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
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsSTARSCREAM'S PROFILE
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
State of the Maker: How we're doing.
author=Illustrious
Page views continue to average over 1,000,000 a month year.
How long is a month year? I know this answer can be obtained from dividing by zero somewhere.
Fixed. :)
Review scoring: standardization, professionalism, etc.
rpgmaker.net 4th birthday contest
Sorry for not releasing the winner yet. I haven't kept in very good contact with the other judges this week.
The cake may be a lie, but the $25 bounty is not.
The cake may be a lie, but the $25 bounty is not.
Religion and the After-Life
State of the Maker: How we're doing.
I just wanted to let everyone know how rpgmaker.net is doing from some popular objective statistical measures. This is meant to complement the database stats that kentona releases every month. These site statistics are less personal but I find them interesting nonetheless. All numbers and statistics are derived from Google Analytics and are from January 1st through May 31st of this year unless otherwise noted.
- Site visits from 01/01/2011 through 05/31/2011 are up 34.53% from the same time period the previous year. Google analytics defines a site visit as “the number of individual sessions initiated by all the visitors to your site.” If you exclude the month of January (in which there was a 13% decrease), site visits are up 45% this year.
- Absolute unique visitors is up 55.06% year to date vs. last year. This category has exploded since late February (meaning a greater variety of users are visiting the site).
- Page views continue to average over 1,000,000 a month. Again, January was an outlier with only 743,000. I guess featuring Legendary Legend in December scared some folks away. :)
- The forum page views are way down for most forums (30% in some cases), but this is misleading as many of the forums were deleted. The ones that survived the merger saw increases. Page views to the main site have increased by about the same 30%, however.
- The mailbox is the second most viewed page on the site after the main page!
- The most popular games by page views:
1. Beautiful Escape: Dungeoneer 13,237
2. Forever’s End 10,363
3. Legionwood: Tale Of The Two Swords 9,884
4. Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis 9,186
5. Leo and Leah 9,151
6. Hero’s Realm 7,973
7. Vacant Sky Vol. 1: Contention 7,160
8. Breath of Fire II: The Fated Child (XP) 6,179
9. Rework the Dead: Evil 6,378
10. RPG Maker 20XX Engine 6,156
- 51.37% of users are referred here by search engine queries. 18.61% are referred here by other sites. 30.01% of users come here directly. This can be attributed to our search engine rank which is pretty high for most rpg maker related terms.
- Browser rank breakdown by percentage of users:
1. Firefox 47.17%
2. Chrome 26.27%
3. Internet Explorer 17.73%
4. Opera 4.81% (this is just me and kentona)
5. Safari 3.37%
6. Other 0.35%
- Operating system rank breakdown by percentage of users:
1. Windows 93.68% (Windows 7 45.89%, Windows XP 34.65%, Windows Vista 19.05%, Other 0.41%)
2. Macintosh 3.41%
3. Linux 1.04%
4. Other 1.87%
- May was the best month ever for rpgmaker.net ad revenue, nearly doubling its monthly average. Combined with user subscriptions, rpgmaker.net now is entirely self-sufficient. Thanks to all of you who helped make that happen!
- Site visits from 01/01/2011 through 05/31/2011 are up 34.53% from the same time period the previous year. Google analytics defines a site visit as “the number of individual sessions initiated by all the visitors to your site.” If you exclude the month of January (in which there was a 13% decrease), site visits are up 45% this year.
- Absolute unique visitors is up 55.06% year to date vs. last year. This category has exploded since late February (meaning a greater variety of users are visiting the site).
- Page views continue to average over 1,000,000 a month. Again, January was an outlier with only 743,000. I guess featuring Legendary Legend in December scared some folks away. :)
- The forum page views are way down for most forums (30% in some cases), but this is misleading as many of the forums were deleted. The ones that survived the merger saw increases. Page views to the main site have increased by about the same 30%, however.
- The mailbox is the second most viewed page on the site after the main page!
- The most popular games by page views:
1. Beautiful Escape: Dungeoneer 13,237
2. Forever’s End 10,363
3. Legionwood: Tale Of The Two Swords 9,884
4. Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis 9,186
5. Leo and Leah 9,151
6. Hero’s Realm 7,973
7. Vacant Sky Vol. 1: Contention 7,160
8. Breath of Fire II: The Fated Child (XP) 6,179
9. Rework the Dead: Evil 6,378
10. RPG Maker 20XX Engine 6,156
- 51.37% of users are referred here by search engine queries. 18.61% are referred here by other sites. 30.01% of users come here directly. This can be attributed to our search engine rank which is pretty high for most rpg maker related terms.
- Browser rank breakdown by percentage of users:
1. Firefox 47.17%
2. Chrome 26.27%
3. Internet Explorer 17.73%
4. Opera 4.81% (this is just me and kentona)
5. Safari 3.37%
6. Other 0.35%
- Operating system rank breakdown by percentage of users:
1. Windows 93.68% (Windows 7 45.89%, Windows XP 34.65%, Windows Vista 19.05%, Other 0.41%)
2. Macintosh 3.41%
3. Linux 1.04%
4. Other 1.87%
- May was the best month ever for rpgmaker.net ad revenue, nearly doubling its monthly average. Combined with user subscriptions, rpgmaker.net now is entirely self-sufficient. Thanks to all of you who helped make that happen!
Review scoring: standardization, professionalism, etc.
author=Illustrious
People getting their panties in a bunch when lots of people post because a reviewer's scoring standards were most disagreeable part of it. Sometimes, it's what there is to talk about. If people disagree with the content being said, they talk about that. Then some prick like person jumps in and essentially trolls the people he considers trolling, which is more derailing than what's currently being discussed. Really, you want to talk about standards in the actual context of a review you get shunned. You want to make your own topic about reviewing standards and you get shunned for making a topic thats been repeated tons of times. Fuck, let people discuss. So a topic is following the rules, and if you don't like where its going, the topic is not for you at that moment. Just stay away from it. Being the guy stepping in and saying "I don't like what you are saying in this topic/review.. all of you sux" is not any more amicable than what you do not like reading in your topics.
Perhaps you are right to an extent, though I think your response is also highly exaggerated. The reality is we are discussing what are in some cases sweeping changes to a review system in an attempt to standardize review scores. Many of the changes requiring using a standardized format, mandating subscores, assigning explicit meanings to the ratings, or replacing the star system with words and/or grades. These issues when considered by themselves may be fine and/or needed but none of them do anything to address the actual reason for wanting to change the system to begin with.
When looking at the review that generated this discussion, almost none of the proposed changes would have changed the final result at all. Reviews are subjective even when the scoring system attempts to be objective. If we switched to a word score we end up with a "hated it" instead of a 0.5. If we switched to a grade we end up with a F- instead of a 0.5. Neither case fixes the problem. We could mandate grading the games played by individual subcategories as has been suggested, but again in the case of the review that has caused the controversy it would not have changed anything -- it even had subscores already.
The comparison to professional/commercial reviews don't really work well since a) it's well known that games journalism is mostly a joke with ultra inflated scores and b) these are not professional games. You can't hold a RPG Maker game to the same standards as you would a professional game (and if you say you do you are probably lying).
The bottom line is no matter what changes are possible, reviews will always be subjective. Some reviewers rate games as standalone products, others rate games compared to other games or experiences, and some factor in non-game related data into the equation. What is an "average" RPG Maker game to some people is a "just barely playable game" to someone else. The outlier scores can only be corrected via having larger sample sizes to counteract them and give a better overall view of how people are feeling about the game. And that requires... a lot more reviews.
Volunteers?
Religion and the After-Life
Review scoring: standardization, professionalism, etc.
author=Feldschlacht IV
I get the feeling that this topic will ultimately change nothing. Hopefully I'm wrong!
You're right. I am thinking the only thing that needs changing is some users at this point. I can't believe we're having a pointless conversation about arbitrary review systems when the real issue lies with rogue reviewers and people willing to derail said reviews into a 100+ post trollfests.
You can change the review mechanisms and scoring displays all you want, but that won't prevent our own inabilities to be fair, helpful, or respectful. None of the proposed changes would be immune to such drama or teach basic manners, such as how to disagree without being disagreeable.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
