I was thinking that TDC could perhaps use a review team. I find that I strongly agree with a lot of the reviews guys like Shroomlock make, so maybe we should put him first into the team. If someone out there feels like writing a lot of reviews, and write a lot of good ones at that, maybe we could add them to the team in the future.
So far, there's no real voting mechanism to say, make the reviewers vote count more, so let's just give a Recommended star for 7 or 8 out of 10 and a Highly Recommended star for 9 or 10. If this really works out, maybe we could do more on it in the future. This seems to be fair, and since a lot of the recommended games are getting high reviews from Shroomlock and other members.
It would help since some games are getting higher than they would deserve otherwise and some games are getting dragged down because the creator isn't popular. I know some of you won't like it, but think of it this way - the Recommended tags will be given out to more people who deserve them and it will nullify votes that are too high or too low.
I won't be here for the next few months, so you guys are gonna have to organize it.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Oh, BTW, I have to say something since this is going to pop up in the future and I won't have time to reply
I think, generally, people who make games don't really make good game reviewers. It's not anything really, more that people who make games end up thinking "Hey, why do you like that guy's game? My game has more features!" or "I spend more time on my game! And you guys let a guy who made a game in 1 hour get high ratings?"
Games should, above anything, be rated for fun, not effort. It doesn't matter if the level is reused, or the graphics use gradients, or the game doesn't have a story line, whatever theories game makers get. It's about whether the average person enjoys the game. Most klikers tend to compare a similar game to their game and complain that their game isn't getting the same attention.
That's why I like the idea of a review team. And Shroomlock heading it, since he's been able to put all that aside.
Remember boys, whatever the heck you do with your game, the end result should be fun. Fun for you to make and fun for the player to play. It's all that matters.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Again, you're looking at the arguement of what makes them "official" and in the position to be an official reviewer of people's work?
I love how you propose and idea like this, then quickly cut to "I won't be here for the next few months, so you guys are gonna have to organize it." Classic
Originally Posted by Bloated and Toasted Muz It's not anything really, more that people who make games end up thinking "Hey, why do you like that guy's game? My game has more features!" or "I spend more time on my game! And you guys let a guy who made a game in 1 hour get high ratings?"
Games should, above anything, be rated for fun, not effort.
I think you're on to something there.
About the review team.
If we decide to have an official review team user-reviews should have to be separated from theirs. As it is now the user-reviews combined decide the average "review-rating" of the game, which can be kinda misleading when someone says "teH tXTS caem a0Ut lttr bai lttr I give it 2-zzz". What should we do with user-reviews?
And if there is to be an official review team you would have to have a long process of deciding who to include. Firstly letting people express an interest in being on the team (could be that Shroom doesn't even want to be an official reviewer), then letting people vote about who should be on the team. Also maybe vote on if the community even wants an official team.
And if it is decided to stay, how would it be decided which games are to be reviewed?
Should creators ask for a review or should the team decide which are worthy of a review? Many a problem to solve, too bad you're not going to be around.
I think it's a good idea, but I won't be signing up for it. Someone already asked me to be an official reviewer about a week ago for Fusion2Developers, and I accepted. It may not get as much traffic, but at least someone is in charge. The rating/review/stars/favorite system here is out of control.
Actually, scratch that. It's not really a good idea. TDC has too many rating styles and I think adding another one will be confusing. Looks like Fusion2Developers has a good system for rating games anyway and I wouldn't like to make the TDC rating system less democratic. TDC has always used more of a user-based review system anyway.
Besides, -Adam- doesn't like it and it looks like every feature Adam demands gets implemented and the ones he doesn't like gets removed
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I was a member of the clickzine writer team and got to write... nothing.
i have actually suggested an official writer team a few times already, and it fell on deaf ears.
The idea wouldn't be for the team's reviews to be more official, it would just be an attempt to get as many games reviewed as possible. Shroomlock can only do so many himself. But a team can organize themselves better.
Well, in a perfect world it would be nice to have one or two "official" reviewers, and then a section below that for user submitted reviews. Other sites have similar features, like Gamefaqs, where they list their own ratings then user ratings. But that would probably just complicate an already complicated set of rating tools around here. People usually write pretty fair reviews at the DC anyway.
The Daily Click is, as Muz said, a user-based site. And as unfair as that can seem sometimes, it has kept the DC alive while other klik sites have come and gone.
Yeah, it'll end up with the users being the main reviewers, with the "official" reviewers being the side reviewers. As it is. The reviews have more weightage than the quick star reviews, but nobody actually looks at them.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I don't see how reviews actually help that much. I read them, yes, but they've never actually helped me to decided whether or not to download a game. I usually decide based on the first few ratings, comments and the screenshots on the download page. Taking the reviewing feature even further just seems OTT to me.
I think the most influential rating mechanism right now are the admin recommendation stars. No one really cares too much about reviews except the authors who made the game (which still makes it worthwhile), and 95% of the decent games here have a user-star rating between 4.5-5 stars, so they all look the same. But then when you see that blue or red star by the name, you think "Oh crap, this must be special."
"But then when you see that blue or red star by the name, you think "Oh crap, this must be special." "
I don't, most of the games with stars I didn't really like but then that all boils down to the admins personal tastes, that's why Nim was kinda annoyed at that system.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by Eternal Man [EE]
At least, it does for me...
