Mission Architect Ratings Analysis/Suggestions
By
Aces_High,
Posted on: 2009-05-16 14:58 in Mission Architect
[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, I don't care how upset someone is that they couldn't finish an arc. A 2 star or below should REQUIRE a comment, any comment.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok! After I 1-star your story-arc here's my required comment: "igberiubgfri oneienfienfeigfneriuner ifuhdlkjgbdfxkljgh!"
[ QUOTE ]
I tend to follow up with people when they leave me feedback to let them know I've listend to that feedback and appreciate it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I don't want those "follow up" comments. The last thing that I want is to start getting tells from some person whose story-arc I 1-starred four hours ago and then promptly forgot all about.
Tell---> What do you mean my story arc is too hard you idiot?!?!?! Just because the minions are AR/Dev & Psi & Rad & Dark all on extreme doesn't mean they're overpowered!! Guess you should'a brought your A-Game huh CHUMP??
Tell---> What's wrong? Nothing to say now huh moron?
Tell---> I know you're on, quit being a wuss and respond you meat-head!
Tell---> Tell ya what you *$*&($W^&&^ I'm gonna look up your global in the MA and 1-star all of your arcs. How's that sound?
These tells will happen. Know how I know this? Because I've already received them. No. I really really don't want you to "follow up" with me. I rated your arc, and now I'm busy doing something else. Go spellcheck your story-arc and just leave me alone.
[ QUOTE ]
I simply can't stand it when someone comes along and 0 or 1 stars my arc for no particular reason and i HAVE to assume it is for no particular reason if they don't leave that comment.
[/ QUOTE ]
Statistically speaking, if someone 1-starred your story-arc it's probably because they don't like your story-arc! You know, I hate to break it to you, but you're probably not Stephen King. You're probably not the awesome teller of tales that you think you are. Assume what you want. When someone 1-stars your arc they're saying; "Your story-arc sucks." Maybe they're right.
[ QUOTE ]
but it should be the Author's right to be able to keep track of people who do lowball rate just to do so.
[/ QUOTE ]
What are you, a cop? A federal agent? No. You do not have the right to keep track of me for any reason.
Any time an artist presents work to the public he's going to have to learn to take criticism. Whether you feel said criticism is waranted or not doesn't matter. If you can't handle the criticism without trying to insist that you should be granted some sort of special rights to track people or force them to give you meaningful feedback then maybe you shouldn't be writing anything for public consumption.
[ QUOTE ]
stuff
[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't about my arc really. It was just a handy example of what I was talking about.
You keep insisting that people who put Arcs up should be able to take criticism. Most have no problems taking criticism if it is offered. Giving a 0 or 1 star rating, however, isn't criticism it is just a "Meh. Can't be bothered."
I submit to you that if you can't be bothered to leave feedback then don't be bothered to rate. If you don't like the material well and good. Gracefully go on your way.
Here is an example for you:
A book title catches your eye and you pick it up to see if it is a work of fiction that you want to read. Once you pick it up you discover it is a romance and not a western or war story or whatever type of fiction you prefer.
Do you go ahead and buy the book knowing it isn't what you like and then give it a 0 or 1 star rating and throw it away?
Or.. do you put it back with a shrug and go on to find something that is the type of fiction you enjoy reading?
My point here is that if you can't be bothered to give some kind of feedback or review then why bother rating it at all?
Despite what you might think there are people out there that just give grief ratings. They enjoy giving some Arc a crap rating because they get off on it or it isn't a farming arc or a comedy arc or whatever.
As to you saying you've gotten hostile tells from Arc authors.. that is what /ignore is for.
[ QUOTE ]
eah, I don't want those "follow up" comments. The last thing that I want is to start getting tells from some person whose story-arc I 1-starred four hours ago and then promptly forgot all about.
Tell---> What do you mean my story arc is too hard you idiot?!?!?! Just because the minions are AR/Dev & Psi & Rad & Dark all on extreme doesn't mean they're overpowered!! Guess you should'a brought your A-Game huh CHUMP??
Tell---> What's wrong? Nothing to say now huh moron?
Tell---> I know you're on, quit being a wuss and respond you meat-head!
Tell---> Tell ya what you *$*&($W^&&^ I'm gonna look up your global in the MA and 1-star all of your arcs. How's that sound?
These tells will happen. Know how I know this? Because I've already received them. No. I really really don't want you to "follow up" with me. I rated your arc, and now I'm busy doing something else. Go spellcheck your story-arc and just leave me alone.
[/ QUOTE ]
How about this? People on your ignore list can't play or rate your arcs. 
That would fix that problem nicely. And I'm sorry that you've had such bad experiences with some people. Thankfully, not all of us are like that. Don't assume that all people who have issues with the rating system are from FF.Net.
[ QUOTE ]
Any time an artist presents work to the public he's going to have to learn to take criticism. Whether you feel said criticism is waranted or not doesn't matter. If you can't handle the criticism without trying to insist that you should be granted some sort of special rights to track people or force them to give you meaningful feedback then maybe you shouldn't be writing anything for public consumption.
[/ QUOTE ]
You would be right... Except that what people are getting isn't criticism. Criticism requires someone to actually look at what they're giving an opinion on so they can give proper feedback. Proper (constructive) criticism allows someone to actually make their work better.
From your viewpoint, it appears that you believe that we're angry that someone dared to give out super special awesome BEST EVER arc a low rating. While I can't say that ego has no part of it (all creative work is subject to the ego of its creator, after all, if they actually care about what they're producing), our point is that the ratings system is flawed and needs to be corrected.
Something else to consider is that the rating system isn't just for the author's benefit. Such a system is designed to allow the casual observer to pick out the cream of the crop, to identify what's worth pursuing and what should be avoided as well. Players are likely to avoid a lower-scoring arc, more often than not for valid reasons.
If you force people to provide feedback for every mission they rate poorly, fewer people will do so, and the rating system will fail to meet this objective. There is in fact valid reason to believe that this is the primary reason for this aspect of the rating system. As has been said, simply starring an arc does little to inform an author what may be wrong with the work. But it does tell others that someone didn't enjoy it. Or a lot of someones; perhaps it's not worthwhile.
And that would be fine if they gave a context window when you mouse over the arcs rating that broke out the overall number of different ratings.:
5 Star: 5
4 Star: 3
3 Star: 4
2 Star: 1
1 Star: 1
As it stands right now though, an Arc that was maintaning a 4 star rating gets hit with a 0 or a 1 and suddenly it is down to a 3 star rating with no way for people to see how many rated it which way. It is just a 3 star to them.
[ QUOTE ]
Something else to consider is that the rating system isn't just for the author's benefit. Such a system is designed to allow the casual observer to pick out the cream of the crop, to identify what's worth pursuing and what should be avoided as well. Players are likely to avoid a lower-scoring arc, more often than not for valid reasons.
If you force people to provide feedback for every mission they rate poorly, fewer people will do so, and the rating system will fail to meet this objective. There is in fact valid reason to believe that this is the primary reason for this aspect of the rating system. As has been said, simply starring an arc does little to inform an author what may be wrong with the work. But it does tell others that someone didn't enjoy it. Or a lot of someones; perhaps it's not worthwhile.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think we can definitely agree that the rating system as it stands now doesn't do its job in any of those ways. We may as well be using third party rating sites to figure out what arcs are worthwhile by now.
[ QUOTE ]
People on your ignore list can't play or rate your arcs.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an excellent suggestion, and although it doesn't eliminate the problem, it seems like it could go a long way towards reducing the severity.
If a player became known for 0-star griefing, lots of people would just put them on ignore and avoid the risk. The reverse-grief - i.e. putting valid raters on ignore just to spite them - seems like it would only hurt the intended griefers.
Yeah, the more I think about this, the more I like it.
And for a while things were cold,
They were scared down in their holes
The forest that once was green
Was colored black by those killing machines
[ QUOTE ]
And that would be fine if they gave a context window when you mouse over the arcs rating that broke out the overall number of different ratings.:
5 Star: 5
4 Star: 3
3 Star: 4
2 Star: 1
1 Star: 1
As it stands right now though, an Arc that was maintaning a 4 star rating gets hit with a 0 or a 1 and suddenly it is down to a 3 star rating with no way for people to see how many rated it which way. It is just a 3 star to them.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we can definitely agree that the rating system as it stands now doesn't do its job in any of those ways. We may as well be using third party rating sites to figure out what arcs are worthwhile by now.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was under the impression that this discussion was aimed at fixes that would better the system that's in place now, maybe even replace it. While we're at it, why shouldn't such a revision aim at making the star ratings worthwhile. It sounds as if you'd rather write them off entirely, instead of coming up with a way to make them work.
[ QUOTE ]
I was under the impression that this discussion was aimed at fixes that would better the system that's in place now, maybe even replace it. While we're at it, why shouldn't such a revision aim at making the star ratings worthwhile. It sounds as if you'd rather write them off entirely, instead of coming up with a way to make them work.
[/ QUOTE ]
If there aren't any changes, they may as well be.
Regardless, I would like to make the current system more worthwhile, yes. I'm just trying to think of ways to address the additional issues brought up. Many valid points were made, by you and many others, and we'll need to work together to find a way to make a proposal that will fix it all in the best way possible.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People on your ignore list can't play or rate your arcs.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's an excellent suggestion, and although it doesn't eliminate the problem, it seems like it could go a long way towards reducing the severity.
If a player became known for 0-star griefing, lots of people would just put them on ignore and avoid the risk. The reverse-grief - i.e. putting valid raters on ignore just to spite them - seems like it would only hurt the intended griefers.
Yeah, the more I think about this, the more I like it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why do I care if the spammers can't play my arcs?
Because that's what fills my ignore list. I don't think I have any actual players in there.
Players' Choice Awards: Best Dual-Origin Level Range Arc!
It's a new era, the era of the Mission Architect. Can you save the Universe from...
The Invasion of the Bikini-clad Samurai Vampiresses from Outer Space? - Arc ID 61013
[ QUOTE ]
6: Unpublish all non-Developer's Choice arcs - This is the only fair way to make the field level again after the revisions are made to the rating system. DC arcs would be DC regardless, and thus wouldn't need to be unpublished. Everyone would be able to republish their arcs immediately, giving them a fresh start on the new rating system.
[/ QUOTE ]
You can take my 200+ ratings and 4-star average from my cold dead hands.
Frankly, I don't care how upset someone is that they couldn't finish an arc. A 2 star or below should REQUIRE a comment, any comment. I tend to follow up with people when they leave me feedback to let them know I've listend to that feedback and appreciate it. I simply can't stand it when someone comes along and 0 or 1 stars my arc for no particular reason and i HAVE to assume it is for no particular reason if they don't leave that comment.
For instance: I've had a lot of people play my Arc and not all of them have rated it but most at least leave feedback and I tweak accordingly if it is warranted. Leaving feedback without rating the Arc is fine. It gives people a way to provide constructive feedback without them worrying about "payback". I've only had a couple people rate the arc and not leave feedback.. which is troubling but meh... This weekend, however, I got my first 0 star rating on it with no comment and it took it from a 4.5 rating to a friggin 3 star. If my rating has to suffer from someone lowball rating it I want the chance to be able to engage that person in discussion and find out why they didn't leave feedback and what, if any, their concerns or problems were with the Arc.
Note: I said the chance to engage them in discussion. They could very well choose to ignore that attempt to communicate. That is their right.. but it should be the Author's right to be able to keep track of people who do lowball rate just to do so.