I made a game (The Will) that took 20 days and another game which took more than 2 years (The Order). They both got 3 cups from AGS panel which makes me laugh. I'm not comparing them to another developer's games which might make it subjective. But rating my first game the same as the second game just makes me wonder if they have any clue how they are reviewing the games. If they gave the first game 1 cup and the second game 3 cups it would make sense. But this is ridiculous. It doesn't make any difference to me cause my both games are free, and I have no plans to become Ron Gilbert. When you take my joke as serious as my art, I realize you must be joking. Do you guys even know what's fart and what's art?
Would you feel better if your other game was downgraded to 2 cups?
Obviously, the person(s) who rated your games generally liked them, but didn't think they deserve 4 cups (which only a small number of games get).
The rating isn't about how much effort went into a game - it's a recommendation for players to decide which game to play. For me personally, the panel comment is more relevant than the mere cup count.
Quote from: cat on Thu 02/01/2025 14:09:23Would you feel better if your other game was downgraded to 2 cups?
Obviously, the person(s) who rated your games generally liked them, but didn't think they deserve 4 cups (which only a small number of games get).
The rating isn't about how much effort went into a game - it's a recommendation for players to decide which game to play. For me personally, the panel comment is more relevant than the mere cup count.
Yes, thank you. I would feel much better if you downgrade my first game to 1 cup. At least I feel like there is some sanity.
Not knowing anything about your games, I would guess that the one that took 20 days or whatever was listed as a short game and the other listed as medium or long. I look at those things and don't expect a short game to necessarily compete to a long game in terms of depth of story, etc. I think the ratings are just does the game work. Does it keep a person interested to the end.
Quote from: fire7side on Thu 02/01/2025 18:37:36Not knowing anything about your games, I would guess that the one that took 20 days or whatever was listed as a short game and the other listed as medium or long. I look at those things and don't expect a short game to necessarily compete to a long game in terms of depth of story, etc. I think the ratings are just does the game work. Does it keep a person interested to the end.
I appreciate your guess work, but you have to play both games to be able to judge characters (which is almost none existence in first game), puzzles, coding, writing, visual art and music (which is also none existence in first game). I understand people can even rate my first game more than second game, which might be 1 cup. But I believe if AGS officially wants to rate a game it must be much more professional. Or are we dealing with another ROTTEN tomato? Anyway, they made their rating based on the length of the game (really?) or whatever, I'm free to have to express my shock. Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm making, and the crap that I made to learn how AGS works is as valuable as something I put more than two years of my life in it.
My 2 cents:
5 cups ratings don't allow too much leeway.
In the whole database, there are only 14 games with 5 cups - truly an exceptional rating.
There are no 0 cup games, probably out of respect for the benevolent creators who took the time to put their games on the database.
That leaves 3 possible ratings for most games.
About the Will and the Order: I've finished both games and I agree on the superiority of the Order.
Graphically and narratively.
The graphics in the Will were only serviceable and its story appeared a bit far-fetched, but it featured acceptable puzzles and I had an okay time with it. Plus it was your first game, so I can see the panel giving it the average to cheer you on.
The Order has a better atmosphere and oozes more personality. The puzzles are good but - as stated in my review - a couple of design choices feel odd.
Also, the conclusion could have been more impactful. The story is nothing to be ashamed of, but we don't get to know the Nizari Order' leader or the Seljuk Prince. For someone unaware of Iran's History (like me), they are Tweedledee and Tweedledum and I didn't care helping one or the other in the end.
So I'd say The Order is a solid 3 cups.
Just because two games got the same cup rating that does not necessarily mean they are equally good. Maybe one of them barely got three cups, while the other just barely missed getting four. (Creamy made the same point in more detail while I was writing.)
Anyway, complaining about your own ratings is always a bad look.
Quote from: Snarky on Thu 02/01/2025 20:30:48Just because two games got the same cup rating that does not necessarily mean they are equally good. Maybe one of them barely got three cups, while the other just barely missed getting four. (Creamy made the same point in more detail while I was writing.)
Anyway, complaining about your own ratings is always a bad look.
As Creamy mentioned The Order gets solid 3 cups, so does it mean The Will got 3 and a half of cup? It's just getting more ridiculous! Does it look like if I care that I look good or bad to you? Why do I even need to say much about Nizari leader?
Let's imagine that the "real" panel rating of
The Will is 2.55 cups, while the "real" rating of
The Order is 3.46 cups. Because there are no half-cup ratings, both scores are rounded to 3 cups, but
The Will is a "weak" 3 while
The Order is a "solid" 3.
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 20:36:13Does it look like if I look good or bad to you?
This discussion makes you look bad. When you release something, you have to accept that others will not agree with your own assessment of how good it is.
Quote from: Snarky on Thu 02/01/2025 20:44:49Let's imagine that the "real" panel rating of The Will is 2.55 cups, while the "real" rating of The Order is 3.46 cups. Because there are no half-cup ratings, both scores are rounded to 3 cups, but The Will is a "weak" 3 while The Order is a "solid" 3.
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 20:36:13Does it look like if I look good or bad to you?
This discussion makes you look bad. When you release something, you have to accept that others will not agree with your own assessment of how good it is.
Did I argue how good The Order is? Or was I telling you how bad The Will and hence your rating system is? Please read my comments again or the way you are defending your rating system might make you look even worse.
Saying the word "your" says more about you than anything.
Well, "he" was rating The Order 3.46 and The Will 2.55. I wasn't. That's why I said "your" "In case" what he said is true, they both still show up 3 😁 and liking "your" friend's comment doesn't change the fact that they both have 3 cups. 🙂
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 20:58:31Well, "he" was rating The Order 3.46 and The Will 2.55. I wasn't. That's why I said "your" "In case" what he said is true, they both still show up 3 😁 and liking or defending "your" friend's comment doesn't change the fact that they both have 3 cups. 🙂
If you drive a car, and have been stuck in traffic you understand the concept that you ARE traffic.
The panel isn't "yours". You used the same wording in the first post too. This is a community, you are participating in the community, the panel is ours. It's a better conversation to discuss what do we want for our panel.
I understand there's a balance in motivating the game developers to continue creating games, and there's also a way for players to evaluate what to play. There may be more things that are subtly or perhaps unconsciously taken into consideration.
But I don't think approaching like you are some external entity is constructive.
Some people still think that my best game is Billy Master Was Right (a short, free game made during the lockdown). Much better than my other commercial games that took me about two years each. And I am happy with that. Maybe they saw something in it that wasn't there in Nightmare Frames or An English Haunting. In a way I'm proud that something so small and unpretentious struck a chord with some players.
Quote from: Postmodern Adventures on Thu 02/01/2025 21:45:55Some people still think that my best game is Billy Master Was Right (a short, free game made during the lockdown). Much better than my other commercial games that took me about two years each. And I am happy with that. Maybe they saw something in it that wasn't there in Nightmare Frames or An English Haunting. In a way I'm proud that something so small and unpretentious struck a chord with some players.
Good for you. I'm neither happy or sad, but rather amazed. Already busy writing another pretentious game. :D Anyone else is interested to convince me how great AGS panel ratings are? Don't hesitate before I get banned.
This specific case aside (because I have played neither game), I do think there is a bit of a problem with the Panel ratings (that are showcased here fairly well):
They are untransparent.
First, while the player ratings are broken down in categories (Visual, Immersion, Puzzles & Pacing, Overall Enjoyment), the Panel ratings are not.
Aditionally - how does the panel even work? If I remember correctly from many, many years, there are some people on the panel (who? Is this noted anywhere?) and just one (Two?, I don't know) person from the panel needs to play a game to give the panel rating. So two games from the same author could be played by two different members of the panel, leading to (possibly) very different impressions and ratings.
Then there's the problem that a rating from 1-5 doesn't actually makes it possible to give a lot of variation in ratings, leading to vastly different games rated the same. As mentioned above, a game could be a very low 2 cups while another is a very high 2 cups - and they would obviously both receive 2 cups.
Then there's the problem that a short MAGS game is probably looked at differently than a full-length commercial game. The expactations for a full-length and/or commercial game are (understandably) much higher than for a short or MAGS or similar game, therefore it might (and maybe should be) more difficult for a full-length game to receive a higher rating.
In short (as someone who hasn't created a game in many years and therefore has no stake in the game), even though I generally like the panel ratings and often find them useful (in addition to the panel comment), I also do think they could and should be more transparent.
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 18:54:03Anyway, they made their rating based on the length of the game (really?) or whatever, I'm free to have to express my shock. Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm making, and the crap that I made to learn how AGS works is as valuable as something I put more than two years of my life in it.
It's just a different thing, like comparing a comic strip to a comic book. You can have a great comic strip and a great comic book, but you can't really compare the rating and say the comic strip should get more stars because it took longer and has more depth. You have to compare it to other games of about the same length. And it's always going to be subjective. It's just to help decide which game to download. It's like critic ratings on a movie. They are kind of all over but tend to be higher in a better game. We have individual comments and the panel rating, plus we can look at the artwork on a few scenes. Works for me.
Quote from: fire7side on Thu 02/01/2025 22:36:03Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 18:54:03Anyway, they made their rating based on the length of the game (really?) or whatever, I'm free to have to express my shock. Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm making, and the crap that I made to learn how AGS works is as valuable as something I put more than two years of my life in it.
It's just a different thing, like comparing a comic strip to a comic book. You can have a great comic strip and a great comic book, but you can't really compare the rating and say the comic strip should get more stars because it took longer and has more depth. You have to compare it to other games of about the same length. And it's always going to be subjective. It's just to help decide which game to download. It's like critic ratings on a movie. They are kind of all over but tend to be higher in a better game. We have individual comments and the panel rating, plus we can look at the artwork on a few scenes. Works for me.
For me it's like rating a movie that is an hour and half or a movie that is 3 hours. Still they are both movies and I would rate it based on the writing, acting, music, etc. I didn't know it works like that. I learned something new. I'm convinced, I'm convinced that both should have solid 3 cups. How can I not be, after so many logical answers.
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 12:00:20But rating my first game the same as the second game just makes me wonder if they have any clue how they are reviewing the games. If they gave the first game 1 cup and the second game 3 cups it would make sense. But this is ridiculous.
Why? Do all artists inherently make better art as time progresses? And by "better", do we mean more polished? Is polished art better than unpolished art?
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 18:54:03Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm making, and the crap that I made to learn how AGS works is as valuable as something I put more than two years of my life in it.
If your first game was crap, why did you release it? Did you know it was crap when you released it, or are you saying that you now consider it crap? Did you want people to play your crap, and call it crap, just so you could release a second game to earn kudos for how much better the second game is compared to the first? Will you retroactively announce this second game is crap as soon as you release a third one? Do I you see why some are saying this is a bad look for you, or do I have to elaborate on this dumb excuse for a gag any further?
Quote from: Sinitrena on Thu 02/01/2025 22:08:55I do think there is a bit of a problem with the Panel ratings
Fair enough, but some of your points raise their own problems. Such as, what is the acceptable granulation level for ratings? Half cups? Quarter cups? Ratings comprised of .1 increments? Just what would be the differences between a 3.4 and a 3.6 cup game? I'll go further, and ask what the difference between a 3 and 3.5 cup game is? To me, all that half tells me is that the game is good, but wasn't good enough to be a four? Maybe that's just me, though.
As to MAGS or commercial games, are we talking about handicaps or demerits? Should we be harsher on commercial games, or more forgiving of MAGS games?
Personally, if a game is worth playing, I don't feel the need to examine how it came into being. Factors such as development time, or the number of people involved shouldn't, to me anyway, bear any influence on the most important factor: enjoyment.
As to panel transparency, the panel was always intended to be anonymous, but I've long since waved my own anonymity. And while we do have guidelines, and we do occasionally discuss ratings as a whole, we also trust the abilities of each other to be fair and knowledgeable on the subject.
I think people should remember that 3 cups = Good. Numbers before 3 are less good. Numbers after 3 are...more good. :-\
If your game gets 3 cups, you made a good game.
Quote from: LimpingFish on Fri 03/01/2025 00:35:28Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 12:00:20But rating my first game the same as the second game just makes me wonder if they have any clue how they are reviewing the games. If they gave the first game 1 cup and the second game 3 cups it would make sense. But this is ridiculous.
Why? Do all artists inherently make better art as time progresses? And by "better", do we mean more polished? Is polished art better than unpolished art?
Quote from: lapsking on Thu 02/01/2025 18:54:03Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm making, and the crap that I made to learn how AGS works is as valuable as something I put more than two years of my life in it.
If your first game was crap, why did you release it? Did you know it was crap when you released it, or are you saying that you now consider it crap? Did you want people to play your crap, and call it crap, just so you could release a second game to earn kudos for how much better the second game is compared to the first? Will you retroactively announce this second game is crap as soon as you release a third one? Do I you see why some are saying this is a bad look for you, or do I have to elaborate on this dumb excuse for a gag any further?
Quote from: Sinitrena on Thu 02/01/2025 22:08:55I do think there is a bit of a problem with the Panel ratings
Fair enough, but some of your points raise their own problems. Such as, what is the acceptable granulation level for ratings? Half cups? Quarter cups? Ratings comprised of .1 increments? Just what would be the differences between a 3.4 and a 3.6 cup game? I'll go further, and ask what the difference between a 3 and 3.5 cup game is? To me, all that half tells me is that the game is good, but wasn't good enough to be a four? Maybe that's just me, though.
As to MAGS or commercial games, are we talking about handicaps or demerits? Should we be harsher on commercial games, or more forgiving of MAGS games?
Personally, if a game is worth playing, I don't feel the need to examine how it came into being. Factors such as development time, or the number of people involved shouldn't, to me anyway, bear any influence on the most important factor: enjoyment.
As to panel transparency, the panel was always intended to be anonymous, but I've long since waved my own anonymity. And while we do have guidelines, and we do occasionally discuss ratings as a whole, we also trust the abilities of each other to be fair and knowledgeable on the subject.
I think people should remember that 3 cups = Good. Numbers before 3 are less good. Numbers after 3 are...more good. :-\
If your game gets 3 cups, you made a good game.
I deleted the comment from here cause it wasn't a reply to the "quote". Sorry!
I try to avoid your off-topic traps, cause I'm already convinced The Will and The Order both deserve 3 solid cups. But I don't know why you guys don't understand my point which is very simple. I never argued The Order deserves more than 3 cups. But if a website wants to rate video games, I would like to to know why The Will also deserves 3 cups. Is it because it's shorter in length? Or is it because I photoshopped some online pictures for visual art? Is it because it doesn't have music? Is it because it doesn't have much story (kind of shooter puzzles)? Is the animation a bonus (which is only a drop of water falling from the pipe?). Do you guys prefer 3rd person? Or because it was cheesy? Is it because it has the most simple coding? Or is low-resouloution a privilege on AGS (Pixel Art)? When I say it looks ridiculous to me, I'm not joking. Anyway, maybe it's my fault that I'm not much aware how reviews and ratings work. But it's very funny. I was proud The Will had 3 cups, but now I have this feeling it was a joke, it's all subjective and meaningless when two incomparable video games both get 3 solid cups. Which is a relief, cause when I realized how funny galleries judge art, I focused even more freely on my art. I had a very good laugh, hope you all had one too.
Edit: Oh, to be honest, now I remember another animation, a box moving from x110 to x80. Did that make Creamy happy? (laugh)
I think one issue here is that you are comparing one game of yours to another game of yours. The ratings panel is comparing a much wider range of games. If you believe your first game to be worthy of a 1 cup rating, have you played other games rated 1 cup, and seen what the panel is comparing it to? Have you played some 2 cup games?
Imagine you have an author that you like. You go back and read their very first book and you think "Okay, that's not as good as their fifth book, which is one of my favourites, I can see the improvement". But you will probably like it much better than some other author's best book. The panel does not exist to compare your first game to your second game. It exists to compare the full range of games people submit to the database.
I'm just comparing my own game with my own test game and these are the answers I get. God forbidden, imagine what would happen if I compared my game with someone else's game. Anyway, my first game is the most safest to compare and also from AGS database. And probably the most obvious.
Quote from: lapsking on Fri 03/01/2025 04:17:37God forbidden, imagine what would happen if I compared my game with someone else's game.
This is the entire point of the panel ratings, except they are comparing your game with everybody else's game*, not just one other person's game. And this is how all game (and film, etc) review scores work.
*made in a similar style. They probably aren't comparing your game to games that are completely dissimilar, such as a racing or strategy game.
Where did you read that? You mean Hitchcock's crap gets the same rating as his better movie? Not that I compare myself with Hitchcock, but I wasn't aware rating system is this stupid. I'm just afraid if I make a slightly better game it might get 2 cups, a tad confused.
I see this in your first post:
QuoteI'm not comparing them to another developer's games which might make it subjective.
Understand this: Reviews are subjective. They are an opinion.
So your last try didn't work, (comparing my own game with my own game), now you are changing the tracks? That's how I like it. I've got a handful of convincing answers, from all different aspects. It will take me a month to comprehend them all.
What don't you understand though? Here's how reviews work:
1. People play your game.
2. They form an opinion of that experience.
3. They compare that opinion to their opinion of every other similar experience in the database.
4. They try to assign that comparison to a very limited scale.
Where are you confused about this process?
How did The Will comparison with other games on AGS database ended up with 3 cups and The Order comparison with other games on AGS database also ended up with 3 solid cups. I mean the database is almost the same, so does it mean my games are also the same. I would like to know how AGS panel came to this conclusion that both games are 3 cups. However I try to compare I don't come to this conclusion. Please enlighten me only if you have played both games.
(https://i.imgur.com/Y3s4hSC.jpeg)
I'm not that retarded, I know 3 solid cups is average. This comprehesive statics were the last piece of puzzle that I was looking for to completely understand why my both games have the same ratings. I think everybody is convinced now and we all can have go to sleep.
Since reviews are always subjective, when using a 5-star (5-cup) system of grading it seems pretty human and natural for a lot of games to end up with a score of 3. I feel this mostly comes down to reviewers, whether it be the AGS panel or individuals, being polite. A 3 is a solid effort that doesn't stand out. A 2 would be a weak performance but the reviewer felt it had some merit, while a 4 is exceptionally good. A score of 1 is usually reserved for either personal issues (this game has X and I don't like X so I'll give it a 1 out of principle) or in the case of the panel reviews a genuine belief that the game lacks any considerable effort or skill in its makeup. Meanwhile a score of 5 is practically a superlative, reserved only for rare and special occasions where a game achieves the kind of quality seen as appropriate for premium commercial grade games.
A game can be scored outside of these norms, even if it generally falls under one, if it has a specific feature or quirk that stands out, but that's the exception and not the norm. One exception I think is easily given is one of trying to encourage new developers, scoring their first efforts more generously and using that review and score not so much to showcase actual quality of a game, but to highlight the effort of finishing a project for a new developer. Fun fact: my first game has this exact panel review: "A good first effort by a new game author." 3 cups. :D
This whole "3 cups is average" conversation reminds me of some internet outrage of old, where a Nintendo Zelda game was reviewed as a 7 out of 10 and some people were furious at the "low score". It's not a low score, it's average, the average just happens to have crept up in a nominally 0-10 scoring system over time.
Quote from: WHAM on Fri 03/01/2025 08:50:27Since reviews are always subjective, when using a 5-star (5-cup) system of grading it seems pretty human and natural for a lot of games to end up with a score of 3. I feel this mostly comes down to reviewers, whether it be the AGS panel or individuals, being polite. A 3 is a solid effort that doesn't stand out. A 2 would be a weak performance but the reviewer felt it had some merit, while a 4 is exceptionally good. A score of 1 is usually reserved for either personal issues (this game has X and I don't like X so I'll give it a 1 out of principle) or in the case of the panel reviews a genuine belief that the game lacks any considerable effort or skill in its makeup. Meanwhile a score of 5 is practically a superlative, reserved only for rare and special occasions where a game achieves the kind of quality seen as appropriate for premium commercial grade games.
A game can be scored outside of these norms, even if it generally falls under one, if it has a specific feature or quirk that stands out, but that's the exception and not the norm. One exception I think is easily given is one of trying to encourage new developers, scoring their first efforts more generously and using that review and score not so much to showcase actual quality of a game, but to highlight the effort of finishing a project for a new developer. Fun fact: my first game has this exact panel review: "A good first effort by a new game author." 3 cups. :D
This whole "3 cups is average" conversation reminds me of some internet outrage of old, where a Nintendo Zelda game was reviewed as a 7 out of 10 and some people were furious at the "low score". It's not a low score, it's average, the average just happens to have crept up in a nominally 0-10 scoring system over time.
Maybe AGS should also try to shift to 0 - 10 cups. Or add half a cup at least. I don't think the discussion is very complicated. But thank you WHAM, for not getting the point. Don't be embarrassed, nobody got the point. People involved with AGS are very giving people, all they think about is how to improve our games, so giving that when you want to improve them they sacrifice their own interests and totally ignore or even deny it. The world would be much more beautiful if everybody was like them, or maybe they are! Including me? Are these people married to AGS? I'm already married and have no intention for a second wife, chill out guys. If I keep my first wife, I've done a great job. Keep your lavish heart and shiny badges to yourself, it seems they bring attachment. Do you have a shit badge for me by any chance? Something like a poo jumping up and down.
Quote from: Sinitrena on Thu 02/01/2025 22:08:55This specific case aside (because I have played neither game), I do think there is a bit of a problem with the Panel ratings (that are showcased here fairly well):
They are untransparent.
Panel ratings used to be quite transparent. (https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/completed-game-announcements/the-rating-panel-information-thread/)
Obviously, every panel member had their own take on the guidelines, but it generally followed that pattern ^
It's been some years now that those guidelines have not been used any longer.
It's not just the rating, but also the review. Who wrote "It's not the highest art"? What the F? Did I claim I'm making a game with highest art? Do they write this nonesense for the other games they review with 3 cups? Couldn't that Art Critique who doesn't dare to be transparent just wrote it's a good art. Did I expect them to say my art is better than Van Gogh? Or exceptional? To be honest I felt some politics in AGS from the beginning. I understand friendly "banters" but when you want to write a review please don't involve your nepotism or prejudice, or at least leave an option for a free game not to have AGS panel review, otherwise enjoy calling your reviews ridiculous. I mean just because I painted every cm with hand does it mean I expected to have the highest art? What kind of shitty review is that? I don't know exactly what I'm writing, to whom it concerns look in-between lines and see what's useful for you to improve yourself if it makes sense to you. As I do the same
Not highest art but put much effort in it to me means I have been wasting my time and I could do the same thing with photoshopping online pictures and get the same review. I wasn't wasting my time, these guys are wasting their time and reputation to convince me I was wasting my time.
The reviewer writes to inform the general audience of their views and opinions. Whatever the game developers intent was or wasn't doesn't really factor into that. If the reviewer feels that the audience might be looking for something (High art? Ultraviolence? Addictive gameplay? Infinite replayability? Whatever, it doesn't matter) and won't find it, then informing the audience of that can be useful. The reviewers own views and expectations will always colour the final opinion and wording, at least for as long as we have volunteers spending their own time and effort to provide these scores and reviews, and the community don't pool up money to hire paid reviewers who follow strict technical guidelines and absolute professionalism (insert your own joke about the integrity of modern day paid-to-work games journalism here).
As for increasing the number range of reviews, I don't see much point. It'd throw off all existing reviews since the values wouldn't convert 1 to 1 and, as noted in my previous message, that just leads to a new "average" score emerging arbitrarily, and then we'll just have someone else complaining that their piece was rated "only a 7 out of 10" while a game they subjectively see as less valuable or less good was given the same or similar score and they then feel upset.
The scores provide a general guidance, and as the old guidelines state: a game with 2 or 3 cups is worth playing. This implies that a 4 or a 5 is a standout and a score of 1 is reserved for games that suffer from some major issues or shortcomings that make it too difficult to recommend.
Quote from: WHAM on Fri 03/01/2025 11:26:06The reviewer writes to inform the general audience of their views and opinions. Whatever the game developers intent was or wasn't doesn't really factor into that. If the reviewer feels that the audience might be looking for something (High art? Ultraviolence? Addictive gameplay? Infinite replayability? Whatever, it doesn't matter) and won't find it, then informing the audience of that can be useful. The reviewers own views and expectations will always colour the final opinion and wording, at least for as long as we have volunteers spending their own time and effort to provide these scores and reviews, and the community don't pool up money to hire paid reviewers who follow strict technical guidelines and absolute professionalism (insert your own joke about the integrity of modern day paid-to-work games journalism here).
As for increasing the number range of reviews, I don't see much point. It'd throw off all existing reviews since the values wouldn't convert 1 to 1 and, as noted in my previous message, that just leads to a new "average" score emerging arbitrarily, and then we'll just have someone else complaining that their piece was rated "only a 7 out of 10" while a game they subjectively see as less valuable or less good was given the same or similar score and they then feel upset.
The scores provide a general guidance, and as the old guidelines state: a game with 2 or 3 cups is worth playing. This implies that a 4 or a 5 is a standout and a score of 1 is reserved for games that suffer from some major issues or shortcomings that make it too difficult to recommend.
No, you still don't get the point WHAM, if the order is not the highest art, the will is not even the lowest part. As someone who wastes his life to make a game, and I'm forced to accept my lowest art is the same as my better art, maybe then I'm in a wrong place, which is the most possible. If you can't write an objective review don't bother with writing a review, just ignore the game. I think I know about art more than whoever untransparently wrote a review about my art. If it was New York Times it didn't matter mocking my art, it could be even a privilege. But as "community" I want to know what the F is going on here.
I feel your mistake here is believing the the score range of "3 cups" magically makes the two games equally valuable, which is not the case.
And to remind you: while you and I 'waste our lives' to make games, so do the volunteer reviewers 'waste their lives' playing these games, assigning scores and writing short reviews for them. I still have games here that never received a score or review.
We know what is going on here: you completed a project and released a game, and someone out there took the time to play it and review it and to assign it a score they felt best represented its general quality amidst other releases on this site at this time.
That effort, for you and the panel, is valuable and means something. Be happy for that!
Your subjective view of the worth of your games clashes with other people's subjective views. No-one can win an argument like this.
I just looked at the panel ratings of my own games and they are all spot on :-D
@lapsking: Chill, the main point of the ratings is to convey whether a game is worth the effort of downloading and playing it or not. Both your games have been deemed worthy. In no way is the rating telling you that all the effort you put in your second game was a waste of time, that's only happening in your head.
Anybody who plays both games will clearly see how much more work and polish went into the 2nd one, so why do you care that much about the cup rating?
I'm not exactly sure what specifically you are complaining about here?
There is no such thing as an "objective review". Even if all the reviewers were following strict guidelines about how they score their reviews, it will always be coloured by their own subjective opinions.
The review comment is where a comment is given to explain the rating, and to provide more context. The panel rating for your game The Order was actually positive. The ONLY somewhat negative comment (if you take it that way?) is that your art wasn't of the highest quality (but it was still complimented about it being done by hand). Would you have preferred that the Panel Rating for "The Will" actually wrote "This game has really bad art"? Unless the game is obviously bad in some way, Panel Rating comments stay away from negative comments like that.
I haven't played either game, but it shouldn't bother you that even with your less skilled art from The Will, it ranks in the same ratings number as your improved skill art from The Order. There are lots of games like that, and graphics is just 1 part of the rating.
Here are some other games with worse and better graphics than your game, also rated 3:
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/2314-tales-from-the-outer-zone-the-goat-crone/
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/2276-space-tunneler-deluxe/
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/1223-star-trek-newton-part-one-anomaly/
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/2604-saturday-night-is-the-loneliest-night-of-the-week/
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/1010-nes-quest/
https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/2190-10-ways-from-sunday/
lapsking, please don't alienate everyone.
@ThreeOhFour and
@WHAM has this slightly wrong, I guess. The bell curve will apply to user reviews (the orange cups). When or if enough players have rated a game, this will give an average like what you describe.
The panel scale, as explained on the games page and in the sticky post from Andail (which may be outdated), operates slightly differently. 2 cups is average, and most games get that. 1 cup games has serious shortcomings of some sort, while 3 cups are good or recommended games. The exact text on the games page:
QuoteThe AGS Panel is a team of AGS forum veterans who play all of the games here, and give them ratings from one to five cups. The rating system is as follows:
1 Cup Not serious entertainment
2 Cups A reasonable game, worth a try
3 Cups A good game, worth playing
4 Cups A great game, well worth your time
5 Cups An outstanding, must-play game!
Feel free to disagree with the panel's rating, and please don't be offended if you think your game has been underrated!
For comparison, the player ratings are worded like this:
Quote1 Cup A bad game, I wouldn't recommend it
2 cups Play it if you're bored, but not much fun to be had here
3 cups It was ok, play it if you've got some spare time
4 cups Recommended, definitely put it on your to-play list
5 cups Amazing! You have GOT to play this game RIGHT NOW!
The way I interpret this, 3 blue cups equals about 4 orange cups. The player ratings tend to be higher than the panel ratings for many or most games. (Note that this is just my impression, I don't have the statistics.)
Now, occasionally, the panel will f up, misunderstand a game or give the "wrong" rating for some reason. This entire forum is filled with people doing this on their free time without getting paid for it. So the panel, the moderators, game devs, engine devs or coding helpers are all in the same boat, so to speak. In this case, I'll agree partly with lapsking and say that his first game probably was rated a bit generously by the panel due to the art and sound shortcomings he's referring to. I remember liking the puzzles a lot, though, so crap it was not.
As for changing the rating system to a different scale (0-10), that would probably mean losing all the player ratings through many years, in addition to having to rerate several thousand games. I don't think that's going to happen.
I can only speak for myself, but when I give a player review, I'll definitely take into account stuff like game length or genre. I'll compare a short game to other short games, I guess, like I would not compare a poem or a short story to a novel - they're different experiences. Likewise a comedy game ought to be funny and a horror game scary. If it's the other way around, (like unintentionally funny) I won't score it that high. If I paid money for the game, probably something like value for money will come into it, too.
I wasn't trying to alienate everyone. And I'm glad I brought it up. It's just the black duck among white geese story. And I can't stand nonesense as much as you can't.
A guy goes to a karaoke night in a bar and sings a song. People clap and there are some cheers. Encouraged, he starts practicing, and six months later he comes back with a band as the evening's musical performer. He gets about the same amount of applause as when he sang karaoke.
Obviously he is furious. (laugh)
Quote from: Snarky on Fri 03/01/2025 12:09:27A guy goes to a karaoke night in a bar and sings a song. People clap and there are some cheers. Encouraged, he starts practicing, and six months later he comes back with a band as the evening's musical performer. He gets about the same amount of applause as when he sang karaoke.
Obviously he is furious. (laugh)
Hahaha, ha, you are so funny Snarky. Maybe try to make a dark humor game. Get busy with your modules. :P
Honestly, I don't see why you're complaining. It's just a subjective review that's highly dependent on the reviewer.
I mean look at my games.
Rowen Goes To Work (2009): "The game is short, uses borrowed graphics and music, and most unfortunately, the puzzles tend to be completely illogical, like using soap in a microwave to make a key. "
2 cups
Crepe Fields: A Scare Among Crows (2021): "While the graphical presentation and voice acting is average, the mystery writing and investigative puzzles are strong points in this adventure."
2 cups
The first game is terrible (I mean it was my first) and the blurb showcases that. The second game is quite good and the blurb showcases that as well. But they have the same rating. Why? Who cares! Someone played my games and cared enough to review them, that's all that matters. The fact that they both got 2 cups is meaningless to me, since I didn't make the game to appease them specifically. Especially since something like a rating is so subjective that even two people who share the exact same opinion on a game can give it different ratings wholly dependent on what they consider each rating to mean.
I mean just look at normal game reviews, where anything under a 7.0 is typically considered to be equal to a 0.0. ???
Your self-worth should not determined by the opinions of others. (nod)
Quote from: Danvzare on Fri 03/01/2025 12:28:34Honestly, I don't see why you're complaining. It's just a subjective review that's highly dependent on the reviewer.
I mean look at my games.
Rowen Goes To Work (2009): "The game is short, uses borrowed graphics and music, and most unfortunately, the puzzles tend to be completely illogical, like using soap in a microwave to make a key. "
2 cups
Crepe Fields: A Scare Among Crows (2021): "While the graphical presentation and voice acting is average, the mystery writing and investigative puzzles are strong points in this adventure."
2 cups
The first game is terrible (I mean it was my first) and the blurb showcases that. The second game is quite good and the blurb showcases that as well. But they have the same rating. Why? Who cares! Someone played my games and cared enough to review them, that's all that matters. The fact that they both got 2 cups is meaningless to me, since I didn't make the game to appease them specifically. Especially since something like a rating is so subjective that even two people who share the exact same opinion on a game can give it different ratings wholly dependent on what they consider each rating to mean.
I mean just look at normal game reviews, where anything under a 7.0 is typically considered to be equal to a 0.0. ???
Your self-worth should not determined by the opinions of others. (nod)
Exactly, at last someone is saying what I was saying all the time. IT'S MEANINGLESS. Thank you my friend.
Quote from: Khris on Fri 03/01/2025 11:46:05I just looked at the panel ratings of my own games and they are all spot on :-D
@lapsking: Chill, the main point of the ratings is to convey whether a game is worth the effort of downloading and playing it or not. Both your games have been deemed worthy. In no way is the rating telling you that all the effort you put in your second game was a waste of time, that's only happening in your head.
Anybody who plays both games will clearly see how much more work and polish went into the 2nd one, so why do you care that much about the cup rating?
Maybe because I was taking AGS too serious my friend? Maybe I was shocked that your coding does worth as my crappy if this then then.
I just very confused by your anger. This is not an exact science. I've explained how I personally rate games, not because I feel it needs defending, but because you seem determined to find fault with the process.
The Order was rated be me. I liked it. I found it strong in some areas and lacking in others. The art style (your painting) initially struck me as somewhat rudimentary, but it grew on me the further I played, despite it's simplicity. I admire the fact that you painted the entire game, but how you achieved said art, or how long it may have took you, bore no impact on my rating, nor should it. And while rudimentary, it was consistent, which is a plus.
You seem to take umbrage with me expressing my opinion, when it is simply just my opinion. And I don't see how I could have addressed your art without forming an opinion. The panel comment, which you angrily posted about, reflects this:
"And while the art isn't strictly of the highest quality, the artist must be commended for their dedication to painting it all by hand."
Like I said in my earlier post, if you decide your next game has better art, does that mean I was actually right in my opinion?
I didn't rate your first game, but the person who did obviously found something worthwhile contained in it, and did so without having your second game to compare it against. You seem determined to have your art judged according to how much value you, the artist, confer on it, and in doing so, you may be setting yourself up for constant disappointment.
And even if I had rated your first game, I can assure you the quality of that first game would not have effected my rating of the second. I may have noted in the panel comment that your second game was an improvement on your first, but I wouldn't have increased my rating, or retroactively reduced the rating of your first game.
So now we are getting somewhere. Someone rated my first game, and another person rated my second game. Do you see any science in this kind of rating? Does this kind of rating system deserve 3 pages defending? Is this comparison among AGS database by any means slightly accurate? Then there is something seriously ridiculous about AGS rating system. Rating can be like IMDB just by audience. But if you want to be rotten tomatoe and give AGS panel review or rating, this system is totally absurd. If you don't have the resources, just skip AGS panel rating and review, it can be easily misrepresenting and false. That's where my anger comes from, otherwise Snarky's joke and others silly excuses just makes AGS look more like a ridiculous circus. What if you like horror and the previous one likes romance. So actually from what I gather, the previous review was one person's review, and this review is your review. In my wildest imagination still I can't call this AGS panel review. I'm really appreciate that you are taking responsibility for your review, but maybe from the beginning you needed to write your name instead of AGS panel. And he/she could write his/her name. It gives a feeling that there is a group of high professional jury which is rating and reviewing the games. Or maybe you could also use audience rating system to rate my game.
I have another question. Are you guys as a "community" having "picnic" together? Or are you into something more serious? Because I have no intention to ruin your picnic which I do all the time and which is why people avoid inviting me to their picnics. I don't mean to be "traffic". :grin:
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 08:37:35I have another question. Are you guys as a "community" having "picnic" together? Or are you into something more serious? Because I have no intention to ruin your picnic which I do all the time and which is why people avoid inviting me to their picnics. I don't mean to be "traffic".
I did not want to reply to this thread, as I've never had anything to do with the website, ratings etc, but the further this goes the more disgusting this becomes. This thread is no longer the issue of the ratings, it's the issue of your attitude. It is perfectly clear at this point that you have zero respect for other people here, and you keep emphasizing this with nearly every new comment, towards ones who did nothing wrong to you.
This "community" is simply people who enjoy making games with certain game engine and playing them, nothing else. Nobody here ever tried to claim that it's anything bigger.
Just above you said that, I quote, "silly excuses just makes AGS look more like a ridiculous circus".
I think that the only thing ridiculous here is you. You are an annoying, tedious, overly pretentious <removed by moderator>, who got triggered by a hobbyist community rating.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 07:20:41from the beginning you needed to write your name instead of AGS panel. And he/she could write his/her name.
The argument for keeping panel ratings anonymous is that it allows the reviewer to be critical without risking the ire of some offended game maker taking it personally.
IIRC, I argued against that position at the time, but your reaction kind of proves the point.
Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 10:23:23Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 07:20:41from the beginning you needed to write your name instead of AGS panel. And he/she could write his/her name.
The argument for keeping panel ratings anonymous is that it allows the reviewer to be critical without risking the ire of some offended game maker taking it personally. So you wanted to keep the reviewer anonymous and instead give a false value to the reviews?
IIRC, I argued against that position at the time, but your reaction kind of proves the point.
Do you know what does AGS "PANEL" mean? Fortunately, my mother language is not English and I had to look it up in dictionary. Maybe you should do the same thing.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 10:36:53Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 10:23:23Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 07:20:41from the beginning you needed to write your name instead of AGS panel. And he/she could write his/her name.
The argument for keeping panel ratings anonymous is that it allows the reviewer to be critical without risking the ire of some offended game maker taking it personally. So you wanted to keep the reviewer anonymous and instead give a false value to the reviews?
IIRC, I argued against that position at the time, but your reaction kind of proves the point.
Do you know what does AGS "PANEL" mean? Fortunately, my mother language is not English and I had to look it up in dictionary. Maybe you should do the same thing. Maybe "The Order" got to 2 cups if it was really reviewed by so-called non-existence AGS panel. And The Will got 4 cups. Then I would be happy.
I'm even more confused with your comments now. I am guessing (hoping?) that the language barrier is responsible for most of the issues, because otherwise it makes no sense.
The AGS community doesn't know each other. We don't go on picnics together without inviting you and make fun of you while munching egg sandwiches. We are all here because we enjoy making and playing adventure games, the same as you, I'm assuming.
None of the panel members are paid for their work. None of the developers who work on making AGS are paid for their work. There is a donation button, and that mostly goes to server costs. Every person who rated your game did it on a voluntary basis, on their own time, with their own effort. If you want, you can also PM the mods and request to join the panel to rate games. How exactly do you think a rating system like that of rottentomatoes (which you mentioned) works? The only difference here is that those critics get paid for their work.
Do you think that AGS members or panel members are so dumb that situations like "Oh, I like romance games, and this is a horror game, so I will rate it low" arise? How exactly would you envision a "better" "perfect" "proper" AGS panel rating system? Can you outline what specifically are you so annoyed with in the current system (besides the fact that they gave 2 ratings that you personally don't agree with)?
Quote from: Babar on Sat 04/01/2025 10:49:21I'm even more confused with your comments now. I am guessing (hoping?) that the language barrier is responsible for most of the issues, because otherwise it makes no sense.
The AGS community doesn't know each other. We don't go on picnics together without inviting you and make fun of you while munching egg sandwiches. We are all here because we enjoy making and playing adventure games, the same as you, I'm assuming.
None of the panel members are paid for their work. None of the developers who work on making AGS are paid for their work. There is a donation button, and that mostly goes to server costs. Every person who rated your game did it on a voluntary basis, on their own time, with their own effort. If you want, you can also PM the mods and request to join the panel to rate games. How exactly do you think a rating system like that of rottentomatoes (which you mentioned) works? The only difference here is that those critics get paid for their work.
Do you think that AGS members or panel members are so dumb that situations like "Oh, I like romance games, and this is a horror game, so I will rate it low" arise? How exactly would you envision a "better" "perfect" "proper" AGS panel rating system? Can you outline what specifically are you so annoyed with in the current system (besides the fact that they gave 2 ratings that you personally don't agree with)?
Yes, I think English language is a barrier. Cause panel in my dictionary means a group of people1.
a flat or curved component, typically rectangular, that forms or is set into the surface of a door, wall, or ceiling.
"a layer of insulating material should be placed between the panels and the wall"
Quote from: Babar on Sat 04/01/2025 10:49:21I'm even more confused with your comments now. I am guessing (hoping?) that the language barrier is responsible for most of the issues, because otherwise it makes no sense.
The AGS community doesn't know each other. We don't go on picnics together without inviting you and make fun of you while munching egg sandwiches. We are all here because we enjoy making and playing adventure games, the same as you, I'm assuming.
None of the panel members are paid for their work. None of the developers who work on making AGS are paid for their work. There is a donation button, and that mostly goes to server costs. Every person who rated your game did it on a voluntary basis, on their own time, with their own effort. If you want, you can also PM the mods and request to join the panel to rate games. How exactly do you think a rating system like that of rottentomatoes (which you mentioned) works? The only difference here is that those critics get paid for their work.
Do you think that AGS members or panel members are so dumb that situations like "Oh, I like romance games, and this is a horror game, so I will rate it low" arise? How exactly would you envision a "better" "perfect" "proper" AGS panel rating system? Can you outline what specifically are you so annoyed with in the current system (besides the fact that they gave 2 ratings that you personally don't agree with)?
Yes, I think English language is a barrier. In my Google dictionary it means:
1. a flat board on which instruments or controls are fixed.
2. a small group of people brought together to investigate or decide on a particular matter.
I don't know but if a group people didn't play, rate and review my both games, then I think AGS panel must be a flat board or something.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 10:36:53Do you know what does AGS "PANEL" mean? Fortunately, my mother language is not English and I had to look it up in dictionary. Maybe you should do the same thing.
Yes, I do know. There is a panel, a group of people, who have been selected as reviewers. One of those reviewers reviews each game. The fact that each game is reviewed by only one panel member has been discussed extensively in the past.
You
didn't know, and that is perhaps a signal that what it means could be communicated more clearly, but it's a perfectly valid term for the system in place.
Lapsking, even if I was entertained by your games I am very disappointed about your behavior here.
If you can't stand how the ratings and feedback works here (even several people tried to explain it to you patiently) get over it or just delete your games from the database. You are free to upload those somewhere else that feels more comfortable to you.
But please stop trolling my AGS-family that offer such a lot of their time to run this forum and help those in need.
They all deserve skudos and more respect than you are obviously able or willing to give.
Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 10:58:01Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 10:36:53Do you know what does AGS "PANEL" mean? Fortunately, my mother language is not English and I had to look it up in dictionary. Maybe you should do the same thing.
Yes, I do know. There is a panel, a group of people, who have been selected as reviewers. One of those reviewers reviews each game. The fact that each game is reviewed by only one panel member has been discussed extensively in the past.
You didn't know, and that is perhaps a signal that what it means could be communicated more clearly, but it's a perfectly valid term for the system in place.
So you think it means could be communicated more clearly, but at the same time you think it's a "perfectly" valid term for the system in place. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know. Sorry, for being traffic.
Quote from: Babar on Sat 04/01/2025 10:49:21The AGS community doesn't know each other. We don't go on picnics together without inviting you and make fun of you while munching egg sandwiches.
Uh, this is not entirely true, Babar. Some of us do know each other, and have in fact held picnics—though I can neither confirm nor deny the egg sandwiches.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 11:03:48So you think it means could be communicated more clearly, but at the same time you think it's a "perfectly" valid term for the system in place. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know. Sorry, for being traffic.
Those statements are not in conflict, but I will attribute your failure to see that to the language barrier.
Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 11:04:58Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 11:03:48So you think it means could be communicated more clearly, but at the same time you think it's a "perfectly" valid term for the system in place. Thanks, that's all I wanted to know. Sorry, for being traffic.
Those statements are not in conflict, but I will attribute your failure to see that to the language barrier.
Yes, exactly, we have language barrier. In my English what could be more clear is not perfect.
In the phrase "perfectly valid," "perfectly" is an adverb modifying "valid," not a separate adjective. So it is not saying the term is "perfect," it's saying it is 100% valid.
Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 11:08:22In the phrase "perfectly valid," "perfectly" is an adverb modifying "valid," not a separate adjective. So it is not saying the term is "perfect," it's saying it is 100% valid.
So it means a review that hasn't been done by a group of people can be called panel and it's "perfectly" valid term. It's getting complicated, I'll ask my wife to translate these for me. She is proudly native English speaker.
Each panel rating is done by one person, but the panel ratings
collectively are done by a group of people. It's pretty routine for panels to delegate particular tasks to individual members, so yes, this is a perfectly valid use of the term.
But I don't really believe that this is your true concern. As you've already said:
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 10:48:31Maybe "The Order" got to 2 cups if it was really reviewed by so-called non-existence AGS panel. And The Will got 4 cups. Then I would be happy.
So it's really about your dissatisfaction with the ratings you got.
Were my games rated and reviewd by a panel, Mr. Perfect?
I have another question. How can one delete games from AGS database? I feel I published my game in an inappropriate atmosphere. Since I'm the author I think there should be a delete button? I told Snarky you would look even worse, he thought I'm joking. I'm not a joker, kid.
I didn't think you were joking, but I also don't think you are capable of seeing things very clearly at the moment.
To delete a game from the database you can ask a moderator to do it. Is that what you want? One or both?
Quote from: Snarky on Sat 04/01/2025 14:58:41I didn't think you were joking, but I also don't think you are capable of seeing things very clearly at the moment.
To delete a game from the database you can ask a moderator to do it. Is that what you want? One or both?
Both please. Neither of them were rated or reviewed by AGS panel. You are a global moderater and I'm telling you.
@lapsking , you know, everyone here understands what it takes to make a game.
You give it your all, day and night, whenever you finally have some time.
You push yourself and are inspired by others to do your very best, helped by the people on the Tech forums without whom your game wouldn't even exist.
And you do it for weeks, months, even years.
Finally, you finished it and you got to a personal point when you can proudly tell yourself this is the best thing you've ever done in AGS.
And then you share it with the world.
I've been there all my life. I've had all sorts of reviews and stars and stuff.
Some were harmful, some were constructive and some were inspiring.
I learned three things back then:
- As a creator you can give it all and more and there will always be people who go "Meh..." .
And they have the right to, because:
- They're giving an opinion on a final product, not on the way of the artist to get there.
- Whatever you think of your personal masterpiece, it's just a step stone to the next one.
I think the problem here is ego.
At such a point that even LimpingFish had to come explain things to you.
At such a point that everyone is trying to explain, understand, question things, for four pages.
But no, you keep biting back, attacking, insulting.
I think that, whatever the emotions, justified or not, you do keep some decency and dignity.
And then you said it: You want the panel to work the way you want it to work, and even more: You get to decide what score the panel should give you for your games.
Do you realize how this sounds?
I hope you'll take the time to re-read this whole topic and see what people tried to do for you here.
Because your words and your attitude were highly unfair and insulting to say the least.
I also hope that at one point you will remember why you wanted to make adventure games in the first place. And that you'll remember how fun it is here, with all those creative people working on their games, inspiring each other.
Quote from: Rik_Vargard on Sat 04/01/2025 16:33:02@lapsking , you know, everyone here understands what it takes to make a game.
You give it your all, day and night, whenever you finally have some time.
You push yourself and are inspired by others to do your very best, helped by the people on the Tech forums without whom your game wouldn't even exist.
And you do it for weeks, months, even years.
Finally, you finished it and you got to a personal point when you can proudly tell yourself this is the best thing you've ever done in AGS.
And then you share it with the world.
I've been there all my life. I've had all sorts of reviews and stars and stuff.
Some were harmful, some were constructive and some were inspiring.
I learned three things back then:
- As a creator you can give it all and more and there will always be people who go "Meh..." .
And they have the right to, because:
- They're giving an opinion on a final product, not on the way of the artist to get there.
- Whatever you think of your personal masterpiece, it's just a step stone to the next one.
I think the problem here is ego.
At such a point that even LimpingFish had to come explain things to you.
At such a point that everyone is trying to explain, understand, question things, for four pages.
But no, you keep biting back, attacking, insulting.
I think that, whatever the emotions, justified or not, you do keep some decency and dignity.
And then you said it: You want the panel to work the way you want it to work, and even more: You get to decide what score the panel should give you for your games.
Do you realize how this sounds?
I hope you'll take the time to re-read this whole topic and see what people tried to do for you here.
Because your words and your attitude were highly unfair and insulting to say the least.
I also hope that at one point you will remember why you wanted to make adventure games in the first place. And that you'll remember how fun it is here, with all those creative people working on their games, inspiring each other.
No you don't still get the point. I respected AGS so much and still I do (obviously, not as much as before). I had reviews more than "meh". Someone just made an account to give my game 0 or 1 out of 10 in the reviews. You guys still don't get it, I have no connection with media but someone can use this forum and edit AGS Wikipedia page and tell the world how the rating and reviewing system works. If you can be honest with yourselves there is no thing such as AGS panel rating or review. Each game is rated or reviewed by only 1 person. Then what's the point of it, abolish it. Audience ratings and reviews are enough. But still it seems you can't comprehend. And what bothers more than reviews and ratings is the fact that I don't see honesty here. My English is terrible, but it can be considered fraud (maybe not legally, but at least morally). If someone makes money with this system, you know ;), maybe it can even become illegal. I don't know much about laws.
By the way another reason I deleted my games was to tell you there was/is no personal interest involved, in case anyone is struggling to understand that.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:33:43By the way another reason I deleted my games was to tell you there was/is no personal interest involved, in case anyone is struggling to understand that.
One thing amazing about this is how you claim certain goal, but achieve the opposite impression. After every addition or edit to your post(s) your position begins to look worse.
And you still cannot avoid putting condescending remarks into your posts... I mean "struggling to understand" in this case.
Yes, it definitely seems like a language barrier issue here.
You seem to think that "AGS Ratings Panel" means that there is a team of X number of people where all of them play a specific game, and they all give a rating, and then the rating is averaged.
That is your assumption. Maybe something you assumed because of your own interpretation of "AGS Ratings Panel".
There was never any claim or assertion from anybody at any point relating to AGS that the Panel rating involved multiple people playing your game and then giving a rating and having it averaged.
I would be curious if anyone else here thought that is how it worked. Nobody ever said any such thing, and all discussion of the Ratings Panel (including the FAQ that I linked from 15 years ago (https://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/completed-game-announcements/the-rating-panel-information-thread/)) always made it very clear how it worked. If you thought about it for a few moments, you'd realise your assumption was quite absurd:
In your mind, a group of...lets say 20 people, in their own free time, with no salary or payment, who have various levels of activity online or on the forums (one of who passed away a few years back), would go through the AGS DB, and each of them would play every single one of the thousands of games in the same sequence and give it a rating, then wait for every other member of the panel to also do the same, then have it averaged to show as the panel rating?
Panel: a small group of people brought together to investigate or decide on a particular matter.
Did a group of people come together to investigate or decide on a particular matter (a game)? Or each of them was separately investigating a separate matter (game)?
There is no language barrier, unless it's from you.
What's the point of AGS reviews panel, if only one person is going to do that? Is AGS panel a person?
Quote from: Crimson Wizard on Sat 04/01/2025 18:36:32Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:33:43By the way another reason I deleted my games was to tell you there was/is no personal interest involved, in case anyone is struggling to understand that.
One thing amazing about this is how you claim certain goal, but achieve the opposite impression. After every addition or edit to your post(s) your position begins to look worse.
And you still cannot avoid putting condescending remarks into your posts... I mean "struggling to understand" in this case.
What's my goal? I'll give 10000 cash if you tell me what's my goal? What's amazing is the number of people that need to try to defend one by one that AGS panel review is "perfect". It's amazing.
Yes, it definitely does seem like there is a language barrier at play here. No, "Your game was rated by the AGS Rating Panel" does not inherently imply that multiple people played your game and collaborated to decide on a rating. Such a system would be impossible, and we'd never get any ratings done at all (even as it is, the Ratings panel is far behind the released games).
Quote from: Babar on Sat 04/01/2025 18:58:59Yes, it definitely does seem like there is a language barrier at play here. No, "Your game was rated by the AGS Rating Panel" does not inherently imply that multiple people played your game and collaborated to decide on a rating. Such a system would be impossible, and we'd never get any ratings done at all (even as it is, the Ratings panel is far behind the released games).
This system is possible and already exists. Check out your favorite movie on rotten tomato. If you don't have the possibility then why bother with it?
Critical ratings on rottentomatoes don't work anything like that. Rottentomatoes takes reviews from other sources (individuals and newspapers/sites/magazines) who have given them permission (and they have accepted), and combine and average those ratings. Every person/group who qualifies doesn't have to have written a review before there is a score for something on rottentomatoes. In fact, for new movies or obscure/unpopular movies, it is very possible that there is only a single critic's review when the score goes up, and more may or may not be added later.
Nobody is specifically writing reviews for rottentomatoes. It is a review aggregator with a selection process for reviewers.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:58:06Quote from: Crimson Wizard on Sat 04/01/2025 18:36:32Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:33:43By the way another reason I deleted my games was to tell you there was/is no personal interest involved, in case anyone is struggling to understand that.
One thing amazing about this is how you claim certain goal, but achieve the opposite impression. After every addition or edit to your post(s) your position begins to look worse.
And you still cannot avoid putting condescending remarks into your posts... I mean "struggling to understand" in this case.
What's my goal?
I was referring to your very previous post, I think it was stated pretty clear:
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:58:06By the way another reason I deleted my games was to tell you there was/is no personal interest involved, in case anyone is struggling to understand that.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 18:58:06What's amazing is the number of people that need to try to defend one by one that AGS panel review is "perfect".
I never had an intent to defend AGS panel. I had an intent to point out that you act silly and you put insults vs other people in almost every your post in this thread.
Well Rotten tomato is closer to what you are imagining. At least there is a group of people who don't come together but decide on a particular matter. Yours is not a group of people and you don't come together, and they don't decide on a particular matter. Each of them are deciding for a different matter. By the way I don't know if rotten tomato is using the word panel. I mean, really? One person? Why there is even a need for such a review or rating? If there was a group we could give the rating a value, or if it was a personal website we could this particular person has this review. What's the point of this kind of rating system? Do you see any accuracy or anything that makes a need to have a different rating and review for each game besides audience review? Maybe AGS panel review should also become visible after 5 people from the panel rated the game? I'm honest, it doesn't make sense to me.
I don't understand your point. I'm not the one who brought up rottentomatoes, you did. If now you feel they don't fit your meaning of how ratings should be done, then...why mention them at all?
As per the link I've already shared with you, the Ratings panel's function is to bring order to and categorise the vast number of games in the AGS DB.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 17:14:39No you don't still get the point. I respected AGS so much and still I do (obviously, not as much as before). I had reviews more than "meh". Someone just made an account to give my game 0 or 1 out of 10 in the reviews. You guys still don't get it, I have no connection with media but someone can use this forum and edit AGS Wikipedia page and tell the world how the rating and reviewing system works. If you can be honest with yourselves there is no thing such as AGS panel rating or review. Each game is rated or reviewed by only 1 person. Then what's the point of it, abolish it. Audience ratings and reviews are enough. But still it seems you can't comprehend. And what bothers more than reviews and ratings is the fact that I don't see honesty here. My English is terrible, but it can be considered fraud (maybe not legally, but at least morally). If someone makes money with this system, you know ;), maybe it can even become illegal. I don't know much about laws.
I don't even know what to answer to something like that.
C'mon man, I do get the point; there's more than one. And at this point right now, your arguments are your so-called terrible english and the ethymology of the word "panel".
PS.: The review by LimpingFish did really recognize all the work you've done as a painter.
Quote from: Babar on Sat 04/01/2025 19:28:57I don't understand your point. I'm not the one who brought up rottentomatoes, you did. If now you feel they don't fit your meaning of how ratings should be done, then...why mention them at all?
As per the link I've already shared with you, the Ratings panel's function is to bring order to and categorise the vast number of games in the AGS DB.
I didn't mention panel. It's all over AGS website. It's written on each game page. So the function of AGS panel is not to review or rate a game? Obviously it is according to each game page. Even Snarky "confessed" yourselves didn't think it communates perfectly but it is a perfectly valid term. You reply I have to reply.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 19:32:46ention panel. It's all over AGS website. It's written on each game page. So the function of AGS panel is not to review or rate a game? Obviously it is according to each game page. Even Snarky "confessed" yourselves didn't think it communates perfectly but it is a perfectly valid term. You reply I have to reply.
So, if ten people had played your game and they considered together that it's a 3 cup game, would that be OK with you?
Reviewing and rating every game is part of categorising them, yes. The rest of it, I don't know what you are saying or asking.
So now that we've established:
- There is an AGS Panel
- The Panel rates games as part of their function
- "The Panel rates games" does not mean that ever person in the panel played the game and rated it, and had their ratings averaged for the panel score.
- Nobody, ever, anywhere, at any time, suggested any system like the one above
- No system like the one above exists at this scope (including rottentomatoes, which you now accept does not work like that)
Look at each game you want. There is "AGS panel rating" was this rating done by AGS PANEL? If not why call it AGS panel rating? It's the simplest English.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 19:40:35Look at each game you want. There is "AGS panel rating" was this rating done by AGS PANEL? If not why call it AGS panel rating? It's the simplest English.
Again, yes, nobody is denying the word panel is used. I don't know why you keep going on about that. The point being made is that it is only YOU who assumes that because the word "panel" is used, that automatically means something involving every member of that panel playing every game and rating every game together.
This is why I said there appears to be a language barrier. You are the only one who seems to think that's the way a panel has to operate. Nobody else has claimed that here.
Yes, it's like "Press Review" and "Mermbers Review" for like, every movie website.
PS.: You didn't answer my question :P
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 19:22:28Maybe AGS panel review should also become visible after 5 people from the panel rated the game? I'm honest, it doesn't make sense to me.
If I understand you correctly, you're referring to the way user reviews work, where five players have to have rated a game before the system shows the result as orange cups. Well, so far this year,
one game has gotten the five ratings necessary to earn orange cups. One of all the games released in 2024. It's pretty clear that most people don't rate the games they play. Many games have lots of comments, but still no player rating. So in my opinion, more of us should rate (using the tiny
vote button on the game page.)
Now, the point of the comments and user ratings are mainly to give feedback to the game dev, and also to other players. The panel ratings I think serve more as some sort of information to the players looking for a game to play. I think both are useful, in their own ways. But they are opinions of someone, and hence subjective. They will also seem odd when time passes. A game from fifteen years ago may have gotten praise for its graphics, yet not be so impressive when compared to something people can do today.
In the FAQ Babar linked to, it says:
QuoteHow does the Panel work?
The Panel works on the following premises:
1. Every member records which game he/she has rated in a special thread, along with a motivation. There is no anonymity within the panel.
2. Any rating can be challenged and discussed by fellow panel members.
3. The panel works under the supervision of each other and moderators.
4. The panel members are instructed and trained to rate according to certain guidelines and criteria that have been worked out in beforehand.
5. The panel members do not rate their own games.
The system is if course not perfect, but it opens for panel members to rate on their own or together, or challenge/discuss ratings. There have been several discussions about how the ratings should work or if they should exist at all over the years, but this information about how it is done has been public for a long time.
There is a BIG difference in rating system, between "a member of AGS panel" and "AGS panel". Ask whoever is sitting next to you what's the difference.
Quote from: lapsking on Sat 04/01/2025 19:32:46Even Snarky "confessed" yourselves didn't think it communates perfectly but it is a perfectly valid term.
I did not say that. I said: "You didn't know, and that is perhaps a signal that what it means could be communicated more clearly."
In other words, your misunderstanding is one data point that suggests the term might be prone to misunderstanding. If others also find that it is easily misunderstood, then perhaps it needs to be explained better.
Being open to a possibility is not the same thing as believing in it. Also, there's no collective "yourselves" here: I gave my opinion, but I have nothing to do with the panel.
There are some questions around the panel that could be worth discussing (again, but it
has been 15+ years), but I don't think it's worth discussing them with you, given how you are behaving in this thread.
Why has this become a debate on the definition of the word 'panel'? It's just a word somebody chose to describe the group of blue-cup reviewers and this is is the first time I've seen anyone challenge that description.
They could have easily gone with 'jury', 'board', or 'committee'. And all of those could also be interpreted as a group of people all playing through a game and then discussing it at length and giving it a score everyone agrees with.
I know that in an ideal world that is exactly what the AGS Panel would love to be able to do, but they also have real lives, and everything that entails. So, usually one person plays the game, they inform the rest of the panel of their verdict and invite agreement or disagreement from any other members who may have played the game. Also if another panel member plays a game at a later point and totally disagrees with the current blue-cup rating, they can (and it has happened) challenge the score and then the panel can discuss it and, if agreed, change it.
So there is a panel/board/committee-esque approach to the blue cup ratings, moreso than you have been led to believe in this thread, but yes, it is usually one member who gives the initial rating.
Ultimately, an AGS Panel review is just that: a single review. Some of my favorite games, be they triple A or freeware, didn't get the best reviews from the gaming press, but I still love them. And other games I've played were critical darlings but they didn't do much for me. Heck, most of my own Barn Runner games earned a middling 3-cup rating, and that's fine. Two of my games did a little better, and one was rated a measly 2-cups (which it probably deserved, although for a MAGS game, I'm still really proud of it). Further, two of the games I worked the hardest on, and am the most proud of (Forever Friday chapter 3 and 5) never even got a rating by the AGS Panel, but that's fine too. (https://www.barnrunner.com/pics/misc/Roger_RollEyes.gif)
Everything that happens at this site is done by people who give up a little (or a lot) of their free time to support a hobby that is kind of fringe nowadays. Some people work on the next build of the engine, other people take time to help newcomers trying to understand the rather quirky AGS engine, and some take the time to actually play many of the games made by this community and rate them for the benefit of people poking around in the ever-growing database looking for a new adventure game to play.
If one reviewer really liked one of my games, that's great. If another reviewer didn't, that's okay too. Like most of the people here, they're doing this because they have a passion for AGS (and they're doing it for free -- let's not forget that!). At the end of the day, it's just a single review. And a rating of 3 is more than acceptable (unlike that 2, which will haunt me until my last breath := ). I've played lots of 3-cup AGS games, and enjoyed most of them. I'm chagrined to admit that I rarely rate the games I play :embarrassed: but most of them I would probably rate a 2 or 3, if I'm being honest.
I'm glad to have you here, Lapsking, and I appreciate that you've chosen to spend the time and effort needed to make good games with this engine. As someone who's been using AGS since 2003, I understand why the games we make mean so much to us. But there's not much to be gained by being this upset over something as inconsequential as a couple of average game reviews. I don't know about you, but I make my games to entertain myself more than for any other reason. Sure, I wish all of my games were rated 5-cups and swept all the categories at the annual AGS Awards, but that's not why I do this, you know? :wink:
I must say that I'm very disappointed that you've removed your games from the database, especially since your argument keeps refocusing on whatever straw is closest to grasp. First, it was the fact that your game wasn't held to judgement against your previous game, then it was the wording of my panel comment, now it's the very meaning of the word "panel".
People have largely been more than gracious in their responses to you, yet you continue to claim you have been wronged and repeatedly belittle both the community and those behind the scenes. Perhaps we do have a language barrier, yet I'd only accept that as an excuse if you showed any sign of cooperation or willingness to correct yourself. You haven't, and instead you've removed your games from the database and continue to argue that everyone except you is in the wrong.
Frankly, I believe it's simply a case of your ego being hurt and you're either unwilling or incapable of owning up to that fact, and instead you're determined to find fault, not with yourself, but with a community that's been gracious and largely supportive of your work.
That being the case, I won't be replying to this thread any further, and my last contribution will be to urge you to rethink your position, and to consider returning your games to the database.
Imagine there are 10 dishes of food and 10 food testers. Each food tester rates one dish and separately gives the food a rating. Do you have any value for this rating? Gavin says the
Imagine there are 10 dishes of food and 10 food testers. Each food tester rates one dish and separately gives the food a rating. Do you have any value for this rating? Gavin says the bean burger is good and Edward says the pizza is good in this restaurant. Maybe Gavin loves burger and Edwatd hates burger. What's the point of this kind of rating? Unless Gavin publishes his rating on a personal website or under the name Gavin in a newspaper. So some people trust Gavin's food tasting and buy his highly rated food. What should I do with a rating that comes from an anonymous person? I have no clue, personally. At audience review is a group of 5 people or more.
Edit We are a family of 5 and each has a different favorite food among my grandmother's food. What value does this give to my uncle specially if we keep it anonymous. Please give attention rhe cook is the same, now find the tailor.
Edit 2 Another thing:
Is LimpingFish = AGS Panel. I was taking AGS panel reviews seriously, now I've realized it was just LimpingFish reviews.
Edit 3 You don't have the resources but you are insisting to give a kind of professional ratings from AGS. This kind of rating has nothing to do with professionalism. Which makes it very awkward.
Edit 4 and the more you defend this rating system the more awkward it looks.
Edit5 I understand somehow your reactions. It's like telling someone after 20 years or something your holy religion doesn't make sense. Their whole being will crumble. I've tried it before and it never worked. I don't why I'm trying it again. I think AGS has become kiind of a religion for you.
Edit6 if LimpingFish wrote his review in comments like the rest, I would be greatful. But reviewing separately as AGS panel like it's a very professional review or rating that deserves to have a separate entity? Still maybe audience gave 1 cup to the Order. I could learn something from that too. That people don't like these kind of games and I have to become a Uber driver. But I have no value for AGS panel rating and review as a separate phenomena.
Edit7 putting AGS panel rating aka LimpingFish rating above audience rating makes me think AGS panel rating aka LimpingFish rating has kind of superiority to 5 audiences rating. Do you guys see that in yourself? I wouldn't even allow myself to do something like that on AGS website.
Edit8 What do you know about "art" LimpingFish aka AGS panel? Can we discuss art for a while?
Mate, you keep getting more wrong with each edit.
It is just a fun(?) feature of a hobbyist website. No one said anything about professional journalism.
Quote from: Stupot on Sun 05/01/2025 07:06:33Mate, you keep getting more wrong with each edit.
It is just a fun(?) feature of a hobbyist website. No one said anything about professional journalism.
Sorry, Stupot. I didn't know it's for fun. That's why I asked my game to be deleted cause I didn't make them merely as fun or a hobby. I have better hobbies like watching mainly bullshit on Netflix. I apologize again.
Quote from: lapsking on Sun 05/01/2025 07:12:28Quote from: Stupot on Sun 05/01/2025 07:06:33Mate, you keep getting more wrong with each edit.
It is just a fun(?) feature of a hobbyist website. No one said anything about professional journalism.
Sorry, Stupot. I didn't know it's for fun. That's why I asked my game to be deleted cause I didn't make them merely as fun or a hobby.
That wasn't to imply that the people who do it don't take it seriously or try their best to give fair scores within the criteria. Just that it's a feature of the community effort, nothing more high brow than that.
My eyebrows might be more fluffy than your pubic hair. But I'm done with hobby. And if my hobby (if you can call a test game hobby) gets the same rating as my serious game, then I have to move on. You can't have both standards together. Taking one step backward and one step forward.
Edit sorry I'm still struggling with this editing and "quoting" system.
Even Steam or itch don't have such thing as panel review. It's just the average rating.
Edit: To me it seems you guys are having a serious picnic.
We are having a wonderful picknick here. It's a pity you don't want to join but instead stand next to us shouting how terrible our egg sandwiches are.
Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 08:50:45We are having a wonderful picknick here. It's a pity you don't want to join but instead stand next to us shouting how terrible our egg sandwiches are.
Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 08:50:45We are having a wonderful picknick here. It's a pity you don't want to join but instead stand next to us shouting how terrible our egg sandwiches are.
Enjoy your picnic. As I said I'm not very welcomed in picnics, as you can obviously see. Although I respect and so happy that you are having a wonderful picnic, and I mean it. :)
Let me tell you something, I wanted to make adventure games when I was 7 (I'm 40 now). I had a dream about making a game and being in utmost joy, so in the morning I made The Will. I'm not against picnics, but I gave up being a vegan and I eat a lot of egg sandwiches and fart a lot. So I have no reason to be AGAINST AGS.
Off-topic, but here's a true story that happened a couple of years ago.
It was the end of July 2023, and we had arranged a family picnic in a public park by the beach with a bunch of different relatives. Some arrived early and began to set up. While they were doing that, a stranger found a spot nearby. As other relatives started to arrive and the picnic got under way, this stranger apparently got upset that we were taking up space, grilling hot dogs, laughing, kids were playing and so on (i.e. normal, low-key picnic stuff), and came over to angrily demand that we move away because we were disturbing him.
One of my aunts told him off, and said that if he had a problem with us, he should move – there were plenty of other spaces available. He refused to do so, and instead spent the rest of the afternoon glaring at us.
Did he have any kind of valid point? Probably not, but even if he did, his attitude ensured we weren't going to listen.
Quote from: lapsking on Sun 05/01/2025 08:53:52Enjoy your picnic. As I said I'm not very welcomed in picnics, as you can obviously see. Although I respect and so happy that you are having a wonderful picnic, and I mean it. :)
Oh, you are very much welcome to our picknick! We just want you to stop insulting us just because you don't like our egg sandwiches. But look here, we have so much more to offer: we have cucumber sandwiches, cup cakes and falafel and have you tried our potato salad? It's fantastic! Please just ignore those egg sandwiches and join us for the rest of the fun.
Quote from: Snarky on Sun 05/01/2025 10:11:49Off-topic, but here's a true story that happened a couple of years ago.
It was the end of July 2023, and we had arranged a family picnic in a public park by the beach with a bunch of different relatives. Some arrived early and began to set up. While they were doing that, a stranger found a spot nearby. As other relatives started to arrive and the picnic got under way, this stranger apparently got upset that we were taking up space, grilling hot dogs, laughing, kids were playing and so on (i.e. normal, low-key picnic stuff), and came over to angrily demand that we move away because we were disturbing him.
One of my aunts told him off, and said that if he had a problem with us, he should move – there were plenty of other spaces available. He refused to do so, and instead spent the rest of the afternoon glaring at us.
Did he have any kind of valid point? Probably not, but even if he did, his attitude ensured we weren't going to listen.
I think English language is seriously a barrier. Cause I have already moved? Are you blind?
You were arguing about the panel ratings just a little more than four hours ago.
But in any case, unless you were hanging out by the beach in Oslo in July 2023, the story concerns you only indirectly.
Quote from: Snarky on Sun 05/01/2025 10:40:51You were arguing about the panel ratings just a little more than four hours ago.
But in any case, unless you were hanging out by the beach in Oslo in July 2023, the story concerns you only indirectly.
It more seems you are not leaving my topic on AGS forum. Do you guys own AGS? Can I have a word with your owner? Being global moderator doesn't mean a shit to me.
Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 10:20:02Quote from: lapsking on Sun 05/01/2025 08:53:52Enjoy your picnic. As I said I'm not very welcomed in picnics, as you can obviously see. Although I respect and so happy that you are having a wonderful picnic, and I mean it. :)
Oh, you are very much welcome to our picknick! We just want you to stop insulting us just because you don't like our egg sandwiches. But look here, we have so much more to offer: we have cucumber sandwiches, cup cakes and falafel and have you tried our potato salad? It's fantastic! Please just ignore those egg sandwiches and join us for the rest of the fun.
I appreciate your invite. But I can't get on your side with Iranian passport without the hassle which I can't bother. I'm somehow stuck in South Africa, if any of you guys including Snarky wanted to come to South Africa to shoot Springboks while I eat broccoli let me know.
I don't hunt or eat meat, but if I ever happen to come to South Africa, I'll drop by for some broccoli :)
Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 12:10:44I don't hunt or eat meat, but if I ever happen to come to South Africa, I'll drop by for some broccoli :)
I would love to take part in a broccoli hunting safari! Any excuse to wear a pith helmet, really. :cheesy:
(https://i.imgur.com/kqlpD8S.jpeg)
Quote from: Ponch on Mon 06/01/2025 01:16:11Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 12:10:44I don't hunt or eat meat, but if I ever happen to come to South Africa, I'll drop by for some broccoli :)
I would love to take part in a broccoli hunting safari! Any excuse to wear a pith helmet, really. :cheesy:
You are more than welcome. And I'm serious. Bring your AK47.
Quote from: lapsking on Mon 06/01/2025 06:00:30Quote from: Ponch on Mon 06/01/2025 01:16:11Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 12:10:44I don't hunt or eat meat, but if I ever happen to come to South Africa, I'll drop by for some broccoli :)
I would love to take part in a broccoli hunting safari! Any excuse to wear a pith helmet, really. :cheesy:
You are more than welcome. And I'm serious. Bring your AK47.
7.62mm for wild broccoli? A light round like that may be suitable for feral Brussels sprouts or wild celery, but I wouldn't use anything less than an express rifle to take down a stalk of untamed broccoli stampeding towards our Land Rover. :=
Quote from: Ponch on Thu 09/01/2025 01:03:04Quote from: lapsking on Mon 06/01/2025 06:00:30Quote from: Ponch on Mon 06/01/2025 01:16:11Quote from: cat on Sun 05/01/2025 12:10:44I don't hunt or eat meat, but if I ever happen to come to South Africa, I'll drop by for some broccoli :)
I would love to take part in a broccoli hunting safari! Any excuse to wear a pith helmet, really. :cheesy:
You are more than welcome. And I'm serious. Bring your AK47.
7.62mm for wild broccoli? A light round like that may be suitable for feral Brussels sprouts or wild celery, but I wouldn't use anything less than an express rifle to take down a stalk of untamed broccoli stampeding towards our Land Rover. :=
What about a USAS-12?
I mean, shooting 10 to 20 shotgun shells in super sudden succession should surely suffice. (laugh)
Who could shoot a Sprout? (https://www.instagram.com/barry_the_sprout/) Especially when any of them could be Barry, the Time Sprout. (https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/9751815) 8-)
I wouldn't get anywhere near live produce like that without at least an A-10C Warthog available for close air support. Too risky otherwise, and we should never forget the hard lessons of the Wild Broccoli Incident of 1997.