Victims of Architect ratings griefers
By
Aliana Blue,
Posted on: 2009-05-24 15:28 in Mission Architect
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Turg, it sucks that it happens to you, there is no excuse for that kind of behavior, but at least Dev's Choice arcs are locked at 5 stars.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eva: They're not. The DISPLAY shows them as five stars, but behind-scenes, they retain a "real" star rating. For instance, when the "Builder" series went live, I only earned the first 4 badges; I didn't get "Master Builder", which awards for 100 ratings of an average of 4 stars or higher. That's one of the gauges I'm using.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's what I meant, the display. To the average player looking for an arc to play, it looks like a 5-star arc. To the average player, this arc should be among "the best of the best." If they don't think it is, for whatever reason, they might rate it down for "false advertising." Especially since your arc contains one major annoyance, that may or may not be your fault, but the average player who doesn't read patch notes has no way of knowing that.
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, just sharing yet another angle of ratings griefing. The conspiritorial side of me thinks all of this (the farming blitz, the over-cooked drama responses, the star cartels, etc) is an attempt to sour our COH experience in light of new games coming out. But, as usual, everyone thinks I'm insane.
*puts tinfoil hat on to protect himself from VIPER psi-troops* 
[/ QUOTE ]
It's all a Nemesis plot?
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
[ QUOTE ]
I'd LOVE to have it where a zero and one star force commentary
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd love it if zero stars didn't exist. From a review standpoint, they make no sense. Star ratings are always from 1 to 5, not 0-5 and the WAY you have to do it feels like a glitch (clicking a rating and then unclicking it). From a math standpoint, it's very uneven since it makes it vastly easier to tank an arc than promote one.
Plus, imagine what would happen if all zero rating were instantly nullified/ignored/cleared from the system...
[ QUOTE ]
Plus, imagine what would happen if all zero rating were instantly nullified/ignored/cleared from the system...
[/ QUOTE ]
If they were all just changed to ones, I think we'd have a few instant Hall of Famers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Plus, imagine what would happen if all zero rating were instantly nullified/ignored/cleared from the system...
[/ QUOTE ]
If they were all just changed to ones, I think we'd have a few instant Hall of Famers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Would be a nice way to kickstart the HoF arcs, huh?
@TURGENEV - Freedom Server / IRON / B.A.N.E / HORDE
Turg Fiction: Ghost in the Machine Acts III & IV coming 2012!
Turg Fiction: IX is now LIVE on Architect Entertainment!
When a person rates something, Their global should be issued rep or something so you know the person's voting habits.
<qr>
I totally believe that there are people who downrate the highly visible arcs. What I don't get is how people are determining that they're receiving 0 or 1 ratings. If you're online, I think you can compare "A rated your arc B" messages to received (or not) tickets, but that only distinguishes 0-2 from 3, 4, or 5. And if you're not online, how can you tell at all?
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
Tickets divided by ratings, mostly.
Hilariously, I've gotten a 1 and a 0 (maybe two 1's) today even though I'm sitting at 4 stars.
One was from someone who I'll let stay anonymous who wrote me the longest, most hilariously bad review I've seen since John Petric saw Def Leopard a few years back.
Well, except he can be entertaining on purpose.
It was obviously given because this person wanted to prove that some of us saying that the ratings griefing is systematic should reconsider and instead think that we deserved those 1's and 0's. They have a novel approach, though. Everyone else just told me I was full of it and ignored empirical evidence. This guy actually went through the trouble of playing my arc and thinking he was proving a point.
The other one never responded though, so it's either him again, a cronie, or I moved up the list too much.
Edit: Hurpadurp I just saw on the wiki that it Doesn't Work That Way, nevermind.
[ QUOTE ]
I have a confession to make.
I didn't realize that, until today, reading this thread, that not-rating an arc actually assigned it 0 stars, as opposed to "No Rating." This is doubly-bad because I like to "flip through" the first few bits of MArcs to see if they interest me, and duck out if they don't. I always assumed leaving them with 0 stars just meant they were unrated and didn't actually do anything to the score.
I don't know how often this happens with other people, but there are definitely at least a couple of us who got misled by the ratings interface. Either way, I'll be stopping that habit for now.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not rating does not give zero stars.
Heh, I understand this only too well. I'm in the same boat as Turg, have had both of my other arcs shot off the first page a while ago, and have been keeping an eye on several arcs (by other authors) that are really well-made, yet keep getting bounced out by a sudden influx of fresh low-rates.
And I mean 'sudden' as in 'too sudden to be realistically gotten through people actually playing the arc and not liking it' - such as 4-10 low-rates in less than a minute. Look at it from any way you want, but there's no realistic chance of that many people coincidentally finishing that one arc just as it hits the first page, and all of them not liking it. Is it possible? Sure. But the odds of it are just astronomical. There's griefing going on here, pure and simple.
Now, are there people who will check out an arc for no other reason than it happens to be on the first page, decide they don't like it, and give it a low rating? Yes. Are there teams of people that do this? Yes. However, there are indeed griefers in this game, and they will downvote arcs for no other reason than that they feel like it.
"If I had Force powers, vacuum or not my cape/clothes/hair would always be blowing in the Dramatic Wind." - Tenzhi
Characters
Griefers didn't just show up when I14 went live. The assertion that they're not going to take advantage of a new way to be malicious is just silly. It's been made available to them, they're going to use it. Just because it's there.
Which is a big part of why I think the ratings system is a Bad Idea <tm>, and needs to be yanked out entirely. Anything that accommodates griefing to that extent just needs to be squashed.
Those who PVP downrate, for the sake of their own arc's visibility... those are another sort. I'm not sure they can even be called griefers, in the strictest sense.
But that doesn't change the fact that they, along with "5-star cartels", help to make the ratings system utterly worthless.
Right now the developers are planning on pulling a whole bunch of badges. If they think that move is going to significantly curb the malicious downrating that's been happening, well... I think they're in for another nasty surprise.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
The rating system is going to have to be looked at one way or another. The devs wouldn't have put the Hall of Fame in there if they didn't intend for people to never reach it, but as is the griefers make it an impossible achievement. How they can fix it is another question entirely since, at some level, you're going to have to find some way to convince people to quit gaming the system.
Arc #41077 - The Men of State
Arc #48845 - Operation: Dirty Snowball
I figure I was griefed. Someone complained about my Kung Fu arc #2517. Shortly after I published it I saw the complaint button. When I click to see what the complaint is there is nothing. No feedback as to why my arc is offensive. When I tell people this who have played it they all say WHAT??? Now I figure I was either griefed or someone is really sensitive. Either way it is no big deal. For all I know they hit it by accident.
ARC # 2517 "Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting"
ARC# 102898 "The Great Sewer Rescue"
[ QUOTE ]
One was from someone who I'll let stay anonymous who wrote me the longest, most hilariously bad review I've seen since John Petric saw Def Leopard a few years back.
Well, except he can be entertaining on purpose.
It was obviously given because this person wanted to prove that some of us saying that the ratings griefing is systematic should reconsider and instead think that we deserved those 1's and 0's. They have a novel approach, though. Everyone else just told me I was full of it and ignored empirical evidence. This guy actually went through the trouble of playing my arc and thinking he was proving a point.
[/ QUOTE ]
That anonymous individual would be me. I 1-Starred the arc because I didn't enjoy it, felt it was poorly executed, and had blatant plot holes.
There is a problem with 1-Star grieffing, I'm not even going to try denying that. I never intended to. I have good friends who have likely been the victim of such. Nor did I set out to prove a point. I simply did not like the arc.
To believe every 0 and 1-Star rating is a grief rating is idiotic. Just because you and others feel your arc should deserve a certain minimum rating doesn't mean everyone else will. And those that didn't like it may very well rate the arc as such. This was the case in this instance.
As an aside, if you decide to ridicule someone when they actually make an attempt to provide feedback after rating your arc poorly, perhaps you shouldn't be surprised or upset when no one else tells you why they gave your arc a low rating. I made sure to provide you with such after you claimed to be upset by the fact that none had. That's why I made sure to do so. But your obvious contempt for my thoughts makes me feel I should have simply 1-Starred your arc and remained silent as well.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One was from someone who I'll let stay anonymous who wrote me the longest, most hilariously bad review I've seen since John Petric saw Def Leopard a few years back.
Well, except he can be entertaining on purpose.
It was obviously given because this person wanted to prove that some of us saying that the ratings griefing is systematic should reconsider and instead think that we deserved those 1's and 0's. They have a novel approach, though. Everyone else just told me I was full of it and ignored empirical evidence. This guy actually went through the trouble of playing my arc and thinking he was proving a point.
[/ QUOTE ]
That anonymous individual would be me. I 1-Starred the arc because I didn't enjoy it, felt it was poorly executed, and had blatant plot holes.
There is a problem with 1-Star grieffing, I'm not even going to try denying that. I never intended to. I have good friends who have likely been the victim of such. Nor did I set out to prove a point. I simply did not like the arc.
To believe every 0 and 1-Star rating is a grief rating is idiotic. Just because you and others feel your arc should deserve a certain minimum rating doesn't mean everyone else will. And those that didn't like it may very well rate the arc as such. This was the case in this instance.
As an aside, if you decide to ridicule someone when they actually make an attempt to provide feedback after rating your arc poorly, perhaps you shouldn't be surprised or upset when no one else tells you why they gave your arc a low rating. I made sure to provide you with such after you claimed to be upset by the fact that none had. That's why I made sure to do so. But your obvious contempt for my thoughts makes me feel I should have simply 1-Starred your arc and remained silent as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't one star my most hated enemies. I reserve that punishment for those who put no effort into their arcs (ie "stuff happened here" "here's this dude").
Geek put a LOT of effort into his map and although I don't expect everyone to like it, I would expect most would be reasonable about rating such maps. You can find fault in anything if you look hard enough. The point is whether or not it's warranted or overzealous. Within the parameters of the game, I would say that a reasonable person could find geeks arc enjoyable even IF there were perceived flaws in the story. As it stands, I believe this is something more personal and don't for a second take it at face value for a legitimate score.
I reserve 0-Stars for the few you mention that don't put thought into their arc. In my mind, and by my rating system, 1-5 are valid ratings for an arc based on how it played. Geek may have put a lot of work into it, but it felt like I was watching a movie, and not taking part in events.
In fact, during the big climax I only used powers once, to free the first EB ally I encountered. He was sufficient to free the rest of the EB ally army without assistance, which was then able to defeat the enemy EBs with no help from me. I played no role in the mission at all, and there was no way my character was the focus of the plot.
In my mind, any arc where the player is not the focus starts at 3 Stars. The aforementioned plot holes, poor execution, and overpowered and overused allies were sufficient in my opinion to drop it to 1. This does bring up a question in my mind, however; why is 1-Star so bad in your opinion that you feel it shouldn't be given out? The game defines 1-Star as "Poor", which I feel this arc is. It seems like a valid rating; why do you consider it overzealous?
[ QUOTE ]
Tickets divided by ratings, mostly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you be more specific? As I understand it, the number next to your rating isn't entirely reliable. Also, this doesn't distinguish a 0 star rating from a 2 star rating, since neither of them give any tickets at all - right?
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
To Heavens_Agent:
Seriously, after almost 300 player arcs played, Speeding Through Time remains probably my single favourite arc except MAYBE Uncreation, by @muu. My entire supergroup on virtue has played it multiple times, and every time we do we're STILL giggling with glee about the 'time dupes' mission.
You really, honestly think this is a one star arc? REALLY? It sounds like you're being insanely petty and have an axe to grind, to be honest. That or you're purposely picking a high-profile arc and 1-starring it to try and 'prove' there's no ratings griefing going on, I think, based on my experiences with the average quality of MA arcs in general. Think about it:
Given the literally tens of thousands of missions that are blatant farms, brokenly unplayable, filled with typos or are written by illiterates, outright inappropriate, don't even HAVE text or contacts, are just a stock NPC with all text being 'meow', have blatantly untested NPCs, have a plot as deep, literally, as 'There's a guy here beat him up I dunno lol!' etc. etc. etc... you still feel that the arc, which if nothing else has carefully selected maps, well-written, intelligent dialog, a good sense of humor and adventure, a coherent plot, and nice-looking custom enemies, and a unique gimmick I've seen literally nowhere else...deserves the lowest possible 'normal' rating? Really? I'm interested in hearing why you feel that the arc is on the same level as the absolute filth and dregs of the MA. Have you even PLAYED other MA arcs? I don't want to sound fanboyish here, (I'm not even on the same server as Geek,) but seriously, even if you hated the plot and the NPCs, you put it on the same tier as the worst of the worst in the game? Come on now.
I want to see what you consider a 5-star arc if you think Speeding Through Time is really one of the worst of the worst. Please, give me some arc numbers of 'good' arcs for comparison here. I'd like to see the review too, so I can see what he did that's so henious that you think the arc is ratings-equivalent to the scummiest of scum arcs the MA has to offer.
[ QUOTE ]
I reserve 0-Stars for the few you mention that don't put thought into their arc. In my mind, and by my rating system, 1-5 are valid ratings for an arc based on how it played. Geek may have put a lot of work into it, but it felt like I was watching a movie, and not taking part in events.
In fact, during the big climax I only used powers once, to free the first EB ally I encountered. He was sufficient to free the rest of the EB ally army without assistance, which was then able to defeat the enemy EBs with no help from me. I played no role in the mission at all, and there was no way my character was the focus of the plot.
In my mind, any arc where the player is not the focus starts at 3 Stars. The aforementioned plot holes, poor execution, and overpowered and overused allies were sufficient in my opinion to drop it to 1. This does bring up a question in my mind, however; why is 1-Star so bad in your opinion that you feel it shouldn't be given out? The game defines 1-Star as "Poor", which I feel this arc is. It seems like a valid rating; why do you consider it overzealous?
[/ QUOTE ]
EDIT: This isn't about "I didn't get any xp during this mission" issue is it? Because that's all that's really wrong with that particular mission. It's a story, go with it.
See, I would never want anyone like you reviewing my arc because you don't bring anything to the table but how to make the arc more to your own liking. There is nothing functional about your critique, simply generalizations of your own feelings.
As far as 1 star, it is an insult. Saying an arc is "poor" is an insult and adds nothing from a critique point of view. And I wouldn't rate yours as 1 star if you put effort into it.
I'm curious, have you made any arcs? Do you even know the functions and limitations of MA?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tickets divided by ratings, mostly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you be more specific? As I understand it, the number next to your rating isn't entirely reliable. Also, this doesn't distinguish a 0 star rating from a 2 star rating, since neither of them give any tickets at all - right?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know for me, as long as your arc doesn't have a ton of votes, and they're coming in slow enough, it's fairly easy to tally up the number of votes you get that don't increase your tickets, and then watch for how many it takes to drop you from 5 to 4, or 4 to 3 stars.
Then it's fairly easy to mathematically figure out roughly how many each of 0, 1, and 2 star votes would be required to drop it that star, given that you know how many 3, 4 and 5 stars you have, and then I sort of average it out between them. It's not exact, but gives you a pretty good ballpark figure.
Any arc is valid until it says what one will basically find in it.
I wanted to do a super arc, that was based on I 14 promises.
Its called "The subteraneans" you prolly got the picture. In order to do that, i need magmites ability to come off the soil, and "Eden" trial with the big wells to transverse earth, literally.
Since i dont get it cause its not implemented, i play small, and save it for further changes,
So, i do Farm arcs.
(i just hope the ink in the well wont turn red)
In order to be honnest, i put a warning in front of my arc, i mean oOWARNINGOo.
and even though i say WARNING this is a 4 man farm, bla bla, i get blamed. and got repported.
Even with this very post i take a chance to get brown nosed.
imma be frankly: i got lotsa accounts, stop it, or i will start.
An eye for an eye.
Im french, but im rude.
[ QUOTE ]
imma be frankly: i got lotsa accounts, stop it, or i will start.
An eye for an eye.
Im french, but im rude.
[/ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't that be "so" not "but?"
This isn't really an effective threat because it already happens. I don't look for 5 star ratings because it's all crap. Strangely enough, the 4 star ratings are a better indicator of decent maps than 5 star.
And if you want to make an arc that doesn't get banned, for gods sake don't say "warning this is for farming." If you make an arc that has a plot (any plot really) that doesn't say "farm", they can't really ban it. On the other hand, it might take away from the number of people playing it but it's the price you pay for not getting banned.
Ok so what you're saying is, "The system won't let me do exactly what I want, so I will use it for what it is flat-out not intended for instead?"
You know what? The system won't let me do a lot of things I want to do. I'm sure nobody who has ever made a story focused arc could make one that fit their vision perfectly, whether because of file size limitations, mission objectives that are flat out unavailable (lead escort to object, find exit, standard minions and lieutenants as "boss" objectives), and a myriad of other reasons. We adapt. We do the best we can.
Lack of flexibility is no excuse for doing what you were specifically told not to do.
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
[ QUOTE ]
One problem with the above GadgetDon, and it's a design problem.
Some people finish an arc and don't want to rate it. Maybe they're just "playing through" or what have you. I'm one of those. I didn't realize until later that whenever I completed an arc and failed to rate it, the individual was getting a 0 star rating.
Personally, I think the interface is counter intuitive. Most ratings are 1-5 stars, with 0 stars indicating "not rated." Unfortunately, the Devs decided on a 0-5 rating scale, and failed to put it in bold print.
Anyway, yes you might be being targeted, but then again you may just be the victim of ignorance/apathy. And you know what they say about ascribing malice to things that could more easily or likely be explained by apathy or laziness.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not true. Playing an arc without rating it does NOT zero-star it. To zero-star something you must click one star, then click it again to turn it off.
My arcs are constantly shifting, just search for GadgetDon for the latest.
The world beware! I've started a blog
GadgetMania Under Attack: The Digg Lockout