AGS Games page update

[BlackDragon1200]

A really simple request (which if implemented would probably actually equate to a lot of work), why not also have half cups for the AGS panel ratings? It just seems to me that the quality of the 3 cup games varies wildly, with 10 steps instead of 5 you could easily fine tune these ratings rather then having to dump all the "average" games into a single catagory.

Also as well as having the ability to search by AGS panel ratings, would it be possible to also have the option of instead searching by user ratings?

Thanks.

[Gilbert]

About the rating thing, I think the panel members had already discussed about it.
IMO, no matter how hard a panel member tries, ratings are a bit subjective, if the scale is as precise as 10 steps, I think whether a game shall get a 3.5 cup rating or a 3 depends even more on personal preference. Moreover, I think a 10 step scale is probably too complicated, as we can't tell how difference a 3.5 is from a 3 or a 4, but if we do it simple to have only full cups, the difference between a 3 and a 4 is more clear-cut.

[BlackDragon1200]

Moreover, I think a 10 step scale is probably too complicated, as we can't tell how difference a 3.5 is from a 3 or a 4, but if we do it simple to have only full cups, the difference between a 3 and a 4 is more clear-cut.

It doesn't have to be that complicated, simply keep the current guidelines but break each number into an upper and lower tier. So take all the games which recieved a 3 (A decent game, give it a go), the ones that really stand out in that catagory get a 3.5 and the rest get a 3.0. In this way it is not that much harder to rate as you are still using the base 5 catagories but we can now see which 3s were close to being 4s and which 3s were just 3s.

[ThreeOhFour]

I really think that the 5 cups rating is fine how it is. If we're going to go into cups and a half, we'll soon probably get people saying "Why don't the panel use a percentage figure instead?".

If you want a more detailed idea of a game's quality, look at the user ratings. They're there for a reason .

[SSH]

To be honest, I think 5 different ratings is too many. The difference between 4 cup and 5 cup games is marginal. We certainly don't need more.

[Ishmael]

Maybe if the five cup rating was reserved for epic games of superior quality that have left an unfading mark on the community, such as Pleurghburg, and um... eh, Ace Quest?

Or maybe not.

[Radiant]

To be honest, I think 5 different ratings is too many. The difference between 4 cup and 5 cup games is marginal. We certainly don't need more.

I agree. While I see a clear difference between 3 and 4 cups, there doesn't appear to be a distinction between 4 and 5 except for personal preference, kind of like the pick of the month. This is probably because there's just a handful of 5-cup games total - less than one per year, as it stands.

(edit) I would like to speak (PM) with the person from the rating panel who writes those one-liner "official" reviews for games. While I believe the rating panel has done a good job at cup-rating the games, I find these reviews have a tendency to lack objectivity, and to be overly negative in tone. Since these are (assumedly) written by one person, why is it that this person isn't simply using the "user review" feature like everybody else?

[LimpingFish]

I would like to speak (PM) with the person from the rating panel who writes those one-liner "official" reviews for games. While I believe the rating panel has done a good job at cup-rating the games, I find these reviews have a tendency to lack objectivity, and to be overly negative in tone. Since these are (assumedly) written by one person, why is it that this person isn't simply using the "user review" feature like everybody else?

It depends, since whoever rated the game is the one who left the comment.

The panel comments are also voluntary, and are usually written as a courtesy. I can't say that I've seen "overly" negative comments; Indeed, the only negative comments would largely be those on one and two cup games.

On the other hand, the reasons why a game is rated three cups instead of five cups are usually all negative ones, no? So I see no reason for the reviewer not to point them out.

Why would we use the User Review function? User reviews and ratings are notoriously prone to wild fluctuations in accuracy. Panel activity should be, and is, kept separate.
 
Of course, all ratings/reviews are simply the opinions of the panel members and don't claim to be otherwise. When a panel member rates a game, that rating is open to objections by the rest of the panel.

Maybe if the five cup rating was reserved for epic games of superior quality that have left an unfading mark on the community...

All marks fade with time.

When the panel was formed, we agreed we wouldn't just go with the popular consensus on "landmark" titles. Everything had to be rated with a fresh eye.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

And since the rating system has been (and will continue to be) anonymous, we're not exactly going to tell you who rated what just because you don't agree with their assessment of your game.  And I 100% disagree that the comments lack objectivity; just because some are 'negative' does not mean they were not written by someone who took the effort to play your game and weigh its merits.  If they found it lacking then sobeit, as long as they weren't blatantly disrespectful or intentionally insulting.  It doesn't mean the end of the world, and it certainly doesn't mean people will avoid playing it (look at the number of downloads some of the worst rated games got BEFORE the cup ratings!). 

If you want to discuss a few specific comments, feel free to pm me your concerns.

[JpSoft]

I checked that there are a total of 32 games included into "training games". 31 of them have 1 cup and just 1 deserved 2 cups. Curious, at least. If some people discuss about have a different rating for ocmercial games, do not be the same for a training game? I read the thread of some of this games and a lot of them were created in 1 week, or even less than that. I downloaded some of them and im very sure that the diference between some  games is more than 1 cup.

Just a free opinion.

Jp

[Amanda Stoica]

I like this system very much.
It helped me to find and play the best games...
But is it just one person that gives the cups?
Shouldn't there be at least three opinions from different players?

[scotch]

It's hard enough finding one person to do a rating. If it can be organised in the future a second or third pass is an option but it's probably not happening any time soon.

Yes the ratings are subjective, which is unavoidable and a good thing in my opinion. I don't want to know what games are popular in the scene, I can see the download stats and google hits already, I see the ratings as just another source for suggestions. They do the important job of diverting people away from the games they definitely do not want to play though. I was in favour of 3 levels to start with, the 4-5 cup split was always going to cause controversy, these games being the most high profile, but 5 is what came out of the discussion and it's here to stay. Good job overall.

[LimpingFish]

There are a number of members who rate different games, but yes, a game rating is usually the opinion of a single person. As are the individual user ratings, I might add.

And again, all ratings, made by the panel or otherwise, are subjective.

Curious, at least. If some people discuss about have a different rating for commercial games, do not be the same for a training game?

"Training Games" is in itself a compromise. It means the panel understands that these games were just made to try out AGS, but a cup rating will still be awarded just the same.

[Le Woltaire]

About two weeks ago I got some emails where several persons congratulated me.
They wrote me that Earl Bobby got five cups, and I didn't understand what they actually mean with this...
When I took a closer look at the games site I recognized the rating,
and thought it was an interesting idea to add a optional rating,
especially because many of the public ratings suffered from vandalism,
like multiple or destructive voting (there was a time where every person in the internet could vote for or against a game in the database).

When I took a closer look at the search function I soon recognized, that only five games (of 904) got a five cup rating. When I filtered the "five cup games" I saw my own game next to all those award winning games that I always admired like "Trilby's Notes" or  "Apprentice". Other games like "5 days a stranger" that I expected in the five cup rating as well were just in the four cup section... Besides of that, my game was the only one in the five cup list, that didn't get an award...

I soon started to ask myself, if I really merit such a high rating with my game...
There was never really any reaction on it.
People didn't seem to like it very much and I got a lot of emails from persons who told me,
that it surely was an effort, but not really a good game.
I even tried to promote my game in other forums for the first time, just to see if someone is interested,
but even there the reactions were almost zero.

I think this shows the subjectivity of this type of rating.
I see it as a big compliment, however it fills me with subjective doubts and sense of guilt towards other games...

[m0ds]

Ahh Le Woltaire I think it was a fabulous achievement. There will always be people looking for more but Earl Bobbys Balls a fantastic game to say the least. I was also a bit surprised that Trilby's Notes was in there rather than 5DAS, where I have read in lots of places and gotten the impression people preffered 5DAS. But, the ratings will never truly speak to everyone. The public vote won't necessarily do you any favours, and I think thats part of a reason why the cup system was introduced. Anyway, I don't think you should feel guilty...show some Balls! Your achievement is recognised in a great place, if not in some of your emails!

[TwinMoon]

You mentioned earlier the game length featured is now gone, the reviewer will put it in the right category.

I think this is fine for short / medium / long, but my MAGS game "Dead of Winter" has been placed in the 'short' category which I don't think is right.

Any official person who can change this for me?
Also a checkbox to state you're uploading a MAGS game would be a good idea.

[LimpingFish]

You mentioned earlier the game length featured is now gone, the reviewer will put it in the right category.

I think this is fine for short / medium / long, but my MAGS game "Dead of Winter" has been placed in the 'short' category which I don't think is right.

Any official person who can change this for me?
Also a checkbox to state you're uploading a MAGS game would be a good idea.

Dead of Winter was played in full, and "Short" was felt to be the correct category for it. It meets the criteria for such, anyway.

Categories for MAGS, OROW, Hour games, etc, were thought to be superfluous to requirements, as the game's creator can make a point of mentioning this in their initial comment when adding their game to the database.

The new database is still in it's infancy, so changes to how it works may be introduced in the future. But for now we have a workable, functioning database, so let's just see how it goes.

And keep giving us feedback.

[TwinMoon]

Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up.

My confusion comes from the fact that the category 'MAGS' still exists. ( My game is a short game, no debate there, but since the database includes MAGS games as a category in length, I thought it would be put in there. )


IMHO the category "MAGS" or maybe "Games made in competitions" or something should remain since games made with a deadline are different from normal games, and people have different standards for it.
At least as an extra option (like with commercial games) so people can include/exlude them from their searches.

[LimpingFish]

Actually, no, you're right. DoW belongs under MAGS, which does indeed remain as a separate category. It's OROW and such that don't have a category.

It just slipped my mind that DoW was made for MAGS.

Slight lapse of memory on my part, but I've corrected the game entry.

[TwinMoon]

Thanks. Complaining does work