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)
REVIEW SCORING: STANDARDIZATION, PROFESSIONALISM, ETC.
Posts
Decky
View playlists
Closeauthor=Racheal
Perhaps instead of a numerical scoring system, or as well as, there could be a word system. One person might view 2.5/5 as "average" whereas another might view it as "just barely playable," but if you label it as average, then everyone would view that rating similarly. It wouldn't functionally be that different, but it might make a rating more universal from one person to another.
That's a great idea. The numbers can be behind the scenes. But people have to understand what average is relative to (professional games or other RPG Maker games...).
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be. I'm sure plenty of people who make games here feel the same way, and I'm sure plenty of people who play the games here aren't holding our games to a professional standard either (they're free, for one thing).
I am not a professional game maker. Also I agree with Racheal.
I am not a professional game maker. Also I agree with Racheal.
author=Feldschlacht IV
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be. I'm sure plenty of people who make games here feel the same way, and I'm sure plenty of people who play the games here aren't holding our games to a professional standard either (they're free, for one thing).
I am not a professional game maker.
Thank you! I thought I was the only one who was perfectly fine with being an amateur. I want to improve of course, and want to be a good indie developer, but I'm not in this for a career. It's a hobby, and there are limits to stress and workloads. I'm in this for fun and satisfaction.
author=RachealThis is a great idea. I wish we could agree on a few games to use as a baseline, though. A game or two that we can all agree constitutes being "average."
Perhaps instead of a numerical scoring system, or as well as, there could be a word system. One person might view 2.5/5 as "average" whereas another might view it as "just barely playable," but if you label it as average, then everyone would view that rating similarly. It wouldn't functionally be that different, but it might make a rating more universal from one person to another.
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be.So we should hold back the people who aspire to do something great with the medium? It's the people who aspire to professional quality that truly improve this community and its image.
author=Feldschlacht IV
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be. I'm sure plenty of people who make games here feel the same way, and I'm sure plenty of people who play the games here aren't holding our games to a professional standard either (they're free, for one thing).
I am not a professional game maker.
Yes exactly, but then, there ARE people trying to hold themselves up to some kind of professional standards. I don't think we should review games by comparing them to professional games, but if we have to have a numeric rating system, we should use the same one.
If we don't have to have it, let's go with Racheal's idea. Terrible -> Poor -> Below Average -> Average -> Above Average -> Great -> Amazing
author=Versalia
Yes exactly, but then, there ARE people trying to hold themselves up to some kind of professional standards.
Alright, good for them I guess.
author=Versaliaauthor=Feldschlacht IVYes exactly, but then, there ARE people trying to hold themselves up to some kind of professional standards. I don't think we should review games by comparing them to professional games, but if we have to have a numeric rating system, we should use the same one.
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be. I'm sure plenty of people who make games here feel the same way, and I'm sure plenty of people who play the games here aren't holding our games to a professional standard either (they're free, for one thing).
I am not a professional game maker.
If we don't have to have it, let's go with Racheal's idea. Terrible -> Poor -> Below Average -> Average -> Above Average -> Great -> Amazing
I was thinking, just to keep the same number of increments:
Terrible -> Very Poor -> Poor -> Below Average -> Average -> Above Average -> Good -> Great -> Outstanding -> Perfect
Irili
3198
My idea: two different categories for basing the game's areas (ie. story, graphics, gameplay, etc.)
Category 1
-Playable
-Unplayable
Category 2
-Enjoyable
-Boring
This way, a viewer will quickly see that a game is (for example) playable but boring or (for example) that the game is unplayable in certain aspects but still enjoyable. No numbers involved!
Category 1
-Playable
-Unplayable
Category 2
-Enjoyable
-Boring
This way, a viewer will quickly see that a game is (for example) playable but boring or (for example) that the game is unplayable in certain aspects but still enjoyable. No numbers involved!
author=DeckillerHonestly, I think we should stick to five. The more finely-grained it is, the closer it is to just being a numerical review score. And "perfect" should not be one of them.author=VersaliaI was thinking, just to keep the same number of increments:author=Feldschlacht IVYes exactly, but then, there ARE people trying to hold themselves up to some kind of professional standards. I don't think we should review games by comparing them to professional games, but if we have to have a numeric rating system, we should use the same one.
I don't really want to be compared to professional games/game makers. I'm not a professional game maker, nor do I ever, ever want to be. I'm sure plenty of people who make games here feel the same way, and I'm sure plenty of people who play the games here aren't holding our games to a professional standard either (they're free, for one thing).
I am not a professional game maker.
If we don't have to have it, let's go with Racheal's idea. Terrible -> Poor -> Below Average -> Average -> Above Average -> Great -> Amazing
Terrible -> Very Poor -> Poor -> Below Average -> Average -> Above Average -> Good -> Great -> Outstanding -> Perfect
Poor -> Below Average -> Good -> Great -> Outstanding or something to that effect.
EDIT: We should probably not argue about what they should be called since that's a discussion to be had once a system is designed.
I like a simple "Thumbs Up/Down" system akin to Rotten Tomatoes. The summary of a review is if you would recommend the game to somebody else without provision (I'd recommend Sonic 2006 to anybody who wants to play a trainwreck of a game). It's a simple metric that everybody can understand and relate to. A score of the game is the number of recommendations out of total reviews. I'd go and watch a movie based on it's synopsis and it's Rotten Tomatoes score, and I'd play the first hour of a game based on a similar system.
There's big issues with it. Technically I'd rate UQM and Exit Fate ThumbsUp except UQM is simply so much better and you'd have to rely on the sample population to reflect the score. And when you get a large sample population you get this hive of scum and villiany.
There's big issues with it. Technically I'd rate UQM and Exit Fate ThumbsUp except UQM is simply so much better and you'd have to rely on the sample population to reflect the score. And when you get a large sample population you get this hive of scum and villiany.
author=Sali
So we should hold back the people who aspire to do something great with the medium? It's the people who aspire to professional quality that truly improve this community and its image.
That's great! For them. For those who want to make the 'next great' with indie game making (and its certainly possible!), they can go ahead, nobody's stopping them. But for us who just like to mess around in the program and see what we come up with, considering this is a FREE HOBBY, well, let us go ahead with our thang.
Excuse me while I go smash up some kids Lego set for not adhering to Frank Lloyd Wright's principles of architecture.
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=SaliThat's great! For them. For those who want to make the 'next great' with indie game making (and its certainly possible!), they can go ahead, nobody's stopping them. But for us who just like to mess around in the program and see what we come up with, considering this is a FREE HOBBY, well, let us go ahead with our thang.
So we should hold back the people who aspire to do something great with the medium? It's the people who aspire to professional quality that truly improve this community and its image.
Excuse me while I go smash up some kids Lego set for not adhering to Frank Lloyd Wright's principles of architecture.
I'm in the middle. I want to make something good relative to indie games, but I'm not out to spend 10 hours a day crafting a professional masterpiece by myself. Work is stressful enough. I expect to be judged according to the standard I attempt to meet.
Perihelion
665
I definitely agree that a word rating is a hell of a lot better than a numerical one. That's a fantastic idea.
I also think five increments is a good number. If you want more specific information, read the review.
I also think five increments is a good number. If you want more specific information, read the review.
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=SaliThat's great! For them. For those who want to make the 'next great' with indie game making (and its certainly possible!), they can go ahead, nobody's stopping them. But for us who just like to mess around in the program and see what we come up with, considering this is a FREE HOBBY, well, let us go ahead with our thang.
So we should hold back the people who aspire to do something great with the medium? It's the people who aspire to professional quality that truly improve this community and its image.
Excuse me while I go smash up some kids Lego set for not adhering to Frank Lloyd Wright's principles of architecture.
Whether you like it or not, RMN is the face of the RPG Maker community to the rest of the world and it should be treated with the sort of professionalism that that entails.
author=Sali
Whether you like it or not, RMN is the face of the RPG Maker community to the rest of the world and it should be treated with the sort of professionalism that that entails.
Yes, the professionalism that entails that of a free hobby. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any standard for our craft, there should! But the standard of professional games, with million dollar budgets, expert teams (of people who get PAID TO DO THIS, MAKING GAMES PAYS THEIR BILLS), collective tons of resources, and all that jazz? Fuck no.
I hate simple thumb up/down. For one, there is no "mediocre" rating! This just leaves us with the ones most motivated to rate a game are those who either really loved it or really hated it - a kind of evangelize/trash dichotomy. This results in an artificial judgment gap, wherein the "meh" voice is lost and only the extreme views are written, posted and heard.
Also, we have too small a sample size to do this.
also also, in a land of worded scores, how would the game's overall rating be established? Right now it is an average score out of 10, rounded to the nearest whole number (and then represented as a out-of-5-star image)
Also, we have too small a sample size to do this.
also also, in a land of worded scores, how would the game's overall rating be established? Right now it is an average score out of 10, rounded to the nearest whole number (and then represented as a out-of-5-star image)
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=SaliYes, the professionalism that entails that of a free hobby. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any standard for our craft, there should! But the standard of professional games, with million dollar budgets, expert teams (of people who get PAID TO DO THIS, MAKING GAMES PAYS THEIR BILLS), collective tons of resources, and all that jazz? Fuck no.
Whether you like it or not, RMN is the face of the RPG Maker community to the rest of the world and it should be treated with the sort of professionalism that that entails.
Hallelujah. We don't have to (and should certainly not) make shit, but we also shouldn't have to feel bad and ashamed and punished with negative reviews if we don't make the next Chrono Trigger. The truth - the consensus - is in the middle.
author=kentona
I hate simple thumb up/down. For one, there is no "mediocre" rating! This just leaves us with the ones most motivated to rate a game are those who either really loved it or really hated it - a kind of evangelize/trash dichotomy. This results in an artificial judgment gap, wherein the "meh" voice is lost and only the extreme views are written, posted and heard.
Also, we have too small a sample size to do this.
also also, in a land of worded scores, how would the game's overall rating be established? Right now it is an average score out of 10, rounded to the nearest whole number (and then represented as a out-of-5-star image)
That's where the behind-the-scenes numbers come into play. Assign each word a number and average it out accordingly. This way, the reviews are standardized but can still be averaged, and there is still no debate on whether 2 is average, below average, or whatever.
