Originally posted by Jorev What I am concerned with, is that ratings that don't fit MMORPG.com's subjective view, are being discarded, which is skewing the overall ratings, and propping up mediocre games. All the higher rated games are bunched together which seems very unrealistic. If MMORPG.com feels that 1 and 10 ratings are not realistic, then remove those as choices and leave a scale of 2-9. To leave them in and yet say, "well we feel too many 1 and 10 ratings are not valid choices so we will arbitrarily ignore those voters", is disingenuous. By all means take measures to limit padding by limiting 1 vote per game per IP address, but if someone wants to rate a game a certain way, it's their view and their choice and the ratings should reflect it.
So if me and my 500 friends ( say we're a big guild ) decide we don't like a game or just want to be stupid , and all log on in the same day and give it a 1 even though we've never played it you still think the rating would be acurate for that game and show what the people here really think about it ?
and how would taking 1 and 10 out make 2-9 more realistic ? wouldn't they just vote all 2s or 9s then ?
Originally posted by hadz I might as well just copy/paste from my last comment on the topic: I happened to follow a link to the EVE forums the other day (probably from this site)...and they are FULL! of complaints about lag...continuous complaints from back in mid 2004 (link after link to complaints about lag...within the EVE forums themselves). Yet...when you look at the EVE ratings...lag (or lack of it I'd assume) comes in as the 2nd best feature of those rateable (with an average score of 8.7). It's obvious from this that long-term, devoted, EVE players are NOT ranking this correctly, and thereby falsely skewing the ratings. I mean the other day they had an 80 on 200 fleet battle (that's 280 people in one area) that crashed 50% of the EVE universe and also crashed the login server (meaning anyone who didn't crash out...but logged out couldn't log back on either). Intentionally false ratings...anyone...anyone...Bueller?
Well then I will quote myself too from the "other thread:
>>>>> Maybe you should get a hint and most people don't *have* problems/lag with the game. Ofc, on the forums you will only see those that complain, and rarely will somebody start a thread "yay, the game is totally lag free". Human nature - complaining is easier. That "continous uproar" (eh?) is concentrated on larger fleetbattles and the high traffic systems - so there are about (that number is just a guess, but it should come close) 80 to 90% of players who are either mining, npcing, and doing other stuff, who are not influenced by lag, since they are not involved in the two major lag factors. Personally I didn't experience unusual lag in the game in the last year, save for the high traffic systems - but I just avoid those and the problem is solved. Sofar I experienced lag in *every* MMO I played and it was the worst in WOW. Aside from that it's not only lag but performance too that is rated together. And that EVE performs well, even on older computers, may have added to that quite positive rating. So all in all you say that the ratings of EVE players *must* be pushed because the performance is rated better than the "praised" community. Interesting logic.
I couldn't care less for the rating system. It's a nice "tail length comparison tool" for so called "fanbois", but to start a thread about why that or that game is on top is totally ridiculous - especially when somebody says "*I* think the game is crap, so why is it on top?". >>>>>
On a general note. Ratings on websites have should always be taken with a grain of salt. While this site certainly has the best mix of all types of players I know of, such ratings only can be seen as a kind of "nice addition on the site", but not a deciding Tool, if that game is for me or not (pick the "best" and go).
Personally I think MMORPG should suspend the rating system, and let the game descriptions speak for themselves. Not only to save us from such threads in the future, which are futile and only incite flaming.
------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Mandolin
Designers need to move away from the old D&D level-based model which was never designed for player vs player combat in the first place.
Originally posted by Jorev What I am concerned with, is that ratings that don't fit MMORPG.com's subjective view, are being discarded, which is skewing the overall ratings, and propping up mediocre games. All the higher rated games are bunched together which seems very unrealistic. If MMORPG.com feels that 1 and 10 ratings are not realistic, then remove those as choices and leave a scale of 2-9. To leave them in and yet say, "well we feel too many 1 and 10 ratings are not valid choices so we will arbitrarily ignore those voters", is disingenuous. By all means take measures to limit padding by limiting 1 vote per game per IP address, but if someone wants to rate a game a certain way, it's their view and their choice and the ratings should reflect it.
So if me and my 500 friends ( say we're a big guild ) decide we don't like a game or just want to be stupid , and all log on in the same day and give it a 1 even though we've never played it you still think the rating would be accurate for that game and show what the people here really think about it ?
and how would taking 1 and 10 out make 2-9 more realistic ? wouldn't they just vote all 2s or 9s then ?
If you left a 2-9 scale it would make the grouping tighter, which isn't helpful, and that is what is occurring now, but at least all votes would be counted. My point is, that if you offer a 1-10 scale, then you should honor it, otherwise why bother. Arbitrarily removing votes on a subjective basis is wrong and skews the results, especially when removing 1's, because people tend to be harsher with their criticism than their praise and more likely to vote 1 for a game that they dislike, while choosing a wider range scale of 7-10 for games they like.
As for 500 people voting 1's the same day, MMORPG.com has already stated they monitor that type of pattern and disregard those votes, which is legit, but nothing is preventing those same 500 people from voting the same way over an extended period of time, so the outcome will be the same.
Right now, the ratings are not accurate and that is misleading.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
There is nothing wrong with the rating system on this site mmorpg rates the game and it dosnt change. Look at Anarchy online for example there are adds everywhere but its still not on the best mmo list....
The ratings are fair and to data I think that mmorpg has a good rating system and I dont disagree with any of the ratings.... except for Ruinscape.....
Other than that theres nothing suspicious about the ratings
Originally posted by Jorev As for 500 people voting 1's the same day, MMORPG.com has already stated they monitor that type of pattern and disregard those votes, which is legit, but nothing is preventing those same 500 people from voting the same way over an extended period of time, so the outcome will be the same.
Right now, the ratings are not accurate and that is misleading.
sigh....
If people are going to take the time to have a large group of people log in over the course of a month or so just to give a game a bad rating then obviously they don't like the game. My point was, that is just one way a free for all system like you seem to want doesn't make it any more accurate then one designed to screen out typical "greifer" type behavior.
You seem to think the number of people who vote in this fashion are a very small minority and wouldn't really impact an open system. If that was really true then lowering the impact of a 10 and 1 wouldn't effect the overall rateing anyway.
Originally posted by Jorev As for 500 people voting 1's the same day, MMORPG.com has already stated they monitor that type of pattern and disregard those votes, which is legit, but nothing is preventing those same 500 people from voting the same way over an extended period of time, so the outcome will be the same.
Right now, the ratings are not accurate and that is misleading.
sigh....
If people are going to take the time to have a large group of people log in over the course of a month or so just to give a game a bad rating then obviously they don't like the game. My point was, that is just one way a free for all system like you seem to want doesn't make it any more accurate then one designed to screen out typical "greifer" type behavior.
You seem to think the number of people who vote in this fashion are a very small minority and wouldn't really impact an open system. If that was really true then lowering the impact of a 10 and 1 wouldn't effect the overall rating anyway.
I think arbitrarily dismissing someone's vote on a subjective basis is unacceptable regardless of how it effects the ratings. There is no arguing that once this is done, the ratings are not accurate or representative.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
Comments
So if me and my 500 friends ( say we're a big guild ) decide we don't like a game or just want to be stupid , and all log on in the same day and give it a 1 even though we've never played it you still think the rating would be acurate for that game and show what the people here really think about it ?
and how would taking 1 and 10 out make 2-9 more realistic ? wouldn't they just vote all 2s or 9s then ?
Well then I will quote myself too from the "other thread:
>>>>>
Maybe you should get a hint and most people don't *have* problems/lag with the game. Ofc, on the forums you will only see those that complain, and rarely will somebody start a thread "yay, the game is totally lag free". Human nature - complaining is easier. That "continous uproar" (eh?) is concentrated on larger fleetbattles and the high traffic systems - so there are about (that number is just a guess, but it should come close) 80 to 90% of players who are either mining, npcing, and doing other stuff, who are not influenced by lag, since they are not involved in the two major lag factors. Personally I didn't experience unusual lag in the game in the last year, save for the high traffic systems - but I just avoid those and the problem is solved. Sofar I experienced lag in *every* MMO I played and it was the worst in WOW. Aside from that it's not only lag but performance too that is rated together. And that EVE performs well, even on older computers, may have added to that quite positive rating. So all in all you say that the ratings of EVE players *must* be pushed because the performance is rated better than the "praised" community. Interesting logic.
I couldn't care less for the rating system. It's a nice "tail length comparison tool" for so called "fanbois", but to start a thread about why that or that game is on top is totally ridiculous - especially when somebody says "*I* think the game is crap, so why is it on top?".
>>>>>
On a general note. Ratings on websites have should always be taken with a grain of salt. While this site certainly has the best mix of all types of players I know of, such ratings only can be seen as a kind of "nice addition on the site", but not a deciding Tool, if that game is for me or not (pick the "best" and go).
Personally I think MMORPG should suspend the rating system, and let the game descriptions speak for themselves. Not only to save us from such threads in the future, which are futile and only incite flaming.
------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mandolin
Designers need to move away from the old D&D level-based model which was never designed for player vs player combat in the first place.
So if me and my 500 friends ( say we're a big guild ) decide we don't like a game or just want to be stupid , and all log on in the same day and give it a 1 even though we've never played it you still think the rating would be accurate for that game and show what the people here really think about it ?
and how would taking 1 and 10 out make 2-9 more realistic ? wouldn't they just vote all 2s or 9s then ?
If you left a 2-9 scale it would make the grouping tighter, which isn't helpful, and that is what is occurring now, but at least all votes would be counted. My point is, that if you offer a 1-10 scale, then you should honor it, otherwise why bother. Arbitrarily removing votes on a subjective basis is wrong and skews the results, especially when removing 1's, because people tend to be harsher with their criticism than their praise and more likely to vote 1 for a game that they dislike, while choosing a wider range scale of 7-10 for games they like.
As for 500 people voting 1's the same day, MMORPG.com has already stated they monitor that type of pattern and disregard those votes, which is legit, but nothing is preventing those same 500 people from voting the same way over an extended period of time, so the outcome will be the same.
Right now, the ratings are not accurate and that is misleading.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
There is nothing wrong with the rating system on this site mmorpg rates the game and it dosnt change. Look at Anarchy online for example there are adds everywhere but its still not on the best mmo list....
The ratings are fair and to data I think that mmorpg has a good rating system and I dont disagree with any of the ratings.... except for Ruinscape.....
Other than that theres nothing suspicious about the ratings
sigh....
If people are going to take the time to have a large group of people log in over the course of a month or so just to give a game a bad rating then obviously they don't like the game. My point was, that is just one way a free for all system like you seem to want doesn't make it any more accurate then one designed to screen out typical "greifer" type behavior.
You seem to think the number of people who vote in this fashion are a very small minority and wouldn't really impact an open system. If that was really true then lowering the impact of a 10 and 1 wouldn't effect the overall rateing anyway.
sigh....
If people are going to take the time to have a large group of people log in over the course of a month or so just to give a game a bad rating then obviously they don't like the game. My point was, that is just one way a free for all system like you seem to want doesn't make it any more accurate then one designed to screen out typical "greifer" type behavior.
You seem to think the number of people who vote in this fashion are a very small minority and wouldn't really impact an open system. If that was really true then lowering the impact of a 10 and 1 wouldn't effect the overall rating anyway.
I think arbitrarily dismissing someone's vote on a subjective basis is unacceptable regardless of how it effects the ratings. There is no arguing that once this is done, the ratings are not accurate or representative.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh