Sorting the games

[ranon]

I am not a game developer. I just like to play adventure games.  The AGS site is a very good repository of adventure games.

However, it is very difficult to find the good games on the site. There is a rating system but there is no way to sort by rating or total number of downloads.

It will add a lot of functionality to the user experience if such sorting is added. Please add it.

[Radiant]

Sorting by current ratings wouldn't work, as those ratings are highly arbitrary.

Sorting by number of downloads would be counterproductive, because then some authors would start artificially boosting their download rating (which actually they already do).

A couple months ago there was a project where a panel of forum members would go and rate everything; I assume they're still working on that since 900 games is quite a lot.

[Lionmonkey]

You can try Completed Game Announcement board. Popular games are on top all the time, because they get many comments.

[ranon]

Sorting by current ratings wouldn't work, as those ratings are highly arbitrary.

Sorting by number of downloads would be counterproductive, because then some authors would start artificially boosting their download rating (which actually they already do).

Just because a system can be gamed, is no reason for the system not to be in place. Today's downloader is very savvy and gets his information from multiple sources. The ratings would be just one. Others would include total number of votes, and the user comments on the games page. But if the games are not sorted, he would likely not see the other information at all.

You can try Completed Game Announcement board. Popular games are on top all the time, because they get many comments.

This is only an option for a dedicated follower of the forum. And it does not give any idea of older games which are popular.

[Radiant]

Today's downloader is very savvy and gets his information from multiple sources.

What makes you think so, especially as this "savvy" downloader is apparently unable to read the Finished Games forum?

And no, if a system is too easily gamed, that is a reason for not installing it, because an easily abused rating system gives no meaningful information.

[JimmyShelter]

Sorting by current ratings wouldn't work, as those ratings are highly arbitrary.

Every rating system is arbitrary. But still, it's better than no rating at all.

I would really like such a sorting function. I returned to the site after a few months, and I had no easy way to find out which good games were made in my absence.

[JimmyShelter]

You can try Completed Game Announcement board. Popular games are on top all the time, because they get many comments.

NEW popular games are on top, but as games get older, their threads disappear even for the most popular games.

If you're new tot the site and the games, currently the best ways is the 'Pick of the Month'-page, but it just takes a few days to play through thoses games.

[ranon]

What makes you think so, especially as this "savvy" downloader is apparently unable to read the Finished Games forum?

You must diferentiate between an active user of this forum and somebody who is just browsing to play some games. Also as was pointed out the finished games fourm is not useful for older games that are popular.

And no, if a system is too easily gamed, that is a reason for not installing it, because an easily abused rating system gives no meaningful information.

Even if the system can be gamed, it should not come in the way of improving the user experience. As of now the system is hardly useful. Some rating is better than nothing at all. And as I mentioned, there are other ways that a user can tell if a game is good or the rating is just gamed.

[Radiant]

Every rating system is arbitrary.

False.

But still, it's better than no rating at all.

Also false. No information is better than misleading information.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

This is being worked on.  Eventually the games page will have additional genre categories and such to make finding a specific type of game easier.  Progress is at or around 70% I would say.

[SSH]

You could also check out the Pick of the Month on the games page, or look at some of the sites that review freeware adventures, such as http://www.adventuregamers.com or Four Fat Chicks.

[ranon]

But still, it's better than no rating at all.

Also false. No information is better than misleading information.

But you have the rating system. So that is some information. What you are saying is that the system can be manipulated. However, how will sorting on that basis increase or decrease the ability of the system to be manipulated?

[bicilotti]

Every rating system is arbitrary.

False.

Please elaborate.

quote]But still, it's better than no rating at all.

Also false. No information is better than misleading information.

I'd rather choose to be one-eyed than blind.

[JimmyShelter]

Every rating system is arbitrary.

False.

A rating system is always subjective, it's always based on opinions, not fact. How could it not be arbitrary?

Does a rating of 78% mean the game is precisely 1% better then a game with 79%?  Ofcourse not.


But on the other hand, would it help my choices when trying to pick a game if I could sort it by rating? Hell yeah.
I'd love to play all the 90% games. If only, to see if the rating's right.

I always rate games after playing them, even more so if I disagree with the current score.

[Radiant]

I'd rather choose to be one-eyed than blind.

Most people would choose to make their own decisions, rather than being misled by false data.

A rating system is always subjective, it's always based on opinions, not fact. How could it not be arbitrary?

That is simply false. Most good rating systems are, or at least purport to be, based upon fact. You know, to make them not arbitrary.

I always rate games after playing them, even more so if I disagree with the current score.

Yes, but because most people don't do that, the current scores are arbitrary. So in effect, you want to play a number of arbitrarily chosen games to find out if you agree with their arbitrary scores. You can already do that.

[SSH]

Back in June 2006 I wrote a script that downloaded all the rankings and generated this page:

http://ssh.me.uk/ranking.htm

[EldKatt]

This is only an option for a dedicated follower of the forum. And it does not give any idea of older games which are popular.

Do you have to be a dedicated follower to just look at a forum? You can sort by number of replies, by the way. This would take care of the age problem. I'm not trying to refute all your arguments, just pointing out a practical possibility that you seem to have overlooked. I don't give a damn about the ideology behind all this.

I'd rather choose to be one-eyed than blind.

And I'd rather be blind than hallucinating. I'm not taking sides in this discussion, just pointing out that non sequitur.

[SSH]

Here's the latest rankings: http://ssh.me.uk/ranking200712.html

[ranon]

Here's the latest rankings: http://ssh.me.uk/ranking200712.html

Thank you very much.

Edit: I already found a game that I want to download using this. I'll be playing the Earl Bobby games tonight. This is incredibly useful.

[ranon]

Do you have to be a dedicated follower to just look at a forum? You can sort by number of replies, by the way. This would take care of the age problem. I'm not trying to refute all your arguments, just pointing out a practical possibility that you seem to have overlooked. I don't give a damn about the ideology behind all this.

Yes that is a method that will work. Many forums do not allow sorting by replies and I guess I did not know about that feature until you told me about it. (and thanks for that)

However i still do not understand why a sort on the rankings are not provided. All I have got are convoluted arguments that really do not make sense.