tl;dr version: If you don't have something TO SAY at all, then you shouldn't be allowed to "say" nothing with just a vote.
Because just the vote with nothing behind it DOESN'T HELP.
[ QUOTE ]
Now, I know the argument that will come out right away from this suggestion: "I don't WANT my global name revealed because I'd be afraid of 'retaliation' for a low score!!!!"
Well you know what? Then either grow thicker skin and a new pair, or make arcs that are good enough to SURVIVE the jerks and still keep going. If what I just quoted above is the whole of your argument, then just mark /unsigned and step out of the thread, because that's all you have to say, and I get it.
...
P.S. Something else I did realize but forgot to throw in here is that if this DOES get implemented, then of course there will be people that will just put in "." or "o" or something just to fill the spot and get the rating in. That's fine with me, as long as I can see their name and get a CHANCE to pester them with at least ONE tell and ask them WHY, for real.
[/ QUOTE ]
See the irony there? That's why I don't leave negative comments, I don't want to be bothered, or be harrassed because I left a one star. Trying to pursuade people, in this case the dev's, to implement something which requires people to grow thicker skin won't be implemented. Of this I am positive. If, however, feedback becomes anonymous, I'd be all for this.
I might accept "anonymous AND required" if there was something like a required minimum number of characters and a filter that would filter out stupid things like "nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn" or "1250-13tngfqdkbjfkl;", because those AREN'T helpful.
If I HAVE to give feedback to leave a rating, I won't be leaving either.
Would you rather have a no feedback 3-stars, which will help cancel a 1-star, or nothing at all?
Nothing at all.
It would be nice for them to require people to leave feedback when you rate an arc 0-2 stars. But I can see how this would cause problems. Of course those can be fixed easily by allowing the person giving the feedback to remain anonymous.
It just irks me to log on look at my arc's and see that I've gotten a 1 star rating and no reason for it. I mean I'd try to make it better if you told me whats wrong with it. Put just giving it a low rating does nothing for me. Great you didn't like it, well I don't know why or how to make it better for other people who will play it later on.
Prey Family Art
My Alts
Mortal Prey II soloing AV's no temp/insps
That's exactly what I'm saying. But if they JUST make it anonymous, then that will give you a bunch of worthless feedback as well, unless there are some sort of requirements for feedback.
How about some Auto feedback like
Mish too Hard
too many miss spelling
Mish not fun at all
IDK but you could have a lot of them so if you rate a mish lower then 3 star you can tell them like it is now or give anonymous auto feedback which would be better then nothing at all.
"All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time"- Chesty Puller US Marine Corps
True most of it will be just pointless feedback. But some of it will be helpful and I'd be happy with getting 1 out of 5 telling me why it was bad.
Prey Family Art
My Alts
Mortal Prey II soloing AV's no temp/insps
[ QUOTE ]
How about some Auto feedback like
Mish too Hard
too many miss spelling
Mish not fun at all
IDK but you could have a lot of them so if you rate a mish lower then 3 star you can tell them like it is now or give anonymous auto feedback which would be better then nothing at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting idea... like a menu to select from, that would be anonymous, but required for 0-2 stars?
I would agree to this is we could remain anonymous. It's not that I'm afraid to explain myself, but it's my opinion that as a consumer of the author's product I don't owe him/her an explanation.
Now I realize many will disagree with me, and that's fine. I'll go with the idea that the author is owed an explanation. I don't have a problem leaving comments, but 99.99999% of the time I don't want to have a conversation with the person about it. If I tell the person I felt the writing bad, I don't want to deal with a person bugging me because I hurt their feelings or pissed them off. Chances are if I get an angry tell I'm likely to just tell the person to [censored] off, and that can get me in trouble. Sure, I could just be more civil. But I don't see that happening.
And if I did want to have a conversation about the arc, I would make an effort to contact the author and start one. Some arcs, no matter how hard the author worked on them, just plain suck and the words just don't exist to describe how bad they are. Think of Batman & Robin movie, but with shittier writing.
[ QUOTE ]
Well you know what? Then either grow thicker skin and a new pair, or make arcs that are good enough to SURVIVE the jerks and still keep going. If what I just quoted above is the whole of your argument, then just mark /unsigned and step out of the thread, because that's all you have to say, and I get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
For those of us not in a SG, there just isn't enough plays on our arc to survive the jerks. Sorry, /unsigned. People will retaliate.
What I've suggested to the devs is some way to alias the responses, so you can get the feedback, but not have a way to know who that person's global handle is. The simplest way is to just send responses through mail with a generic "From:Arc Feedback" instead of the current tell system. If you want the person to know your global handle, you have the option of including it in the mail message.
131430 Starfare: First Contact
178774 Tales of Croatoa: A Rose By Any Other Name ( 2009 MA Best In-Canon Arc ) ( 2009 Player Awards - Best Serious Arc )
[ QUOTE ]
That's exactly what I'm saying. But if they JUST make it anonymous, then that will give you a bunch of worthless feedback as well, unless there are some sort of requirements for feedback.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't agree at all.
If it's anonymous more folks would be willing to give feedback. One of the reasons I've STOPPED giving feedback and simply rate now, is because I have limited playtime during the week.
I don't have time to get into a philosophical conversation with everyone I rate.
Even the folks I give 5 stars to and used to comment on would want to have convos with me.
I don't have that type of time.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
tl;dr version: If you don't have something TO SAY at all, then you shouldn't be allowed to "say" nothing with just a vote.
Because just the vote with nothing behind it DOESN'T HELP.
[/ QUOTE ]I think that this is a silly idea.
The voting system is not just for your benefit; it is for anyone who wishes to look at the arc in the search and see what is doing well. The rank is for you and for them; the feedback is for you.
I didn't read all of this... but I'll say this:
I really want a dev's choice. I know, I know.. everyone does, but I put genuine thought and effort into my arcs, and it frustrates me that my arc may never even get SEEN by a dev because it gets lost in a see of ticket farms and PL farms and farm farms...
So... ya... the ratings matter to me. I know that I have a better chance of getting my arc seen by a dev if it has a higher rating.
/rambling continues...
The other night I was playing and I saw "You have been awarded 15 tickets" which means, of course, that someone just rated one of my arcs 3 stars.
Not long after, I saw "someone has voted on "arcname"" which means someone rated it 1 or 2 stars.
This frustrated me because just earlier that night, my arc had moved up onto the list of 5 star arcs. I was really excited about it... then, of course, that knocked it back to 4.
I suspect the 1-star was a malicious thing (bc neither of mine ARE 1-star arcs), but the three star... I would really like to have known why that person rated it a 3. It would have meant a lot to me to read "I gave you 3 stars because while I enjoyed the arc, I thought you could have done more with your NPC chatters" or "I liked your custom group, but the plot wasn't logical"
So, I sorta agree with OP here. I would have liked to heard constructive feedback.
Let's not forget that a bad rating is an opinion thats all. We all want a great rating to achieve hall of fame. But no matter what, not everyone is going to like your arc. And why should feedback be mandatory? I don't really care to give feedback. Why? Cause I am no expert. My feedback may not be all that great for you anyways. I might think the custom group was too easy but 10 other people may think they are too hard. Maybe I think your arc is boring for my own personal taste. What are you going to do? Pester me with tells BUT WHY IS IT BORING? it just is for me. With all due respect. Is'nt your skin thick enough to handle people who don't give feedback? Your assuming everyone doing your arc is an expert critique with all the answers to make it better.
ARC # 2517 "Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting"
ARC# 102898 "The Great Sewer Rescue"
If you rate something low, then you have a REASON why you rate it low. I don't expect Ebert-level criticism, what I expect is, if you think it's boring, then at least TELL me you think it's boring, that's all! You don't have to tell my why it's boring, just tell me that it's boring! Then I can add ambushes or whatever. You don't have to tell my why it's hard, just tell me it's hard! But your single star tells me nothing, nothing at all.
[ QUOTE ]
If it's anonymous more folks would be willing to give feedback.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, very true. Anonymous feedback is the way to go, imo.
[ QUOTE ]
How about some Auto feedback like
Mish too Hard
too many miss spelling
Mish not fun at all
[/ QUOTE ]
THIS would be very nice, and helpful. You could even force a low-rater to select an auto-feedback option, so they can't just send you "nnnnnn" or other completely useless feedback.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't expect Ebert-level criticism, what I expect is, if you think it's boring, then at least TELL me you think it's boring, that's all! You don't have to tell my why it's boring, just tell me that it's boring!
[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, if you force players to send negative criticism directly to another player, you are basically asking for an increase in negative-heated exchanges that may be very unpleasent and reduce the enjoyment that players get from the game.
For that reason, they will never force you to send your negative feedback to the arc creator.
As for 1-star arcs I've played, I doubt that feedback such as "Were you even trying to create a decent arc?" or the like would be particularly helpful to the creator.
[ QUOTE ]
Ratings Feedback Info
[/ QUOTE ]
Outside of the suggestion at hand, I know I'd like the ability to see feedback provided by players who played the arc previously. Something like "People who 5-stared this arc saidÂ…." and show the top 3 feedbacks, and do that for each star rating "People who 1-stared this arc saidÂ…"arc unfinished" "not fun at all" "too many errors" etc and display the globals of the folks providing the feedback.
I certainly can appreciate your desire to get constructive feedback. But the fact is that if a person isn't leaving that feedback today, they won't leave it if the system forces them to put something in that field.
The second reason this should be disallowed is that I've seen reports on the forums of mini flame wars. Example: someone rates an arc low with the comment "The minions are overpowered--they're mez-proof." The reply comes "Controllers and doms that try to solo missions with custom minions are just asking for trouble." Then you're off to the races with increasingly nasty tells. Then comes the retribution of 0-starring the arcs of the person sending the critique.
So I disagree with your suggestion on the grounds that it won't accomplish what you want it to accomplish. There won't be an increase in constructive criticism, and you'll get people who avoid conflict who will skip rating arcs at all.
Freedom: Blazing Larb, Fiery Fulcrum, Sardan Reborn, Arctic-Frenzy, Wasabi Sam, Mr Smashtastic.
I'd rather have no rating at all, than a rating that doesn't have any meaning behind it.
As far as the "flame wars" go, I would be happy to see an anonymous menu required instead of required feedback with your global.... I think that's the best idea I've ever heard, and I'd like to amend my OP, but I can't anymore, so....
New suggestion thanks to BrokenPrey: If rating < 3 stars, then a Menu pops up that's anonymous and contains things like:
[ QUOTE ]
Mish too Hard
too many miss spelling
Mish not fun at all
[/ QUOTE ]
And
"Boring/Slow"
"Unoriginal/Needs more uniqueness"
Things like that, on a menu that you have to select from. Then the mission arc creator receives it as a message from the System.
[ QUOTE ]
If you rate something low, then you have a REASON why you rate it low. I don't expect Ebert-level criticism, what I expect is, if you think it's boring, then at least TELL me you think it's boring, that's all! You don't have to tell my why it's boring, just tell me that it's boring! Then I can add ambushes or whatever. You don't have to tell my why it's hard, just tell me it's hard! But your single star tells me nothing, nothing at all.
[/ QUOTE ]Okay, you wish everyone who doesn't give your missions/arcs a high rating would tell you WHY they didn't give it a high rating. Understood.
Put it in your intro text. "Please give feedback, even if you don't like it, so I can try to improve." But you have to accept that even then, not everyone will. People vary, and some simply don't want to give feedback. Some don't know HOW to give useful feedback.
Accept it, and treasure the useful feedback you DO get.
And keep in mind that you cannot please everyone. There are dipweeds out there who will 1-star your arc just because its not the kind of arc THEY want to play. If you're going to obsess over those who don't like your arcs, and don't say why, you're only going to hurt yourself.
[ QUOTE ]
I certainly can appreciate your desire to get constructive feedback. But the fact is that if a person isn't leaving that feedback today, they won't leave it if the system forces them to put something in that field.
The second reason this should be disallowed is that I've seen reports on the forums of mini flame wars. Example: someone rates an arc low with the comment "The minions are overpowered--they're mez-proof." The reply comes "Controllers and doms that try to solo missions with custom minions are just asking for trouble." Then you're off to the races with increasingly nasty tells. Then comes the retribution of 0-starring the arcs of the person sending the critique.
So I disagree with your suggestion on the grounds that it won't accomplish what you want it to accomplish. There won't be an increase in constructive criticism, and you'll get people who avoid conflict who will skip rating arcs at all.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT
I know that some really, really welcome any comments given - and I applaud their maturity and desire to improve.
But as we have seen in some other threads the past couple of weeks (and as I have experienced elsewhere when asked to provide feedback on someone's creative project), there are also many people out there who truly do NOT want honest feedback. They just want to hear how wonderful their own "perfect snowflake" was. No matter how often they state "Tell me what you really think".
And or system of offering feedback is also not conducive to offering enough feedback to be truly helpful. Good feedback is a dialogue, not a /tell. I don't have time I want to devote to offering feedback on something I thought was awful enough to rate as 1-2 stars.
Forced feedback via required comments is not a good idea. It would result in a system where bad creations would not even receive the minimal feedback of low ratings.
Altoholic - but a Blaster at Heart!
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
"You gave us a world where we could fly. I can't thank you enough for that."
I still remember getting frustrated at the feedback system when I started an arc, and sent feedback early on a couple of typo's in the first mission's send-off. That was when I discovered you can only send feedback once per arc.
I put a lot of work and thought into my arcs. If everything is working well, then I don't need to hear about it. I don't want to hear "great arc!" over and over again, because I don't need that kind of feedback, my ego is already big enough.
What I WANT is feedback, real feedback from all those that give 0, 1, or 2 stars. I want to know why, so that I may IMPROVE. It irks me to no end that I don't know WHY someone is rating down my arc. Unlike a certain forum poster who shall remain nameless.... let's just call her... um.... Q_Q.... I WANT the negative feedback to make my arcs BETTER. I can take it.
Thus my suggestion is as follows: if you rate an arc less than 3, you MUST input something in the ratings column, otherwise you cannot rate it.
What will this do? I'm not a pie in the sky dreamer. Okay, maybe I am, but I can see the reality. What this will do is two things:
<ul type="square">[*]1. It will cause people that want to rate arcs lowly but NOT give feedback to be revealed, so that I may pester them with at least a tell-back asking what I did wrong, or why they didn't give any decent feedback for WHY the mission was "so bad" that they couldn't give it a decent rating.[*]2. It will cause people to be more careful and thoughtful in both their ratings, AND their feedback, thus allowing missions that really deserve it a better chance at rising, and all the others a better chance to improve, thus increasing over time the quality of arcs.[/list]
Now, I know the argument that will come out right away from this suggestion: "I don't WANT my global name revealed because I'd be afraid of 'retaliation' for a low score!!!!"
Well you know what? Then either grow thicker skin and a new pair, or make arcs that are good enough to SURVIVE the jerks and still keep going. If what I just quoted above is the whole of your argument, then just mark /unsigned and step out of the thread, because that's all you have to say, and I get it.
If you have other, better arguments that don't involve FEAR, then please present them and I will fairly consider them.
P.S. Something else I did realize but forgot to throw in here is that if this DOES get implemented, then of course there will be people that will just put in "." or "o" or something just to fill the spot and get the rating in. That's fine with me, as long as I can see their name and get a CHANCE to pester them with at least ONE tell and ask them WHY, for real.