Before you read this i must warn you, if you lack the ability to be real with yourself and the world around you and you plain out lack the ability to use proper logic judgement and opinion (those who do know it) you may want to leave now, this isn't meant to be extremely serious and it's no debate but you must understand what true understanding is and apply it in this post i have a question slash discussion about.
heres where that begins.
I understand there are a few difference between a user rating and a user review for the games we submit (i.e ones a simple button, one requires moderating and accepting, ones more detailed, the cocky come back basics)
but i would like to be explained what the true pure difference between a user rating and a review is besides the fact that from what i've seen/experienced is a user rating gives everyone the power to automaticly make new users prejiduce a game before ever playing it (i.e little stars aren't filled up looks bad), now what say i just use different accounts or numerous different people just never play this game and choose 0 stars, it automaticly labels the game and shelves it with the "i don't want to play that" category before ever even being truly experienced and played and thus causing a person who has devoted their heart mind soul time health money and family into this is forced to feel bad or give up or some extremity over a possible error in judgement or a devious user holding a grudge downing your stars......
a review must be moderated but lets be quite frank, 2-3 paragraphs....maybe if the game is 2-3 minutes, how in the world could anyone have submitted a 2-3 paragraph review about final fantasy 7 if it was different circumstances and it was an indie game instead of a top title with the same play and everything, tell me how you could justify requiring such a low count of feedback for games, the feedback should be proper to the games experience and time took to play, once again we could be knit picky here but be absolutely real, can you justify giving a 2-3 paragraph review about a game that could take months to beat, hell no. with that being said each user uses their own judgement when making a review, life has proven in every aspect that we can't make our own decisions always and those who know better will teach better (i.e moderators), so why in the world would we ever be told to use our own judgement in critiquing a game. Where is the guidelining for that judgement considering a 5 year old who gets on a pc and reviews an indie game from rpg revolution has NO judgement and thats a fact, be real.....see where i'm going. I could continue ( and may have to ) but in this little bit of explaining and my thoughts on "user ratings" and "reviews". I realise a review has to be moderated and accepted before it is placed but be real again, thats put loosely and applied loosely and you can see it everywhere in alot of reviews and it says it for it's self by saying 2-3 paragrsaphs and use your own judgement, they want you to make them have to moderate this section as little as possible, and why blame the big wigs here at rr, they have alot going on and alot to handle and im not saying anyone needs to take time to solve this problem but i just decided to voice my opinion about it. in essence whats the difference between a user rating and a review other than a user rating lets people prejiduce a game before they play it and a review lets them stigmatize a game after its been played, neither of the two make you give an honest opinion, and i've seen many great games that people spent loads of time and energy and effort on get bagged and trashed honestly because some plain out stupid logic lacking no judgement kind of people are allowed to say whatever bullcrap that comes out and it sticks as law to these games.....
whats the difference between user ratings, and reviews. If there is a difference regardless in my opinion user ratings should be eliminated permanently all togethere because that is just stupid anyone can click stars (i could give my own music bad ratings in my own windows media players with my own stars, does that mean i hate my own music and its bad? just means i could be a royal ass to myself not, and heres the key...."TRUTHFUL") i mean i believe we deserve a little more defense over our work than the ability to completely tarnish it for no reason being put into the hands of literally any brand new user who signed up 5 minutes ago with an attitude or biased opinionated dick. Reviews should be the only thing allowed for games, and user reviews need to be truly moderated and have a requirement justfified to the games length atleast, once again 2-3 paragraphs would never sum up FF7 but i could still get on here and review it bad and sum it up that way thus stigmatizing an obviously epic game to everyone whos never and now will never play it.
have i not asked a very good question and backed up my reasons for so, if i've confused anyone anywhere please address me with your questions so i can clarify mine.
whats the difference between user ratings and reviews, and even if there is can we not agree that in it's self is a joke (my ff7 example)
This post has been edited by carnie_natas: Sep 12 2011, 02:37 PM
Reason for edit: Paragraphs easier to read ~kaz
__________________________
Light one up! You can run.....But you'll only die tired!
To be honest, I couldn't make sense of the complete point you were trying to make here.
For clarification, were you trying to say that it's unfair to developers to allow the rating system for members to haphazardly click whatever they feel on a whim for new games, possible without having played them?
In addition, the requirements for what constitutes as a review (being 2-3 paragraphs minimum) doesn't meet a standard that you feel should be met for the game?
While I can see the first option being abused, it's also a part of life. If you're making a game to win a popularity contest, then you might be pissed off if a few people come along and rate you incredibly low right away (anyone would be upset about this). Yet that's the risk you take when you open up a project to the public. Look to your project thread for support, if someone leaves some critical feedback, or says they like your game, request that they go to the games page and rate your game accordingly (provide them a link as well). There will always be people that like to do mean things without any good reason, just roll with the punches and fight back by using your thread as a means to promote your game better and boost up that score.
In regards to the review, 2-3 paragraphs is excellent for a minimum length. This isn't a professional gig for these people, and many of them don't care to dwell on every aspect of the game from map to map. With this minimum length the contributor should be able to cover the basics of did they like it, or did they not like it, and why. If you want a longer response, then use your thread to direct players attention to certain aspects of your game that you desire feedback about. When all you say is "7 hour demo. Feedback wanted!!!" Then you have no reason to complain when people don't talk about the music you made yourself for that one scene. Or the puzzles you made for that map.
Anyhow, this is all based on whether or not I was able to understand the point of your topic though. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Please clarify if that's the case.
__________________________
~Zortik
Designer of Classika! A work in progress. Please click the link below to view the topic thread.
Beneath is a wonderful title made by Stern. If you're looking for a superb project to try, please click this link! An adaption of a novel that LIterarygoth wrote. Loads of custom work and carefully thought out materials.
To be honest, I couldn't make sense of the complete point you were trying to make here.
For clarification, were you trying to say that it's unfair to developers to allow the rating system for members to haphazardly click whatever they feel on a whim for new games, possible without having played them?
In addition, the requirements for what constitutes as a review (being 2-3 paragraphs minimum) doesn't meet a standard that you feel should be met for the game?
While I can see the first option being abused, it's also a part of life. If you're making a game to win a popularity contest, then you might be pissed off if a few people come along and rate you incredibly low right away (anyone would be upset about this). Yet that's the risk you take when you open up a project to the public. Look to your project thread for support, if someone leaves some critical feedback, or says they like your game, request that they go to the games page and rate your game accordingly (provide them a link as well). There will always be people that like to do mean things without any good reason, just roll with the punches and fight back by using your thread as a means to promote your game better and boost up that score.
In regards to the review, 2-3 paragraphs is excellent for a minimum length. This isn't a professional gig for these people, and many of them don't care to dwell on every aspect of the game from map to map. With this minimum length the contributor should be able to cover the basics of did they like it, or did they not like it, and why. If you want a longer response, then use your thread to direct players attention to certain aspects of your game that you desire feedback about. When all you say is "7 hour demo. Feedback wanted!!!" Then you have no reason to complain when people don't talk about the music you made yourself for that one scene. Or the puzzles you made for that map.
Anyhow, this is all based on whether or not I was able to understand the point of your topic though. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Please clarify if that's the case.
no i agree with what you've said actually, but like i said i was really trying to ask a question, what is the real difference between a user rating and a review. I really do agree with what you said but it doesn't change the reality of what i said either, if someone is trying to win a popularity match then i don't think it would ever happen here at RR anyway muchless the fact that people would still have to play your game to give you any kind of honest popularity rating and that's my only problem with the flawed system here is people do not have to give any kind of honest opinion about your game even though thats life something like that can be regulated in better ways, they do it over at blizzard ent 24/7. (I realise this is no blizzard but RR is definately something to take notice of) but i'm just one guy with an opinion honestly. My question through my detailed intro was besides the clear basic differences what is the real pure difference between a user rating system and a review system, as far as i can tell none and one is more easily abuse (user rating) so why not just eliminate the user rating and keep the review system as well as revise the requirements for a review, in my opinion you don't get the right to review a game if you haven't played it, and if you actually did play it then since your willing to do so, get on the internet, come back and go into the review area for a submission then why not give a proper review due to the nature of the game. 2-3 paragraphs cant sum FF7 up, and some games dont even make 3 paragraphs worth of information. is there a difference between user rating and reviews in the end considering they both affect a rating of your game, how can you have 2 seperate ratings in the same game about the same game? I click games with 2 star ratings that have wonderful high reviews and that crosses me as really unneccessary and a bit stigmatizing which should only be done through a detailed review if ever.
Kaz, 2 things. I realise all that (except i didn't know the main site controlled ratings) but that really doesn't say if a user rating is any different than a review, it tells the differences between them which i know and anyone can plainly see, whats the real difference if any. Why in the heck am i constantly hearing about some "main site" controlling things you all never do, it's like we got some RR god in some RR heaven. It usually sounds like you all have no way of making certain changes because the "main site" won't listen, reminds me of wizard of oz.... oh ya and with what you said then it would in my opinion make more sense to let a moderator review and only a moderator review affect the rating of a game and not any joe shmoe off the side of forum alley considering a moderator review has a much much better chance of being truthful.
This post has been edited by carnie_natas: Sep 12 2011, 02:40 PM
__________________________
Light one up! You can run.....But you'll only die tired!
To be honest, I couldn't make sense of the complete point you were trying to make here.
For clarification, were you trying to say that it's unfair to developers to allow the rating system for members to haphazardly click whatever they feel on a whim for new games, possible without having played them?
In addition, the requirements for what constitutes as a review (being 2-3 paragraphs minimum) doesn't meet a standard that you feel should be met for the game?
While I can see the first option being abused, it's also a part of life. If you're making a game to win a popularity contest, then you might be pissed off if a few people come along and rate you incredibly low right away (anyone would be upset about this). Yet that's the risk you take when you open up a project to the public. Look to your project thread for support, if someone leaves some critical feedback, or says they like your game, request that they go to the games page and rate your game accordingly (provide them a link as well). There will always be people that like to do mean things without any good reason, just roll with the punches and fight back by using your thread as a means to promote your game better and boost up that score.
In regards to the review, 2-3 paragraphs is excellent for a minimum length. This isn't a professional gig for these people, and many of them don't care to dwell on every aspect of the game from map to map. With this minimum length the contributor should be able to cover the basics of did they like it, or did they not like it, and why. If you want a longer response, then use your thread to direct players attention to certain aspects of your game that you desire feedback about. When all you say is "7 hour demo. Feedback wanted!!!" Then you have no reason to complain when people don't talk about the music you made yourself for that one scene. Or the puzzles you made for that map.
Anyhow, this is all based on whether or not I was able to understand the point of your topic though. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Please clarify if that's the case.
Kaz, 2 things. I realise all that (except i didn't know the main site controlled ratings) but that really doesn't say if a user rating is any different than a review, it tells the differences between them which i know and anyone can plainly see, whats the real difference if any. Why in the heck am i constantly hearing about some "main site" controlling things you all never do, it's like we got some RR god in some RR heaven. It usually sounds like you all have no way of making certain changes because the "main site" won't listen, reminds me of wizard of oz.... oh ya and with what you said then it would in my opinion make more sense to let a moderator review and only a moderator review affect the rating of a game and not any joe shmoe off the side of forum alley considering a moderator review has a much much better chance of being truthful.
RRR is owned and hosted by ientry- therefore we as Directors do not have any control over the main site- apart from approving and deleting games and Reviews. Therefore we do not control or are able to remove the user star ratings ( these are awarded any anyone who wished to say they like a game or not)We do run the forum however.
We go through user submitted reviews and delete any that are obvious that the game has not been played. Our official RR Review staff are selected to give honest and thorough feedback after play testing a game.
ok i understand, ientry..... what is ientry exactly, a group of college students, a social ring of like minded people making things happen, a corporation or business with some actual business building, a single person or group of people... any idea? on another note i really appreciate the prompt response about my questiond, your awesome Kaz!
(though i feel the same about the review system) your information was useful to my questions.
This post has been edited by carnie_natas: Sep 12 2011, 03:29 PM
__________________________
Light one up! You can run.....But you'll only die tired!
Group: Director
Posts: 6,347
Type: None
RM Skill: Undisclosed
iEntry is a company that makes revenue off the advertisements that are placed on RRR. Obviously they have other functions, and other sites including rpgmakervx.net, but as far as we are concerned they are merely supporting us for as long as the site (RRR) is profitable to them. Hope that helps answer your question. =]
iEntry is a company that makes revenue off the advertisements that are placed on RRR. Obviously they have other functions, and other sites including rpgmakervx.net, but as far as we are concerned they are merely supporting us for as long as the site (RRR) is profitable to them. Hope that helps answer your question. =]
Got it, thanks for the info!
__________________________
Light one up! You can run.....But you'll only die tired!
Group: Global Mod
Posts: 1,784
Type: None
RM Skill: Undisclosed
Rev Points: 15
I, too, was never sure of why there was a user rating. Since you are asking what the difference is I'd have to guess and say that one allows a person to rate a game without explaining why, and the other allows a person to type up a lengthy review to explain in deeper terms what they enjoyed or did not enjoy about a game.
Admittedly, the user rating can cause for some emotional ratings based on what a person feels the moment they play a game, but I assume it's there for people who want to rate the game but don't much like writing/typing lengthy expositions. I myself find that when I review a game, the rating I would have given prior to the review is not quite the same as when I finish the review, because I've had time to reflect and contemplate what the developer was attempting to accomplish and what they probably should have done better.
It makes no sense to remove user ratings. Sometimes people use the ratings button as a way to rate your presentation of your game. If you do a horrible job of presenting your game and it looks boring, you'll probably get a low rating.
For those that play the game, reviews are the main fare, and ratings are optional. I usually base my judgement about whether a game is worth playing or not based on the reviews of a game, not necessarily the rating. Also, the title is important, because I skip over boring titles. Then there's thumbnails and screenshots. If those are dull, expect me to not play.
Therefore, ratings and reviews both serve purposes and are intertwined.
Games
Resources
RPG Maker VX
RPG Maker XP
Scripts
Tutorials
Downloads
User Rating and Review, a difference?
Submit Your Article
Sep 12 2011, 09:47 AM
