack of sound and really tedious and unbalanced battles, but the story is really good and the mapping is nice. Together it adds up to average.
My sample review is 115 words and consequently would be too small.
I think 300 characters or even 500 characters would be fine or 100 words. But more is not so good. Not if you allow rating only when a review is done.
Lately, I've been against numbers as any kind of helpful criteria by which art is measured to be good. Detailed essays in which reviewers explain both the work and their reaction to it are much better. Much more human.
After all, it was a person who made each of these works.
After all, it was a person who made each of these works.
I don't like the way Gamejolt does their system since most of the time it's just ratings without any explanation, comment or feedback. And that's already the biggest problem we have on the community right now.
I like the way RMN has it set up, and we do have buzzing games and new and notable for more exposure.
I like the way RMN has it set up, and we do have buzzing games and new and notable for more exposure.
Rya, frankly, that review is crappy and doesn't tell anyone anything. Put a bit of effort into it for the sake of fuck.
Because you said fuck all in your so-called review. What, exactly, did you say? That the mapping was okay, the sound was shit, the story was great, gameplay was spotty in areas and overall you didn't mind it. FFS. Seriously.
Graphics 3.5/5 - Uses default RTP, but mapping is nice so I'll put it above average.What was so nice about the graphics? I mean, all you said was that they were good despite being RTP. Why were they good? What do you consider nice? What stood out to you as worth above average? Were there places where the creator could improve? This tells the reader absolutely Fuck All.
Music 1/5 - Game didn't have any music or sound effects and I felt it could really need some.Where could sound effects be put in? Were there any areas that actually were enhanced due to the lack of music? In the case that a game had music would you just have written "The music fit and sounds were good"? In that case why not expound on what particular areas you liked, where music didn't really help out or if anything was jarring?
Gameplay 2/5 - Gameplay outside of combat is nice, but battles are really boring and the balance is horrible.How is it nice? Give us a few fucking examples. Was there minigames that were neat? If so, what kinds? And why were battles boring? Examples of bad balancing so the creator knows what, exactly, was unbalanced. Was there anything you liked? Was there anything that you thought could be cut out of the game?
Story 4.5/5 - Really interesting story, it was probably the only thing that really kept me going.Why was it good? Was it the characters? Which parts did you enjoy? Were there any parts that confused you or didn't make sense? Anything you thought shone in particular? Were characters well-crafted and if so, which was your favourite and why? Did you have a specific story part that you liked or thought could be polished up?
Total 3/5 - Game is mostly ruined by lack of sound and really tedious and unbalanced battles, but the story is really good and the mapping is nice. Together it adds up to average.Would you recommend it to any one group? What kind of things would you suggest the creator work on a bit more? Did you like it, in general, and in your opinion is it worth playing?
My sample review is 115 words and consequently would be too small.
I think 300 characters or even 500 characters would be fine or 100 words. But more is not so good. Not if you allow rating only when a review is done.
Because you said fuck all in your so-called review. What, exactly, did you say? That the mapping was okay, the sound was shit, the story was great, gameplay was spotty in areas and overall you didn't mind it. FFS. Seriously.
Liberty, could it be that you are getting a bit too worked up about this? I totally agree that any review, rated or not, should be much more in-depth than above example. But after all, people here are just having a discussion and explaining their viewpoints. Isn't that essentially a good thing?
Nobody wants to (or, for that matter, would be able to) force you to change the rules. We're merely suggesting options, hoping to improve something for all of us. There's no need to let this thread escalate.
Nobody wants to (or, for that matter, would be able to) force you to change the rules. We're merely suggesting options, hoping to improve something for all of us. There's no need to let this thread escalate.
No, not really. I can understand if someone wrote a good review with low word count, but that example? Not a good review. And that they put it forth as a "Why was this denied I couldn't write any more it was long enough waaaah" example? They're just shooting their own argument in the foot. Which is what I'm trying to point out.
That review isn't. A review. It's a bunch of words that give opinion without actually telling why that opinion exists. The only decent part of the 'review' was the music portion and that's only because they had nothing to draw off beyond 'there was no music'. Okay, that's fine, but the rest? No. At least give an example of what you meant because frankly, no-one is going to know what you mean.
It's not enough to say "I liked this" and then give a score. You need to say at least why you liked it, show an example of why or why not so that others reading can say "Oh, fair enough."
Complaining that 'I couldn't write any more' when there's literally a fuckton that could be written? Even just answering one or two of the questions posed for each section would have doubled, if not tripled, the word amount.
Laziness is all it is.
Put at least a little more effort into it than just "I liked this because it looked good." "This was okay out of battles but in was unbalanced." It doesn't tell you crap and doesn't verify in the readers eyes. If you're going to say something about a game, good or bad, at least say how or why!
That 'review' could easily be 300 words in length. It doesn't take an IQ of 200 to write that many words, really. Hell, even 10 year olds write more than that for stories in school! And complaining about something that minimal? It's just stupid.
Write 300 words, add a score, boom. Easy as fucking pie.
That review isn't. A review. It's a bunch of words that give opinion without actually telling why that opinion exists. The only decent part of the 'review' was the music portion and that's only because they had nothing to draw off beyond 'there was no music'. Okay, that's fine, but the rest? No. At least give an example of what you meant because frankly, no-one is going to know what you mean.
It's not enough to say "I liked this" and then give a score. You need to say at least why you liked it, show an example of why or why not so that others reading can say "Oh, fair enough."
Complaining that 'I couldn't write any more' when there's literally a fuckton that could be written? Even just answering one or two of the questions posed for each section would have doubled, if not tripled, the word amount.
Laziness is all it is.
Put at least a little more effort into it than just "I liked this because it looked good." "This was okay out of battles but in was unbalanced." It doesn't tell you crap and doesn't verify in the readers eyes. If you're going to say something about a game, good or bad, at least say how or why!
That 'review' could easily be 300 words in length. It doesn't take an IQ of 200 to write that many words, really. Hell, even 10 year olds write more than that for stories in school! And complaining about something that minimal? It's just stupid.
Write 300 words, add a score, boom. Easy as fucking pie.
turkeyDawg
195
Uh.. I'm not sure if this was mentioned already, but if a game's score is supposed to be an average of its reviews, then maybe the score shouldn't be displayed until there are enough reviews to make an actual average. Like, at least 3 or 5. If a game required a minimum number of reviews before its score was visible, then it might motivate people to write more reviews...
Eh... probably not.
As for demos, it seems to me that the sensible solution would be to check the date of the review and compare it to the game's completion date before adding it to the list of values to be averaged, but I'm no web programmer so I have no idea how hard that would be.
And yeah, 300 words* ain't much if you actually have something to say. I have a single-page review draft of Sonic the Hedgehog that's a little under 800 words. A SINGLE PAGE (12pt Times New Roman). And it doesn't even mention the graphics or music.
My barely-started Ristar review is 1.5 paragraphs and pretty much only mentions the graphics so far, and its 229 words. Believe me, YOU CAN DO 300 WORDS.
*Assuming the "word count" uses your average word processor's "Statistics" page
I'd write reviews for this site if I actually finished the games that I download...
Eh... probably not.
As for demos, it seems to me that the sensible solution would be to check the date of the review and compare it to the game's completion date before adding it to the list of values to be averaged, but I'm no web programmer so I have no idea how hard that would be.
And yeah, 300 words* ain't much if you actually have something to say. I have a single-page review draft of Sonic the Hedgehog that's a little under 800 words. A SINGLE PAGE (12pt Times New Roman). And it doesn't even mention the graphics or music.
My barely-started Ristar review is 1.5 paragraphs and pretty much only mentions the graphics so far, and its 229 words. Believe me, YOU CAN DO 300 WORDS.
*Assuming the "word count" uses your average word processor's "Statistics" page
I'd write reviews for this site if I actually finished the games that I download...
RyaReisender
200
With the strict reviewing rules there will hardly ever be even 3 reviews. Only the most popular games have 3+ reviews here.
@Liberty
While I of course could write better reviews than in the example, I think the content of the review is good enough to prove that I (or whoever writes it) actually thought about the score and thus should be qualified to rate the game. It doesn't qualify you as good reviewer, but as someone who actually thought about it before giving the game a score.
Laziness? Sure. It is laziness. But if laziness prevents many people from rating a game they would like to rate, then the rules are counterproductive.
@Liberty
While I of course could write better reviews than in the example, I think the content of the review is good enough to prove that I (or whoever writes it) actually thought about the score and thus should be qualified to rate the game. It doesn't qualify you as good reviewer, but as someone who actually thought about it before giving the game a score.
Laziness? Sure. It is laziness. But if laziness prevents many people from rating a game they would like to rate, then the rules are counterproductive.
oh crap, maybe I better not even think about writing a review :(
Would hate to be rejected by a "lady from Australia" hahahahahahahaha
Not sure I could take the rejection :(
I wonder why it's feels so hard to write a decent review.
I know what I like, what I enjoy....but putting it into a 3-500 word review that will actually mean something....
Maybe I should read those "how to write a review tutorial"
ah gees Liberty, I was just kidding :)
Would hate to be rejected by a "lady from Australia" hahahahahahahaha
Not sure I could take the rejection :(
I wonder why it's feels so hard to write a decent review.
I know what I like, what I enjoy....but putting it into a 3-500 word review that will actually mean something....
Maybe I should read those "how to write a review tutorial"
ah gees Liberty, I was just kidding :)
amerk
2539
This topic is escalating to nowhere fast other than Liberty telling everybody to fuck off. Congrats, Liberty, I'm sure if we were to tell you the same, we wouldn't be here for much longer.
If you had bothered to actually participate in the discussion, you would have realized that the problem isn't so much with the length of reviews, but the fact that not enough people are writing them. This in turn means scores are more prone to being biased rather than balanced, and developers aren't getting the feedback they need.
So rather than spouting off "300 words, 300 words" over and over again like a parrot, maybe you can come up with a reasonable solution that will encourage more reviews.
Does this mean I'm taking your antics a bit more personal? Perhaps. But frankly I'm tired of the condescending attitude and belittling everybody's suggestions. Even as Admin myself at another RM community, I would never think of talking down to people that way, and I find it shameful that you're allowed to do it here.
If you had bothered to actually participate in the discussion, you would have realized that the problem isn't so much with the length of reviews, but the fact that not enough people are writing them. This in turn means scores are more prone to being biased rather than balanced, and developers aren't getting the feedback they need.
So rather than spouting off "300 words, 300 words" over and over again like a parrot, maybe you can come up with a reasonable solution that will encourage more reviews.
Does this mean I'm taking your antics a bit more personal? Perhaps. But frankly I'm tired of the condescending attitude and belittling everybody's suggestions. Even as Admin myself at another RM community, I would never think of talking down to people that way, and I find it shameful that you're allowed to do it here.
@amerk, I'm pretty sure Liberty will respond herself, but since I created this monster, thought it might be ok for me to say something.
I have a feeling Liberty might be a little frustrated and I can understand that.
I have a feeling some of you are upset with a word or two she uses. I was also wondering the same thing. BUT, I've got a feeling it's a way of speaking. Some of us simply use a few words more than others are used to hearing :)
It looks like about 15 of us would like to make reviewing easier and Liberty is the only person answering us....I actually feel a little sorry for her having to take us all on and try to make us understand that 300 words is not really a lot to write.
As for me, my spelling and grammar are not great and sometimes the spell/grammar check I use may even be giving me bad information :)
MAYBE, since the developers are the only ones who REALLY know what goes into a game should be doing the real reviews so the game maker gets a pros feedback and let the rest of us give a star review based on how we like or not like a game.
Those who don't know how to make a game can give a number of stars and an opinion in the post area if we want.
DAMN, did I just come up with a halfway decent idea ??? :)
I have a feeling Liberty might be a little frustrated and I can understand that.
I have a feeling some of you are upset with a word or two she uses. I was also wondering the same thing. BUT, I've got a feeling it's a way of speaking. Some of us simply use a few words more than others are used to hearing :)
It looks like about 15 of us would like to make reviewing easier and Liberty is the only person answering us....I actually feel a little sorry for her having to take us all on and try to make us understand that 300 words is not really a lot to write.
As for me, my spelling and grammar are not great and sometimes the spell/grammar check I use may even be giving me bad information :)
MAYBE, since the developers are the only ones who REALLY know what goes into a game should be doing the real reviews so the game maker gets a pros feedback and let the rest of us give a star review based on how we like or not like a game.
Those who don't know how to make a game can give a number of stars and an opinion in the post area if we want.
DAMN, did I just come up with a halfway decent idea ??? :)
A humble suggestion: Let's all try to calm down a bit and get this thread back on the constructive track. Throwing F-bombs at each other is not going to solve anything in any way.
Good call, amerk. Let me throw in an idea here: Does anyone remember the "Reviewrim" event from the beginning of the year? Now that was a blast and encouraged tons of reviews. It would be great to do something like that again.
I suggest organizing a similar event, but this time make it so that users sign up to review a certain game (or multiple games) while it is made sure that there are always at least 2 individual people "assigned" to a game. Then, they would each write a review for this game independently and be rewarded with an achievement or something similar. That way, there would never be a one-sided rating because every review would have at least one other review to balance it out.
Ergo: More useful feedback for the developer, a fairer average rating of the game, and an extra incentive for members to actually review games. What do you think?
Thing is, Linkis, that most active members here are actually game developers themselves. Not all are professionals, mind you, but the majority are currently making games, which kind of defeats the point of your idea.
However, nothing stops you from posting your impressions of a game (or even a "rating") into the comment section of its gamepage. People usually look at those as well (at least I know I do).
author=amerk
maybe you can come up with a reasonable solution that will encourage more reviews.
Good call, amerk. Let me throw in an idea here: Does anyone remember the "Reviewrim" event from the beginning of the year? Now that was a blast and encouraged tons of reviews. It would be great to do something like that again.
I suggest organizing a similar event, but this time make it so that users sign up to review a certain game (or multiple games) while it is made sure that there are always at least 2 individual people "assigned" to a game. Then, they would each write a review for this game independently and be rewarded with an achievement or something similar. That way, there would never be a one-sided rating because every review would have at least one other review to balance it out.
Ergo: More useful feedback for the developer, a fairer average rating of the game, and an extra incentive for members to actually review games. What do you think?
author=Linkis
MAYBE, since the developers are the only ones who REALLY know what goes into a game should be doing the real reviews so the game maker gets a pros feedback and let the rest of us give a star review based on how we like or not like a game.
Those who don't know how to make a game can give a number of stars and an opinion in the post area if we want.
Thing is, Linkis, that most active members here are actually game developers themselves. Not all are professionals, mind you, but the majority are currently making games, which kind of defeats the point of your idea.
However, nothing stops you from posting your impressions of a game (or even a "rating") into the comment section of its gamepage. People usually look at those as well (at least I know I do).
Thing is Never, you may be wrong :)
Many times I will read a review and if that person either says a game is terrible and rips it to shreds OR they clearly explain why they thought a game was so good, I would click on their names to see their games and try to decide just how well their games are made. MANY, MANY times there is either nothing in their developers section or they have several unfinished games.
If they have several finished games I will check them out and maybe play one. On the other hand, if they have several unfinished games from 2-5 years old...how much do they really know about making games and if not much then how much is their opinion on why a game is good or bad really worth...
I know. I purchased the VXACE and have so much trouble understanding how to actually create a game, so what do I know :( for that reason "just saying ^^^the above. I love playing many of the games on this site but can't seem to get myself to actually make one :(
Many times I will read a review and if that person either says a game is terrible and rips it to shreds OR they clearly explain why they thought a game was so good, I would click on their names to see their games and try to decide just how well their games are made. MANY, MANY times there is either nothing in their developers section or they have several unfinished games.
If they have several finished games I will check them out and maybe play one. On the other hand, if they have several unfinished games from 2-5 years old...how much do they really know about making games and if not much then how much is their opinion on why a game is good or bad really worth...
I know. I purchased the VXACE and have so much trouble understanding how to actually create a game, so what do I know :( for that reason "just saying ^^^the above. I love playing many of the games on this site but can't seem to get myself to actually make one :(
Except Libby, problem is what amerk had said - less review = more biased ones (with negative bias more likely, as it is easier to find more reasons that game is shit than that it is any good). Maybe I'll just quote my earlier post, bolded relevant.
By "revenge" scores I meant both scores posted by "fanboy" of the game and people that have beef with creator for some reasons. It will all even out to be trustworthy rating. It's a self-regulating system.
Because as it is now, score really doesn't mean anything.
author=Rave
How about this: "Short" review (clicking star, perhaps with short comment) won't net ANYONE makerscore while long reviews 9as they are now) will? Then we'll have best of both worlds.
And I agree that when anyone will be able to rate game, "revenge" scores will drown in the sea of accurate ones.
By "revenge" scores I meant both scores posted by "fanboy" of the game and people that have beef with creator for some reasons. It will all even out to be trustworthy rating. It's a self-regulating system.
Because as it is now, score really doesn't mean anything.
Why bother with reviews at all then? Just give everyone the ability to score a game seems to be what you're saying, since the actual written component don't mean shit, apparently.
Frankly, if you can't write 300 measly words on a game you played then why bother with reviewing at all?
(Oh, and for the record, me swearing != actual heat to my words. I plead the Aussie swearing contract of 04 - that is, I swear as a natural part of my speech and thus don't bother - on rmn at least - to self-edit in that regard. It's bad enough I edit my posts all the fucking time for grammar/spelling mistakes as is. XD
So, if you took that to mean I am angry and took offense, don't. It's not aimed at any of you, just how I talk in general.)
Also, as to revenge scores - yeah, no. We've all seen the jump on that happens in games where people give a 5 star to what should be a 3-star game and then the horde that descends, giving it 1-stars and driving its score to below 2. Or at least, I've seen it before. People get stupid over scores so it's best to either require some effort put in for them OR allow each and every person to score (but in that case you have people scoring based on what the game looks like and everyone with half a brain knows that just because something looks good, that doesn't mean it is good.)
Another reason that I'm all for 300+ words is that it actually requires you to play the game (or be very good at fobbing). Under that you could write a review based on what you see in screenshots and with just vague generalities you can just 'say' you played it and give it that 5-star review without actually doing so. Hell, you could just read someone else's review and summarise it. There's no effort or proof that you played the game (hence why we actually ask that if you give 5 or .5 stars that you make your case as to why you're giving the 'perfect/worst' score.)
Because drama, everywhere. >.<;
That said, I'm currently waiting on an article to be approved so that I can slap it here for anyone who has trouble reaching the 300 mark. It's a guide to pimping out your reviews a bit more and how.
As for events, we do tend to host review ones after a larger contest. Maybe after this Indie competition. We can't have them all the time or people would get burnt out - same reason we don't have game creation events every month.
Frankly, if you can't write 300 measly words on a game you played then why bother with reviewing at all?
(Oh, and for the record, me swearing != actual heat to my words. I plead the Aussie swearing contract of 04 - that is, I swear as a natural part of my speech and thus don't bother - on rmn at least - to self-edit in that regard. It's bad enough I edit my posts all the fucking time for grammar/spelling mistakes as is. XD
So, if you took that to mean I am angry and took offense, don't. It's not aimed at any of you, just how I talk in general.)
Also, as to revenge scores - yeah, no. We've all seen the jump on that happens in games where people give a 5 star to what should be a 3-star game and then the horde that descends, giving it 1-stars and driving its score to below 2. Or at least, I've seen it before. People get stupid over scores so it's best to either require some effort put in for them OR allow each and every person to score (but in that case you have people scoring based on what the game looks like and everyone with half a brain knows that just because something looks good, that doesn't mean it is good.)
Another reason that I'm all for 300+ words is that it actually requires you to play the game (or be very good at fobbing). Under that you could write a review based on what you see in screenshots and with just vague generalities you can just 'say' you played it and give it that 5-star review without actually doing so. Hell, you could just read someone else's review and summarise it. There's no effort or proof that you played the game (hence why we actually ask that if you give 5 or .5 stars that you make your case as to why you're giving the 'perfect/worst' score.)
Because drama, everywhere. >.<;
That said, I'm currently waiting on an article to be approved so that I can slap it here for anyone who has trouble reaching the 300 mark. It's a guide to pimping out your reviews a bit more and how.
As for events, we do tend to host review ones after a larger contest. Maybe after this Indie competition. We can't have them all the time or people would get burnt out - same reason we don't have game creation events every month.
Kaempfer
1932
Sometimes I go to post and then I just read Liberty's posts and she has already said everything I wanted to. Stop stealing my thunder, please.
I would favour a 500 word minimum, as well. There's no reason you should be posting a review if you haven't actually reviewed anything.
Like Liberty sort of said (THUNDER STEALER), you wanting to share a half-formed thought or opinion doesn't really warrant you posting a review. Saying "I don't like the music" is useless to everyone. Perhaps the game was filled with sweeping orchestral music which fit the mood perfectly but you, personally, don't like. Does that actually have any bearing on the quality of the game? No, no it doesn't.
Metacritic has shown us that allowing users to just hit a button and score something breaks the system. Look at scores of Diablo 3- Reviewers (people who actually have to play it and think about its pros and cons): 88%, Users (people who were mad that it wasn't Diablo 2): 35%. Many give no justification of their vote, and it makes the 35% overall a complete waste of time. I don't want to read a factsheet of your opinions. With the exception of a very few people I've interknown for a long time, I don't care what your opinions are. I want to see a review- what's good, what's bad, what's so-so. That is useful to me, going into the game. That will generate actual discussion. Your opinions will, at best, generate flamewars.
As an aside, I always think it's funny when Liberty has to apologize for swearing. oh no sware wards, oh no using caps for emphasis u must be mad =(
I would favour a 500 word minimum, as well. There's no reason you should be posting a review if you haven't actually reviewed anything.
Like Liberty sort of said (THUNDER STEALER), you wanting to share a half-formed thought or opinion doesn't really warrant you posting a review. Saying "I don't like the music" is useless to everyone. Perhaps the game was filled with sweeping orchestral music which fit the mood perfectly but you, personally, don't like. Does that actually have any bearing on the quality of the game? No, no it doesn't.
Metacritic has shown us that allowing users to just hit a button and score something breaks the system. Look at scores of Diablo 3- Reviewers (people who actually have to play it and think about its pros and cons): 88%, Users (people who were mad that it wasn't Diablo 2): 35%. Many give no justification of their vote, and it makes the 35% overall a complete waste of time. I don't want to read a factsheet of your opinions. With the exception of a very few people I've interknown for a long time, I don't care what your opinions are. I want to see a review- what's good, what's bad, what's so-so. That is useful to me, going into the game. That will generate actual discussion. Your opinions will, at best, generate flamewars.
As an aside, I always think it's funny when Liberty has to apologize for swearing. oh no sware wards, oh no using caps for emphasis u must be mad =(
