Feedback should be mandatory if you rate an arc!
By
3dent,
Posted on: 2009-04-19 16:53 in Mission Architect
Oh hell yes. Also, happy cakeday!
It could have been a onestar bandit as they're nicknamed if you dropped from 5 to 3, a drop from 5 to 4 would have indicated someone thought it was good but not uber impressive, as happened with my little arc (it seemed to bounce between 5 star and 4 star with regularity between the 11 plays its got so far).
I too know the annoyance, of the 11 plays, 5 haven't provided any feedback either directly to me through global channels, the forums or through the tell system.
The thing may be that it may be our American friends playing it and rating it, even if they leave feedback it doesn't seem to reach us across the pond from what I can tell.
Badge Earned: Wing Clipper
A real showstopper!
In another thread, I said that I wanted approved "ebay" (as it used to be) style feedback where you had to leave it and you had to have it approved by the author (and then the cycle of dev checking that may result it).
No decent feedback, no access to the Mission Architect system - simple as.
Of course if negative feedback is given and the author doesn't like it and thus dings against them for it, then the whole mod checking thing will kick off - could be messy, but the whole thing is messy at the moment.
"Idealism is such a wonderful thing. All you really need is someone rational to put it to proper use." - Kerr Avon
Myopic Aardvark on Twitter
Gankvotes are a real phenomena.
Without feedback, I'd just say ignore outliers. Sure, they may lower the average rating, but if your arc is any good it should weather the storm.
Personally I ignore ratings given to my arcs, I only listen to feedback. If there isnt any, then no point listening to it.
As for your global star rating, does anybody take this seriously? IMO 4 star arcs are on average better than 5 star arcs, for instance - at least you have a chance of getting an arc which takes a few risks.
Just ignore, and post your arcs ID, Ill see if I can giveyou some honest feedback some time.
[ QUOTE ]
After 2 people had rated it, it was 5 stars, one of those people was Blue Rabbit who gave feedback and pointed out a couple of spelling errors, which are now sorted.
I got to check it now......3 ratings....now 3 stars!...and no bloody feedback!
Now, if this is based on averages, I reckon that has to be at least a 1 or 2 star rating to get 3 after 3 ratings.
[/ QUOTE ]
First - the maths:
A 3 star rating after 3 ratings means a total of between 7 and 9 (so the mean rating is between c. 2.333 to 3.0).
A 5 star rating after 2 ratings meant a total of between 9 and 10 (so the mean was 4.5 or 5).
You went from 9 or 10 to between 7 and 9 in one extra rating.
So either:
- the 3rd rating was a 0 star rating, a 1 star wouldn't do it, which would seem like grief voting if something hokey wasn't going on with the 1st 2 votes...
or
- one of the 1st two ratings rerated to lower their rating, in which case all bets are off.
Yes - you can rerate. So someone may have rated a 5 then played more arcs and realised that they'd been too generous and come back and rerated it a 3 or something...
Secondly - comments...
We know that cross zone comments (i.e. US<->EU) are not working - so it could have been a US player who did comment but the bugs meant you didn't get the comment.
Sadly I wouldn't reckon that th e devs will look upon this as a priority since it only affects cross zone and so US<->US comments, which will make up the bulk of comments, are fine...
In fact I wouldn't be surprised if, if they did anything, they removed comments entirely until they might be working and put back in...
nope - not still bitter about Prisoners at all.
BTW cross zone comments and length/clarity of comments are 2 more reasons why I'd recommend people using City of Guides...
By my mohawk shall ye know me!
my toons
Funny: Ee-Ai-Ee-Ai-Oh! #3662 * The foul-mouthed Handyman! #1076 * City of Norms #132944
Serious: To Save A Single World (#83744) * Marketing Opportunity (#83747)
Well, dunno who the first vote was, again, no feedback, the second was Blue rabbit who told me what he rated me at, cos he's nice like that 
Fair point about the cross country problem, must admit I never thought of that, but it's still confusing to get such a low mark. I'm not trying to flatter myself it's a master peice, but comepared to a lot of the so called 5-stars out there, I think it's a good storyline, good custom group etc, and this was backed up by Rabbit, so the 0-1 star vote is weird!
And I already posted it on CoG
We built this city on Rock and Roll!
[ QUOTE ]
And I already posted it on CoG
[/ QUOTE ]
I know - and hopefully people will start using it more for reviews/comments!
I've only just started playing a few arcs after creation time... but I aim to post comments there for arcs included on the site.
By my mohawk shall ye know me!
my toons
Funny: Ee-Ai-Ee-Ai-Oh! #3662 * The foul-mouthed Handyman! #1076 * City of Norms #132944
Serious: To Save A Single World (#83744) * Marketing Opportunity (#83747)
It is possible to figure out how many votes you were given by using the extra tickets awarded as a tally. If you have 50 tickets awarded you know you got two 5 star ratings and so can take an educated guess at what the third one was.
Of course, in order to do this you have to know how many tickets you have available to claim from the ticket vendor before the mission is rated and the more ratings you recieve the less accurate the guesses on the low starred votes will be.
[ QUOTE ]
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
[/ QUOTE ]
One word: "kjsklwqr"
Enforced feedback doesn't work on the Internet.
One thing that is worth mentioning is that you could have been left feedback, just from the US. Which doesn't get to us.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
[/ QUOTE ]
One word: "kjsklwqr"
Enforced feedback doesn't work on the Internet.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thus the need for Author approval and referral to mods if that's what they get (and if the author goes power hungry and gets people banned).
No, I don't think it's workable either - I think it's easier to leave it as is and not do anything (hey Posi's happy right now, why bring up all the FUNDAMENTAL problems that we told them about through both betas to ruin it), but it's my suggestion.
"Idealism is such a wonderful thing. All you really need is someone rational to put it to proper use." - Kerr Avon
Myopic Aardvark on Twitter
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
[/ QUOTE ]
One word: "kjsklwqr"
Enforced feedback doesn't work on the Internet.
[/ QUOTE ]
True, but at least I'd know who it was and if a lot of other people have had 1 star ratings from the same person, it could be shown to be griefing.
We built this city on Rock and Roll!
I think the fact that we don't appear to get feedback from the US is the current greatest failing to anyone attempting to write a serious (as opposed to thrown together rather than in tone) arc and improve upon it.
Has this issue been acknowledged anywhere? Do the Devs know and if so is anything going to be done about it? Or did I just miss that info?
[ QUOTE ]
Has this issue been acknowledged anywhere? Do the Devs know and if so is anything going to be done about it? Or did I just miss that info?
[/ QUOTE ]
On 14th April I bugged with:
I suspect that MA comments are bugged. Very, very few coming through and seem to all be from EU players. Could be a side-effect of being an EU player, but rate of comments is probably 2 in 100 ratings which is ridiculously low compared to test. As some comments definitely get through it's hard to know for certain though.
So it has been reported...
By my mohawk shall ye know me!
my toons
Funny: Ee-Ai-Ee-Ai-Oh! #3662 * The foul-mouthed Handyman! #1076 * City of Norms #132944
Serious: To Save A Single World (#83744) * Marketing Opportunity (#83747)
I agree with the above. At least for "negative" marks, feedback should be mandatory. Give the author a chance to change what's perceived as bad and not just rate and run.
I quite liked the arc, it was fun, light and very enjoyable to play with a funny custom group I just wanted to pick up, wrap and take home with me! I know not everyone likes cute, but at the very least explaining why it deserves a "negative" rating should be common courtesy.
Rabbits & Hares:Blue (Mind/Emp Controller)Maroon (Rad/Thermal Corruptor)and one of each AT all at 50
MA Arcs: Apples of Contention - 3184; Zen & Relaxation - 35392; Tears of Leviathan - 121733 | All posts are rated "R" for "R-r-rrrrr, baby!"|Now, and this is very important... do you want a hug? COH Faces @Blue Rabbit
[ QUOTE ]
It is possible to figure out how many votes you were given by using the extra tickets awarded as a tally. If you have 50 tickets awarded you know you got two 5 star ratings and so can take an educated guess at what the third one was.
Of course, in order to do this you have to know how many tickets you have available to claim from the ticket vendor before the mission is rated and the more ratings you recieve the less accurate the guesses on the low starred votes will be.
[/ QUOTE ]
Too imprecise when you have multiple votes and multiple arcs.
And IIRC you get the following:
0 star rating - 0 tickets
1 star rating - 0 tickets
2 star rating - 0 tickets
3 star rating - 15 tickets
4 star rating - 20 tickets
5 star rating - 25 tickets
So what did you get if you have 5 new ratings and 60 tickets?
Was it a 5-star, a 3-star and 3 0-2 stars?
Was it 3 4-star ratings, and two 0-2 stars?
Was it 4 3-star ratings, and a single 0-2 stars?
BTW - I noticed that the arc I rated with 3 stars says 'Good' next to my 3 star rating... so I'm guessing that the devs have attached text descriptions to the star ratings and 3 stars is 'good'.
Anyone know what all the official rating descriptions are?
By my mohawk shall ye know me!
my toons
Funny: Ee-Ai-Ee-Ai-Oh! #3662 * The foul-mouthed Handyman! #1076 * City of Norms #132944
Serious: To Save A Single World (#83744) * Marketing Opportunity (#83747)
2 is 'mediocre'.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
[/ QUOTE ]
One word: "kjsklwqr"
Enforced feedback doesn't work on the Internet.
[/ QUOTE ]NC has already stated that votes will be monitored. Making feedback mandatory would significantly ease the monitoring.
Of course, they should first make the feedback be handled by and stored on the MA server instead of the current system.
But it is a real pain that the feeback system does not seem to be able to cross the pond. I only bother commenting now when I know that somebody is from our side.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
[/ QUOTE ]One word: "kjsklwqr"
Enforced feedback doesn't work on the Internet.
[/ QUOTE ]NC has already stated that votes will be monitored. Making feedback mandatory would significantly ease the monitoring.
[/ QUOTE ]Generally I leave feedback when I rate an arc, most of it is generally constructive, but I have also rated arcs and left no feedback, for whatever reason.
Some unimaginative arcs should be given negative feedback, but it's time consuming and frankly why should I bother to comment on an arc that someone has written in 10 minutes, and is just poor, I just rate them 1 or 2 stars and move on. Never ever given 0 stars, even if it's shockingly bad.
Forcing people to leave feedback, will lead to more negative comments, rather than positive or constructive ones, in general. Some people give feedback every time, others don't give any, it's the beauty of living in a free speech society.
On the flip side though, I can see why genuine authors want feedback. I'd rather know what works and what doesn't on ones that I write, but forced feedback is a step backwards IMO.
Main 50 & Badger Nine Claws Claws/Regen/Body
Other 50's Ph10x Brute Unjust Law Tanker Samantha Urai Scrapper Codename 1250 Scrapper
Cepheus Defender Nilus Scrapper Electro Field Blaster S.PONGE Tanker
It would be handy if the feedback screen was like the bug reporting screen, with set criteria you could click to select at the top, then a text field at the bottom for adding further detail. The clickable criteria could be in two columns: Positive on the left and Negative on the right. Unlike the bug reporting screen you would be able to click multiple criteria, but only either Positive or Negative for each line.
The layout of the feedback screen would then be as follows:
[ QUOTE ]
Award a rating for this arc: 0 stars (dire), 1 star (poor), 2 stars (mediocre), 3 stars (good), 4 stars (excellent), 5 stars (perfect)
.
[ ] I liked the story/theme of the arc / [ ] I disliked the story/theme of the arc
[ ] I liked the contact/NPC dialogue / [ ] I disliked the contact/NPC dialogue
[ ] I liked your custom group(s) / [ ] I disliked your custom group(s)
[ ] Missions were too short / [ ] Missions were too long
[ ] Arc was too easy / [ ] Arc was too difficult (Tooltip: list team size below)
[ ] I noticed no errors/bugs / [ ] The arc had errors/bugs (Tooltip: provide detail below)
etc.
.
If you click neither of the following options the arc creator will know your global name when they receive your feedback, but not the rating you gave:
[ ] Notify creator of the rating you awarded and your global name / [ ] Deliver feedback anonymously
.
Type further comments, detail and suggestions in the box below:
[ ]
[/ QUOTE ]
The feedback would also automatically include the archetype, primary/secondary powersets and level of the current character of the player giving the feedback (useful info for creators trying to balance arcs for solo play). Perhaps the feedback screen could also include a simple drop-down menu for selecting the team size as well.
This would guide the feedback into a more useful format for the arc creator, but also make it simpler for players who don't like typing comments to leave feedback quickly - then the arc creator could tell if their arc was being marked down because of valid problems or qualitative opinion (because tastes differ and quantitative feedback is arguably a lot more useful to you when you initially publish an arc).
This feedback would be delivered as a form via the in-game email system (rather than the /tell system, as it is now), so that you could get feedback even if you were offline. You could then also retain the feedback for later perusal (i.e. for when you had time to make changes to your arc in lieu of that feedback).
Also, as an added incentive for people to leave feedback, I would like to see two buttons at the bottom of the feedback email the creator receives - Was this feedback useful to you: Yes [ ] No [ ]. If the arc creator clicks yes then the player giving feedback is awarded 5 MA tickets that they can claim on any character (similarly to how arc creators can currently claim the 5-tickets-per-star-of-rating award they get from their arc being rated), but perhaps only if the feedback was not given anonymously.
Sympathise greatly with Coin's first post.
One of my arcs was rated five stars after seven ratings, most of which I knew to be actual five star ratings because the ratings were from people I knew and who tested it for me, people who I trust greatly.
Two more ratings and it went down to four stars. I may be wrong but I am figuring, from the mathematics involved, that the two people who rated it next either gave one star and two stars, or both gave it one star.
Trying desperately not to be immodest but given the effort, fully fleshed out story and attention to detail that went into the arc a one star rating would seem to be somewhat unjust. 
If I do an arc and I recognise the effort and quality of various aspects I would never ever give it such a ridiculously low rating, even if the precise content of the arc was not to my tastes (as when I played the Devs' Choice arc "Butterfly Effect" for example).
I don't want to entirely rule out the possibility that the eighth and ninth people who rated it really thought it was that bad, but I think I would be a tad surprised and really, really intrigued to find out what it was that raised their ire.
Thoughtlessness or simple one-star griefing? Does this go on? I suppose it does.
Anyway, without some kind of feedback it is a little dispiriting for people who are putting a lot of effort into creating arcs they think people will enjoy and that will add, in some small way, to the game's content.
[ QUOTE ]
Two more ratings and it went down to four stars. I may be wrong but I am figuring, from the mathematics involved, that the two people who rated it next either gave one star and two stars, or both gave it one star.
[/ QUOTE ]
Five votes of five, two votes of three, gives an average vote of (5 * 5 + 2 * 3 ) / 7 ~= 4.43, which rounds down to a rating of four stars.
Ok my latest arc, Stuff 'n' Fluff has just been rated down.
After 2 people had rated it, it was 5 stars, one of those people was Blue Rabbit who gave feedback and pointed out a couple of spelling errors, which are now sorted. Huzzah thinks I, people are enjoying it, cue many smiles!
I got to check it now......3 ratings....now 3 stars!...and no bloody feedback!
Now, if this is based on averages, I reckon that has to be at least a 1 or 2 star rating to get 3 after 3 ratings.
Now, fair enough, if someone doesn't like it, then mark it down, but they could at least give some feedback as to why they didn't like it! Was it the storyline? Spelling? The bosses? What???
Now, how do I know this isn't someone griefing, or just being a pillock??
If feedback was mandatory, it would stop things like this a lot easier!
Seriously, I feel like not bothering anymore. I'm not averse to criticism, I welcome it. I'd rather know the truth about what people think so I can adjust the mish if I agree or just make my own decision about it based on feedback. Random people marking it down with no info is just demoralising
We built this city on Rock and Roll!