Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

998143 Posts in 39142 Topics- by 30548 Members - Latest Member: EditinLuv

April 17, 2014, 07:00:23 PM
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneralHierarchy of values on games
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Print
Author Topic: Hierarchy of values on games  (Read 3399 times)
Fallsburg
Level 10
*****


Fear the CircleCat


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2012, 01:11:59 PM »

people who complain about "biased" or reviews havent understood the concept of reviews

i think a lot of the problems of mainstream gaming journalism can be explained by the fact that it caters to kids

I think the problem is the concept of 7 being the average. I don't think scores utilize enough of the 10 point scale.

This is actually a very wide-spread problem.  Humans don't actually like to work with that much precision when it comes to subjective measures, so scales like this with 20 values wind up with a lot of clustering.  Typically, 3,5, or 7 point scales are desired as they allow for low-middle-high with varying degrees and depending on the question at hand can offer plenty of granularity. 
Logged
peanutbuttershoes
Level 10
*****


wat a hell


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2012, 01:23:16 PM »

Darn, I thought this thread was bringing all y'allz perspective on how a game's quality should effect it's price. (VALUE)

But quality is kind of whatever you want it to be.

Oh you guys are trying to figure out what quality is.

Well what if the creator truly believes his game to be of high quality despite every else on planet earth opposition his belief? Is he wrong?

Should everyone hype their game as the best thing ever or should they objectively look at it and decide the level of hype it deserves. (By objectively look at it I mean look at everyone else and compare it to what's considered successful by the majority of people) Because, you know, hype level is totally up to the creator. Not really, I was joking. Does hype sell games? Or does money sell games? If money sells games is it an elitist system?
Are all systems elitist?

Does money buy hype? Or does it come from the quality of the game? How many diamonds are there in the rough? Oh right. Quality is whatever you want it to be. Well what's the general consensus on what makes quality?

And I don't just mean in indie circles, I mean for everyone.
Because if we really want to be happy we should be grabbing for the biggest piece of the pie.

We should probably be making MW rip offs if we want to make money.
What do people do for fun?
Is money fun? Does money buy happiness? Or just temporary highs?
What if you snorted money? Can money cure depression? Is fun what makes you happy?
Or is happy not dependent on any sort of external source? Can a corpse be happy?
Games are supposed to be fun right? Or... well maybe not everyone wants to have fun.
Maybe they want to learn. Maybe we just want different things. Maybe life on this planet doesn't really stick to anything for long enough for us to accurately measure it.
Maybe we try too hard to know things that are unknowable. Life is variable and we are searching for constants.
Maybe we should just hang out with each other instead of trying to find the best ways to take advantage of our temporary desires and whims.

Would that makes us happy?
Logged

wat a hell

SirNiko
Level 10
*****


View Profile Email
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2012, 03:46:55 PM »

Another dilemma with judging games is that our perceptions are hugely impacted by other games we've played. A person who has never played a game from a genre before might rate it highly for the originality, whereas a person who has played hundreds of games from that genre is likely to rate it very poorly. This is especially an issue for people like me who grew up with an Atari, but may be reading reviews from people whose first console was a PS2.

Or once you've played a game like Okami with a really distinct art style, or 16 bit era games with huge, beautifully animated sprites it's really hard to take a modern game and praise it for its graphics even though they are really sharp and lovely.
Logged
PleasingFungus
Level 7
**



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2012, 04:34:54 PM »

How come no one ever talks about rating movies more scientifically? I mean, most reviewers just rate out of four stars! That's just 5% of the precision that game reviews have. Pathetic!

First, movie reviewers need to start breaking things down into components: they need to have scores for plot, characters, cinematography, sound, and 'other', for anything else that those don't cover. The scores will obviously be decimals out of 10, or percents, just the way all the best games reviewers do it. Then we can set up a highly advanced heuristic (using principles from machine learning) to set up the best possible average between the different components, and between different reviewers, too: we'll need to have a truly objective movie rating if we're going to determine the exact percentage difference in greatness between Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring and the Hurt Locker.

As a bonus, after all this, we can just discard all that pesky 'review text': I mean, a lot of the time it doesn't even seem to bear any relation to the scores games receive! Much better to focus on the numbers. Words are obviously subjective, but numbers are objective.

tl;dr: this discussion is a complete waste of time, read the fucking reviews instead of skipping to the numbers at the end, you illiterate morons
Logged

Beta: Starhaven! Finished games: Manufactoria! International King of Wine! [url=http://forums.tigsource.com/index
peanutbuttershoes
Level 10
*****


wat a hell


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2012, 04:41:02 PM »

I don't know about anyone else, but I did not find that fungus pleasing in any way.
Logged

wat a hell

C.A. Sinner
Schlagerstar
Global Moderator
Level 10
******



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2012, 04:52:32 PM »

Quote
How come no one ever talks about rating movies more scientifically? I mean, most reviewers just rate out of four stars! That's just 5% of the precision that game reviews have. Pathetic!

First, movie reviewers need to start breaking things down into components: they need to have scores for plot, characters, cinematography, sound, and 'other', for anything else that those don't cover. The scores will obviously be decimals out of 10, or percents, just the way all the best games reviewers do it. Then we can set up a highly advanced heuristic (using principles from machine learning) to set up the best possible average between the different components, and between different reviewers, too: we'll need to have a truly objective movie rating if we're going to determine the exact percentage difference in greatness between Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring and the Hurt Locker.

As a bonus, after all this, we can just discard all that pesky 'review text': I mean, a lot of the time it doesn't even seem to bear any relation to the scores games receive! Much better to focus on the numbers. Words are obviously subjective, but numbers are objective.
the problem is: this is exactly how game reviews work at the moment
Logged

dEnamed
Level 4
****


Bored was AmnEn.


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2012, 05:31:07 PM »

You don't say? Wink

Logged

Obviously of demonic ancestry. In that case, can I get my wings please?
DavidCaruso
YEEEAAAHHHHHH
Level 10
*



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2012, 05:54:20 PM »

tl;dr: this discussion is a complete waste of time, read the fucking reviews instead of skipping to the numbers at the end, you illiterate morons

Good idea! *goes to a website with 200 expert reviews, many of works he doesn't know much about, and just reads every single one to find out which ones are worth his time because the reviewer was too incompetent to numerically quantify his qualitative judgment from the start*

All the negative reaction to scores I see in different places seems to be based on shitty reviewers using them in shitty ways (stupid scales, payoffs, disparity between score and text, etc.) There is absolutely nothing wrong about the concept of attaching a score to your review; it's just another method for the reviewer to express his judgement as concretely as possible, and quickly let the viewer know from the start whether he liked or disliked a work. Of course if someone is a shitty reviewer who can't make concrete qualitative judgments they might be against doing this, but I really can't see any other reason not to include them. It sucks that many people care more about them than the actual reasoning of the review text, but that's not a very good reason to get rid of them.

As for the whole scale thing, 5 seems ideal to me. Anything based on the number 10 leads to Schoolyard Flashback Syndrome where 5/10 is awful and gets you grounded by your parents instead of average, 7 is a wonky number, 3 is too limiting. Anything higher than 10 (that includes decimal scales btw, which basically rate out of 20 or 100, sometimes even 1000 in the worst case) is retarded because no living human being can accurately quantify their judgments into such small increments.

Also just for the record, The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring is only (5 stars/3 stars) → 166% better than The Hurt Locker. This is indisputable fact, thanks in advance for not questioning it.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 06:02:36 PM by DavidCaruso » Logged
iffi
Guest
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2012, 06:05:40 PM »

I rate this thread as follows:
Presentation - 3/5
Graphics - 1/5 (needs more JWK5)
Sound - 2/5
Gameplay - 3/5
Lasting Appeal - 4/5

Overall:  Gentleman Gentleman Gentleman/5
Logged
DavidCaruso
YEEEAAAHHHHHH
Level 10
*



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2012, 06:11:20 PM »

You forgot the value, man! This is a pretty unremarkable thread but it's free to read, I think that alone should be enough to give it 5 stars and proclaim it General Thread of the Year. For the price, this thread is a great read, you aren't going to find that great of a read anywhere else unless you waste gas in your car (costs lots of money, shit value) and go to a public library.
Logged
John Sandoval
Cpt. Dum
Global Moderator
Level 10
******


get mad


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 14, 2012, 06:12:27 PM »

 i give this thread a Gomez Gomez Gomez/ Cave Story Cave Story Cave Story Gomez
Logged

ஒழுக்கின்மை
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.

RinkuHero
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #26 on: February 14, 2012, 06:17:19 PM »

i have no problem with scores, they can be useful in a loose sense of "how strongly would you recommend that your friends play this game" -- fighting over scores is ridiculous though, since recommendations to friends depend on the person recommending the game and on the friends

score does lose some nuance though. for instance i'd rate "shoot the bullet", "super smash bros. brawl", and "final fantasy 6" all at "4/5", but whether someone would enjoy them depends a lot on that person's tastes and gaming history etc. -- so a lot of the details that would be in a review are lost in a score
Logged

noah!
Level 6
*


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 14, 2012, 06:41:34 PM »

I guess, deep down inside, I don't feel like numbers are the right way to assess artistic mediums. It's stupid, and while there may be some objectivity to such a thing...there isn't much at all. In one of my dreams I met a girl standing on sidewalk and she was having a panic attack. I tried to stick around to see if I could help but she was already trying to calm herself down, frantically repeating the phrase "quantify the situation." She was probably a games journalist.

And honestly, in this day and age, I'm wondering if game reviews are even worth it. Like, right now I have Dodonpachi Daifukkatsu coming in the mail. I didn't read a review for it, didn't look at any scores. I just watched a YouTube video of the gameplay, looked down at my trousers, and I knew that yes, this is what I want. Should I have measured the size of the stain and posted that as my preemptive score? Should I have typed a big long wall of text in an effort to describe something that's best shown in thirty seconds of footage?

I had another point in this paragraph but Eres already made it so I'll just keep the PRO REVIEW plug.

There's a way to make good points without using numbers or walls of text. I know there is. I'm gonna go find it now.

In summary, this thread gets a solid Two Jerads:

   
Logged
peanutbuttershoes
Level 10
*****


wat a hell


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 14, 2012, 08:37:47 PM »

Noah, thank you for all you do.
Logged

wat a hell

PleasingFungus
Level 7
**



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #29 on: February 14, 2012, 11:33:45 PM »

the problem is: this is exactly how game reviews work at the moment

that is the punchline to the joke

But seriously. Off the top of my head, Rock Paper Shotgun and Kotaku have unscored reviews, and a number of other sites have scoring systems that... at least aren't decimalized / percentile, which I think is one of the more absurd things games review sites do.

Kotaku being a champion of good games journalism practice is the other punchline to the joke.

tl;dr: this discussion is a complete waste of time, read the fucking reviews instead of skipping to the numbers at the end, you illiterate morons

Good idea! *goes to a website with 200 expert reviews, many of works he doesn't know much about, and just reads every single one to find out which ones are worth his time because the reviewer was too incompetent to numerically quantify his qualitative judgment from the start*

All the negative reaction to scores I see in different places seems to be based on shitty reviewers using them in shitty ways (stupid scales, payoffs, disparity between score and text, etc.) There is absolutely nothing wrong about the concept of attaching a score to your review; it's just another method for the reviewer to express his judgement as concretely as possible, and quickly let the viewer know from the start whether he liked or disliked a work. Of course if someone is a shitty reviewer who can't make concrete qualitative judgments they might be against doing this, but I really can't see any other reason not to include them. It sucks that many people care more about them than the actual reasoning of the review text, but that's not a very good reason to get rid of them.

Games are art. They're a subjective medium. Incredibly broken, unpolished games can be fantastic, for someone who's willing to push past the broken parts - STALKER, for example, or Crusader Kings. These games tend to get low review scores at launch, and not by 'bad reviewers'. On the other hand, extremely polished, tightly-scripted games can very easily end up turning people off with their artificiality, while still - again, justifiably - getting high review scores. (I'm sure you can think of a few examples.) These aren't the results of shitty reviewers misusing the rating systems - these are examples of important qualities in games that can't reasonably be conveyed in a 1-10 rating scale. (Or 1.0-10.0, or whatever.) These aren't isolated cases - they happen again and again.

I guess I'd back away from my earlier position (and my invective - sorry about that, got carried away), and say that some kind of review scores do make sense for the mass market. However - anyone with a passing familiarity with the industry who puts any weight on scores, especially 'objective' scores, is making a fool of themselves.

I agree with everything after the quoted section.
Logged

Beta: Starhaven! Finished games: Manufactoria! International King of Wine! [url=http://forums.tigsource.com/index
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic