Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
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 ListsEDCHUY'S PROFILE
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Fallen Wings
comment=29195
I went in the actual project...:/
I guess I forgot that bug. :(
I think there is another bug at the actual end of the game aswell.
Dezz, next time you find something like this please let the developer know. I wouldn't know myself how to go about fixing such things. I am pretty sure it isn't hard, if you know how. Just think if you have somebody playing your game and finding something like this how grateful you would be if something told you about it! By the way, this is not a complaint, but rather a suggestion, OK?
A Quick Look at RMN Ratings
comment=29273
Getting rid of review scores and replacing them with scores based on a voting system would be a good idea. Right now if someone wants to fuck up another developer, they can whip up a quick review and give the game one star and there's not that high of a chance that someone else will come over and submit a 5-star review to balance the score somewhat. And even then due to one spiteful shithead the game has 3 stars only. How is that fair? With popular vote a good game will have a good score, and a bad game will have a bad score, because your average player doesn't care about RMN drama, internal cliques, and circle jerking. He cares about the games he plays. Oh, and that would mean that probably more than 90% of the games would have an actual score. Yay!
In principle that would work, but certain things would have to be in place, among them I would say:
- Voting should be voluntary. (we are talking about democratizing ratings here!)
- Only registered users should be able to vote (to reduce spamming votes).
- Nobody should be able to vote for a game more than once (see above).
- Only games with a download should be eligible for voting (otherwise you get what they have in RRR top 10 games, with games that are just on paper).
- No developers should be able to vote for their own games (for obvious reasons).
- New voting should be in place when a new version (bugfixes don't apply and new version has to have new content or significant changes) of a game comes out.
- The people who rate actually have to had played the game (it would be a scout's honor system; at least in a review you have to convice us you at least tried to play the game and somehow justify your rating).
- I would advocate for a system with a rating, with some sort of obligatory feedback (few basic questions: what they liked, disliked, what they would see improved).
- All voting and related feedback of a game should be visible to all registered users. (for transparency's sake).
- Any registered user should be able to see any others registered user's voting record. (see above).
- If anybody's caught cheating somehow they're banned from RMN. (I remember there was some Misao voting issue ...)
Currently there's no easy way of knowing how many of all RMN games actually have some sort of download. I would guess it's in the 65-85% range of all games listed.
And yeah, I agree that, unfortunately rated reviews can be used for obscure purposes.
EDIT: It seems that my concept of the system is quite different than what you have in mind, DE!
TO ARMS DEVBLOG #5: Open Call for Beta Testers
Whereisit.png
Whereisit.png
comment=29254
Well ya never know... It could taste nice.
That could be the case. But imagine throwing it up or going to the bathroom afterwards ... it burns!
Whereisit.png
comment=29249
Oh, yeah...like, Demon Powder is the seasoning they use to make school food, y'know.
Not to mention hospital and airline food!
A Quick Look at RMN Ratings
comment=29230
I, too, am surprised that the average game rating is just below 3! I get the impression that some believed that the average ratings were too high, when in fact it's probably where it should be. For games on Hiatus or Cancelled, it's almost as if the promise of the game inflates the scores a bit. Like, this is what it could have been. That being said, 60% of completed games being rated is higher than I was expecting - I was pleasantly surprised. Of course, it could and should be better, but it's still more than I thought.
This is just a personal anecdote, but I found that my Cancelled games get less downloads due to their status, which probably affects how likely they are to be reviewed.
EDIT: and RMN simply truncates decimals. The rating system is on a 10 point scale, so if you have a game average rating of 3.41, the database stores (or calculates) the average as a 6, which translates to 3 on the 5 star scale (since 3.41 x 2 = 6.82 => 6 after the decimals are dropped => 3/5 stars).
Until May 1st, Generica had an average review score of 3.9 stars, which was truncated down to a 3.5/5.
As I said, that average is based on what RMN shows. I think I'll go ahead and try to start calculating later today the average based on individual reviews (among other things) and do an addendum to what I wrote here, with some new graphs to get a clearer picture.
Regarding games that have been rated and are in hiatus, I will look into this further to see if I can figure out something else. Cancelled games would probably not be affected by the promise since they're DOA projects, but you're probably right about the download issue. I would probably guess that the fact that both of this status are shown in Red in the "Games" list, probably doesn't help them with getting downloads either. Although, I would guess some contrarians would still go ahead and take a look at these games, if not download them, out of morbid curiosity.
EDIT: Currently, Generica has 4 stars rating. Thanks to the latest review, it actually averages a 4.0 rating on the nose.
DenadelWorldMapFinal.png
comment=29232
I think I finally noticed what was really bugging me about this worldmap: there is no deep water!
Yeah, I think you nailed it right on the head!
Beautiful Escape: Dungeoneer
A Quick Look at RMN Ratings
comment=29225
Now that its morning, I understand.
About 60% of completed games having reviews, some of the games were completed in 2002, then this site came around and people reuploaded them, so there was a flood of games. Too much for people to review.
Plus some completed games look like they suck or they do suck, preventing anyone from having the desire to review them.
Sorry if I kept you up at night, busting your brain!
Yeah, you're probably right about both things, especially the latter one. I have finished playing some of the completed games as well as demos here, but didn't get around to doing reviews until RS!X, which is another way some of that occurs. I was probably not alone in that regard. However, now I have the chance to make up for that. Which is what's important for me.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
