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)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsLOWELL_RICHARDS'S PROFILE
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Review scoring: standardization, professionalism, etc.
author=Max McGeeauthor=Fallen-GrieverF-G I love you baby but the inverse of this is that maybe if we want to be taken seriously we shouldn't SELF-RATE in such a way that the average game rating is 1.5 or 1 or some shit. Self-deprecation only goes so far before it becomes infuriating instead of ingratiating. If the message from our reviews is 'we suck, we suck, we really really suck' then some people can't be faulted for believing us. It is insane to have the '5 Star' rating mean 'an excellent professional game made by hundreds of people over several years by a professional studio' when almost every game on here is a one-man show.
If we want to be taken seriously then we should definitely compare our games to professional/indie games when applicable
I personally see absolutely no value in harsh reviews.
Of course, the use of the word professional in the topic title is itself highly arguable. This post will expand over time.A 2.5/5 should be an average game regardless of who made it or what engine it was made in.
The man speaks sense.
Personally I feel that if we don't hold ourselves to the same rating as a standard game we are more or less lying to ourselves which hurts more than helps our creativity as game developers. If you make games for fun, good for you, but don't expect to be given special treatment because your game isn't supposed to be a blockbuster in the indie gaming world. The more highly you think of yourself, the less likely you are to learn and vice-versa
Review scoring: standardization, professionalism, etc.
Thumbs Up/Down is as broken as the current system. It can be abused and used to wrongly judge a review much like how the five stars can currently wrongly judge a game. The exclusion of a numerical system is the best as it can't be abused by the creator or his friends to wrongly promote a project. Leaving the players to read or skim over the reviews and use their own judgement to see if the game is worth it or not.
Forever's End Review
I don't think it's fair to curve the game because of the endless pool of bad RM games but seeing the reactions in this thread makes me wonder what the review system is for if there is no set standards on quality based on the number of stars. From what it looks like now the standards of a review are set by each reviewer rather than a consistent scale.
Forever's End Review
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=Lowell_RichardsOkay you read one review good job!!!author=Feldschlacht IVI just read the first review on the list that seems more like a brief glimpse into the game instead of an actual review of the game. It basically gave the game a 5/5 not for what it is, but for the potential it possesses, which is a big no-no for reviewers. It never pressed on any particular point, just brushed on things he thought were nice. There was no detailed input, or anything vaguely resembling a review.
You could easily read the other, 27 or so positive reviews for that, man. It's not exactly hard to find!
Considering this is the review that gave the game a 5/5 and passed, I'd imagined it would be detailed and not be a waste of time. The 5/5 of that review shouldn't be some half-assed mess that barely grazes on the games content, only mentioning little tidbits here and there that the author liked.
Forever's End Review
author=Feldschlacht IV
You could easily read the other, 27 or so positive reviews for that, man. It's not exactly hard to find!
I just read the first review on the list that seems more like a brief glimpse into the game instead of an actual review of the game. It basically gave the game a 5/5 not for what it is, but for the potential it possesses, which is a big no-no for reviewers. It never pressed on any particular point, just brushed on things he thought were nice. There was no detailed input, or anything vaguely resembling a review.
EDIT: If reviews like this can pass, I doubt the other reviews are even worth reading.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
