Unrated AGS games in the archieve

[JackAnimated]

How about we all choose a game or too in the games section that havent got enough votes for a rating - play them, and vote. Rate those ignored games, give em a chance...

...maybe.


Jack

[Akatosh]

Sounds like a good idea.

[JackAnimated]

Ive rated Aswin's Dream (by Coffeesoft - Aswin).

C'mon people, think if you brought out a game that wasnt downloaded much because it didnt have a rating.

Jack

[Snake]

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't look at the rating before downloading a game - I like to form my own opinion.

I wouldn't care if I got a 0 as a rating, the best gift to me would be that I actually got a game finished


--Snake

[Ishmael]

The only ratings I care about under any circumstances are the ones my own games have got

[MillsJROSS]

I tend to look more in the actual thread the games were released, than look at the reviews there. The rating sytem can never be truly accurate. The problem lies in the fact that random people rate the game, and while the general mass usually averages the rating out to being fairly accurate, the general mass usually doesn't play all the games (as you've noticed). Even looking at the games that do have ratings, it's apparent that there's a wild fluctation of votes from one game to the next. A lot of it has to do with how well people "pimp" or make known about there game. When it's released (during high or low forum activity or what year). How good it actually is. If it has good graphics, regardless of gameplay, it will generally recieve more play, and usually more votes. There's really no way to implement a solution that would work (I just don't think we can expect people to play all of the games made). I think all in all, it's up to the game author to try and generate enough interest in voting.

I really wish that the attempts to make AGS game review/news sites had lasted longer. Because then you could assign reviewers to games and cover more ground, with more consistency, since people can judge what they like according to how well a reviewer thinks like them.

-MillsJROSS

[magintz]

I think this is a brilliant idea to help people know what everyone thought of their game and to know that they would need to improve. If more reviews were left as well it would allow people to form better decsions as well, even if the rating is low it could have some really incredible parts which get overlooked.

I will definatley contribute to this.


Hehe, I just looked at my piratess game, it's been downloaded over 1000 times and with 8 votes giving an average of 38%. Considering this game was unfinished and very buggy I think that's a friggin' awesome rating and definatley gives me some motivation that if I put more effort into what I'm making then hopefully it will score high.

[ManicMatt]

I never did like how it rates things here.

When a magazine finds a game to be average, they really score it around 70%, not 50%. Maybe it's me and I'm not so easy to please, but if I read a game in the shops scored an average of 50% in all the magazines I more than likely wouldn't touch it. It will most likely be awful.

So from that perception, 38% say, would suggest to me that it's the scum of the earth. But in AGS it means below average.

Good thing I don't really value the percentages given to games on here.

[Pumaman]

When a magazine finds a game to be average, they really score it around 70%, not 50%. Maybe it's me and I'm not so easy to please, but if I read a game in the shops scored an average of 50% in all the magazines I more than likely wouldn't touch it. It will most likely be awful.

But surely that's a flaw in the magazine ratings, not the AGS ones. By definition an average game should get 50%, a bad game below 50% and a good game above 50%.

[Pelican]

We can currently browse games by category, or date added etc.; how about browsing by rating? Or even just have a rating column on the game's digest list, so people can see at a glance which aren't rated yet. I mean the games database has 741 games, its going to take a while to check all those to see which aren't rated...

[Ishmael]

Been discussed before, and a listing sorted by rating made by SSH I think showed exactly why it's not there. The voting is by no means accurate or truthful. If there was a way to effectively sweep off all the spam votes of the past, it would maybe be no problem, but since some rather bad quality games have amazing ratings the sorting wouldn't serve any real point. And besides, you're not supposed to look at the rating when picking a game to play; instead, the discription, screenshot, (constructive) comment, etc. and the forum thread, if such can be found.

[Pelican]

The suggestion wasn't really about being able to search for games with good ratings (we can search by awards already). I was just suggesting something to highlight which games aren't rated yet, so if people are inclined they can go play them and rate them (the point of this topic).

[Pumaman]

Sounds like a reasonable idea, I'll think about it.

[Ishmael]

That, ofcource, could work.

[Steel Drummer]

I just rated EXIT (I forget who made it). It had a few votes, but not as many as other games like The Apprentice and so on.

[JackAnimated]

Just rated and reviewed A walk in da tomb: Final (by Pmdee). Waste of time.

[FSi++]

Just rated and reviewed A walk in da tomb: Final (by Pmdee). Waste of time.

Absolutely.
Better play Ace Quest!!1 some of my games, and better not 'joke' ones. I think no one of them is rated so far .

I myself played (and voted) Update Quest. It suck if you know what it was supposed to be but eh.

[Akatosh]

I don't know what you all have against UpdateQuest. In my opinion, it wasn't that bad at all- just way too short and easy!

Just rated and commented Enoworld.

/EDIT: Also rated AWIDT. The worst I've ever played, and that guy actually rated his own game best-possible.

[Dualnames]

I played Bog and Wayer Quest. And Manic Matt's secrets. Though I di not rate it.
Sorry Manny.

[Stupot]

this is a good idea... let me go and choose one to rate.