Cups are coming...

[bicilotti]

[Link to cup rating test page removed, it's not ready yet!]
Cups are coming...  and I felt sad from the very first page

[Ali]

I don't mind the cup ratings, because I do feel people should be able to filter out games below two cups if they choose to do so. I've found it tiresome to trawl through the database before, so I welcome this.

What seems to be missing from this is a breakdown of the AGS panel's scores in the same way that we can see the users' votes. I would like to be able to click on the cup rating and see how many cups a game's graphics or puzzles were awarded. I don't know if that's planned, but I think it would add depth to the rating. I'd like to know, perhaps if a game has poor graphics, that the panel felt it had strong puzzles.

Also, are the rating panel's identities a secret? Are they all sequestered in SSH's country mansion, or Andail's airship?

[bicilotti]

I just hope AGS does not drift towards "professionalism". And I agree with you, a detailed breakdown would be better.

Third: dear rating panel, please take your time to judge new releases. If you smash a game into pieces before a few people have tried it the creator of the game itself will not get some useful feedback for his/her future projects. Numbers (and unfortunately even big blue cups) don't speak for themselves.

[Neil Dnuma]

Christmas Quest 2 > Cirque de Zale?

lol

[Akatosh]

Is it just me or does the panel give ridiculously low rating?

[bicilotti]

Christmas Quest 2 > Cirque de Zale?

lol

I lol with you, just not to get on my knees and cry. Please mr Jones, just make sure this panel thing will not become the doom of us all.

[scotch]

It's just an editor's rating on a single website... you're acting like it's a big deal. If you have a major problem with a specific rating, fine, I'm sure the panel will be willing to take a look at it. I think the ratings that are there seem generally useful, though. As for the making or breaking a game stuff, if you rely on the AGS games database to drive your traffic you're really not getting close to as many players as you could, 5 cups or 1 cup.

[Radiant]

Post withdrawn. When I posted this, I thought Bicilotti was on the rating panel and announcing a preview. Guess I was wrong.

[scotch]

I agree the bias towards rating things low is an issue. While most AGS games are quite poor in the greater scheme of things like those of any hobbyist game making program, I think people realise this, and we don't need to reinforce it by marking lots of stuff low. On the other hand, the massive amount of awful in the games database is the main reason why the cups system was discussed, and the one cup rating is there to say something is a test game, or unplayable. There are a lot more unplayable games than awesome games.

Things are mostly rated by one person each right now, which is one reason for the sometimes odd results if you compare one game's rating to another. I hope they intend to do another pass with each other's game selections and average things out, but it depends on manpower I suppose.

[AGA]

Christmas Quest 2 > Cirque de Zale?

lol

This is absolutely true! ¬¬

That implies that either the rating is heavily biased towards the lower end, or that nearly every AGS game is pretty crappy.

The vast majority of AGS games released just aren't that good.

Also, very few games deserve 5 cups. 5 out of 5 implies the game is perfect, or very close to it. Not many games are.

[Radiant]

Post likewise withdrawn.

[scotch]

I second the idea about putting the 3+ games past second or third reviewers. It seems manageable.

[ildu]

or that nearly every AGS game is pretty crappy.

Yup :|.

[LUniqueDan]

How many '5 cups' at the actual standards are you planning to find in the entire database? Max 3-4 others.

Why not just locate them in their own window (or in the front page of the site) and have a better division between the other games. Even SSH's pick of the month is only '2 cups' right now.

Also :
Reactor 9 == Chick Chaser == Meta == Larry Vales?

Due to the nature of AGS and people who hang around game creation, I seriously think that it's going to fit better just to have a R5 division : divide the entire game list (without the best of the best) in 5 equally size groups. It's just going to be more fair (and also way more useful) for everyone.

With the actual narrowed category, once we have played grade 4 and 5 games (and most of us did), we found ourself in the same messy jungle than before, to find new games to play.

[bicilotti]

I second the idea about putting the 3+ games past second or third reviewers. It seems manageable.

expecially to alien threat (3 cups??!)

[LimpingFish]

dear rating panel, please take your time to judge new releases. If you smash a game into pieces before a few people have tried it the creator of the game itself will not get some useful feedback for his/her future projects. Numbers (and unfortunately even big blue cups) don't speak for themselves.

Useful feedback: A crap game is a crap game, professional or amatuer, regardless of who made it. As a gamer, I'm not in the habit of playing crap games just so I can give feedback to a developer in the hope that the next one won't suck. I play games to be entertained, and if a game fails to do that, either from the outset or over time, then that game is not worth bothering with.

I'm tired of the amatuer/indie community as a whole feeling that just because a game was made by one person, or is free, that some sort of handicap should be used when reviewing such.

There are dozens of free/indie games that are excellent, made by people with obvious talent. But for every excellent game, there is vast quantities of toss. And as such it should be labelled as toss.

Harsh as that may seem...

I'm sure the panel could be all touchy-feely and rate everthing three cups, so as not to upset anybody. I don't think that would be very helpful.

Having said that, one man's gaming toss is another man's gaming gold, and as such the AGS panel rating is only one opinion. We don't have to agree with it.

[Pumaman]

Um bicilotti, who gave you the URL to that page? It shouldn't be made public yet, the panel still have to finish rating all the games and then review the ratings before we launch the site. Where did you get this link from?

[deadsuperhero]

Um bicilotti, who gave you the URL to that page? It shouldn't be made public yet, the panel still have to finish rating all the games and then review the ratings before we launch the site. Where did you get this link from?

Probably from typing random stuff after the domain name. I do stuff like that all the time, just to see what happens.

[bicilotti]

Useful feedback: A crap game is a crap game, professional or amatuer, regardless of who made it. As a gamer, I'm not in the habit of playing crap games just so I can give feedback to a developer in the hope that the next one won't suck. I play games to be entertained, and if a game fails to do that, either from the outset or over time, then that game is not worth bothering with.

Let's say I answer to your post with this:

"your post falls in the 3 cups category"

Maybe you prefer something like:

"I got you idea but I partially disagree with that.
Let's say a great storyteller or writer picks up AGS. He makes a game which is interesting and enjoyable, but puzzles are too easy. Now, someone of the rating panel sticks a "two cup" on it justa after it is released.
Results: the game creator gets very few feedbacks, feels frustrated, abandons the AGS community.

Now, if we let the new games float around like 2 or 3 weeks without putting a school-mark on them, some useful flow of information happens, the game creator recognize his/her fault and deliver the next time a great game (beg you pardon panel, a 5-cups game)".

I like indie game to be professional, which means with a lot of effort put in them. I don't like "professionalism", which stops men and women with lot of good ideas and skills from learning AGS and experimenting with it.

[Link to cup rating test page removed, it's not ready yet!]

Talking of feedback, the few people who visited the link gave you useful feedback, Scotch (like Radiant). Put it back, let the AGS get a taste of the improvements.

Um bicilotti, who gave you the URL to that page? It shouldn't be made public yet, the panel still have to finish rating all the games and then review the ratings before we launch the site. Where did you get this link from?

Messing around with google. Again, maybe it should be made public, just to let people see how the thing is growing.

P.S.: There is a filter for the cups (like "games with at least 3 cups" etc.) in the search screen, but not one for the user's vote (something like "games with at least 60%.." etc.).
Is that a feature that it is "work in progress" or do you plan to implement only the cup filter?

[scotch]

If it was at the stage where people felt it was ready for feedback it'd be posted.
I wonder how it got into google...