Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EVE up, everything else down!!?!
Nightbrother
Member Posts: 35
Well, I see the ratings here have lost all credibility. It looks like a couple of hundred EVE players gave EVE top ratings, and everything else the lowest rating. EVE now stands a FULL point above everything else, and games suddenly have 200 more votes than they did before.
Has this been discussed before? If it has, I'm sorry for the double posting.
Can the moderators of this site please do something about this?
Comments
Just admit that EvE is the best game thus far
The ratings had credibility before?
The ratings are only as good as the people doing the rating. I don't think you can do anything about a pack of rabid fans going all out to support their game. They are entitled to their horribly misguided opinions too.
That last line was a joke. This line is the disclaimer for the humor impaired.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
/deepbow
MAKANE
(Horizons: Malakye Revan - Conjurer on Bounty)
Lords of Stonekeep
I am actually playing eve since beta 4 and it's a good game.
Still this rating is just stupid. Where's the point in doing this?
I can't give a game a negative rating that i don't even know.
I didn't give eve a 10 either except for the graphics.
Problem with such a rating system is that stupid fanbois ruin it totally and it says nothing about game quality at all.
You might as well just delete the whole thing.
Oskeosuw Ionsuw
Chief Of Communications, Ahazi Server
I am actually working on fixing the rating mess. Here is the process we came up with:
We feel this will clean up the ratings considerably. Lots of work, lots of work
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oh my god... dont ask where i found it
A: 73% S: 66% K: 33% E: 26%
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 98% who has, copy & paste this in your signature.
A: 73% S: 66% K: 33% E: 26%
Nice changes man! Really really nice.
I hope all the rating s get reset after you applied them.
Way to go mmorpg.com!
Well they won't get reset (all of them) - but we are going to be purging ones from members that just passed through to rate games and leave...which should clean up most the bogus ratings. Most people see a link in a forum to boost a particular game, then they just come here and create one or more accounts and boost their game...than others take it a step further by voting down all the others.
We will create something similar to the "waiting period" to buy a firearm. Your account will not be able to post reviews until you have spent a little time with us.
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive.
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
I disagree with the changes, though I do think changes need to be made.
I for one would do this. Require that for each rating that you give for each attribute of the game, you must give a 25 word explanation if you rate between 3 and 7. For votes above 7 or below 3 you would be required a 50 word explanation. This shouldn't be hard if you are passionate enough to rate in those ranges.
If you do not meet the required words (the, and, a, of, etc...should not count) then the rating is not registered.
I don't mind someone rating a game even if they rarely if ever visit a forum. Just make them do a thorough review. If you do not, you allow Fanboys and Hateboys to have too large of an influence.
Think about it. If I have enough posts now, I will be able to go onto the EVE section and give it all 1's with no explanations. I just say, "The game sucks" Maybe I never even played the game. Who would know if I don't give a good explanation of why I rate the way I do.
This happenened in the WWIIOL on. I came here just to rate that game. I wrote several reviews but they kept getting erased for some reason. I gues it was because I wrote them so long, my login expired.
Then I wrote a shorter one.
Anyway, I read many of the reviews and they sucked. They told you nothing about the game. "It rocks!" "It sicks!" Yeah, that tells me alot, NOT! All it tells me is the person likes it or dislikes it.
Some people were writing short reviews but you could tell they had not played in a long time because they harped on bugs that had long ago been squashed.
How many people would rate the game if they had to actually write a review? Like I said, I don't care if the guy came here to rate it with his first post so long as he is descriptive. I want to hear from the fanboys too.
Another thing you could do is make it so that the person can't rate a game with straight perfect scores. There is no perfect game, yet. This would make the reviews perfect because even the fanboys would let the cat out of the bag as to what the weaknesses of the game is. WWIIOL would have suffered in the graphics score, though that is being addressed with the new terrain engine.
The fact is this system will discriminate against the fanboys, but the local haters will drag the rating down. The fact is that the fanboys play the game day in and day out. This makes them the most qualified to speak about the game. Just make them be more honest. Make them explain them selves.
I do agree with limiting people on the number of ratings and reviews they can do in a day. Of course with my requirements put in place, who would rate 50 games in a day? LOL
Another thing that could help is any rating for each attribute that is more than 3 points away from the average will not be figured into the total score for the game. It will figure into the individual's rating for the game and be displayed in the individual's rating/review.
Another thing that would help is rating the reviewer. Show how many games he has reviewed and what his average review is for both attributes and overall. This way if he has reviewed 200 games in 6 months, we know not to take him serious, who could really know these kinds of games in a year or two. RPGs take months of dedicated time to know them well.
If he has 10 games rated and he has an average of 4.0 but rated one game at a 9.5 then we know he is a fanboy for that game. This is knowledge for the person reading the review.
I personaly love WWIIOL but were it not for the fanboys that came to these boards and voted, the rating would not have mathed the MMORPG reviewer's score. The Haters would have had the rating for it at around a 1.5 and since I love the game this poses a question.
Would a rating of 1.5 or even 3.4 have done me anygood if I had come here looking for an opinion on the game? I would have missed out on what for me is a great game. I would have been mislead by people who don't even play the game.
So what do you think?
IMHO, the changes will make the ratings no more valid than they are now, maybe even worse.
I am liking this idea but I also think to really know what a mmo is like you must try it. Take for example swg got slaughtered by european reviewers I thought uh oh I might aswell try it and I did. Well lets say I play four mmo's and most of my time is took up by swg.
Oskeosuw Ionsuw
Chief Of Communications, Ahazi Server
Those are some good ideas ImSneaky, but I don't think making people comment will help either...you will just get someone who copy/pastes a bunch of garbage text to fulfil the word requirements and they only prevention is to spend hours screening all the reviews...no thanks
I don't think ANYTHING could make the system worse than it is now. I think the most important things we will do is preventing people from creating multiple accounts from the same IP and limiting the number of reviews per day, per user. This will stop the abuse...which I can tell by looking at the database, the problems are caused by users abusing the system...not our members that have some level of rank.
There will never be a fail-safe system...that is just impossible
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive.
I love this site its a great hub
Oskeosuw Ionsuw
Chief Of Communications, Ahazi Server
I thought it was a pathetic ploy by the Themis consulting group to attract more users to EVE.
Oskeosuw Ionsuw
Chief Of Communications, Ahazi Server
I agree that nothing is ever going to be fail-safe but the one problem you noted is also easily fixed. "Report this post to Admin" If someone copies somebodyelse's post or they just put in a bunch of crap, somebody who reads it and sees it can report the post. This way you don't have to screan them all. You just go directly to the problem post, a quick scan tells you the truth.
For double posts, someone copying another post, there could be a number assigned to each review so that when somebody reports a review they can also report that it is copied from review #57. Then you just go to the fraud post and compare it to the original. If they are alike, the fraud is deleted.
In addition to this, the person must read a small list of rules before they review. Make each rules come up one at a time so that they get a better look at them.
The report this review function could also be used to report liars. Liars should not be allowed to keep a review up either. I'm talking about someone who blatantly lies about what a game is like.
This happened in this forum but I don't know if he did in a review. If he did, his review was false and misleading. He made claims about the game and what the could do that anybody who had played the game for awhile would know to be completely false.
In an instance like this, the person reporting the fraud review would explain what the person said and why it is false.
There is also another option, if you have some senior members here who have proven themselves to be as unbiased as possible and can remain mature in tough situations, they could be Moderators for your site. They can do alot of the work and anything that they are unsure of or is a tough call they refer to you. Simple stuff like the copying a previous review they could easily handle though.
I think it can be worked out and I think if someone is passionate enouh to rate a game they should be required to write a review.
I agree with this with one exception, I noticed several reviews of 1's straight across the board for WWIIOL that were by guys with some level of rank, as in they didn't come here just to rate WWIIOL. They had too high a post count for that.
Reading their reviews, it was easy to see that they had either never played the game before, were citing problems from very old reviews or had not played the game in well over a year.
It was easy for me to see this because I have played the game since day one. So when they report bugs that were squashed 5 months into the game and the game is 2 1/2 years old, you know they are not an honest reviewer.
I have not reviewed any of the other games here, and I won't because I have no right to, I figure you can check that. I have not played any of these other games so I would be a fraud if I tried to rate them.
People who have not played a game should not rate them or review them, that's a given. So the reviewer rating system I pointed out would be a good thing. Who you take someone serious if he had rated 200 or even 50 games in 6 months? What if his rating also included a score to show how many of his reviews were deleted for failing to meet the criteria?
This would allow us as prospective buyers of a game to be able to weed through the chaff and get right to the reviews worth reading.
These are all interesting...but I think it makes it far too complex and adds a lot of "gray" areas where we are going to have to sit down and be a judge...visiting game sites to find out if people are really liars or if the person reporting them as a liar really knows what they are talking about, etc.
I am looking to get this as automated as possible. I do like your "report this to staff" idea, this will help us track down offensive stuff (although we will not stop people from giving a game 1's if they feel that it deserves it - this will be for reporting rule breakers).
I am planning on all kinds of cool additions to the site in the coming months, I don't want to spend 50 hours changing the entire review process...I think my time is better spent elsewhere. The changed I am planning on making will not require a lot of work and simply limit the pool of people with access to place reviews.
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive.