Yoyogame's Rating System, its weird Options

[2% Milk]

The problem with the current rating system is dishonest raters, i.e. people who vote a game low without looking at the game seriously, just to bash. Do you really think that increasing the precision to 1/10, will make any of those people vote anything else than the extreme possible vote? Whether 1.1 is possible or not, a 1.0 will have the biggest (negative) impact on the average rating, so that's what they're gonna vote.

I already know that the problem lies within people and not with the rating system. I will say it again: adding decimals is just for those who actually put a bit of thought into rating a game have more freedom.

And, fair 1 star ratings that the rater intended to be 1.4 but rounded off to 1, I think don't happen really that much... Especially with games worth less than 2 stars, people aren't going to take 20 minutes to make a review, as the game creator probably spent at most 20 minutes to make the game.

If a game isn't worth taking at least 5 minutes to make a solid review then it's not worth playing. Simple as that.

And the problem is also not that Frozzd is worth 4.4 or 4.5 or whatever. The problem is that lots of people vote a 1 for it (and lots of other good games). Decimal values aren't going to solve that.

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

If everyone spent 20 minutes to decide on their final rating (like I did above) no rating would be wrong.
Your point makes sense but it's not a very good one. You act as if ratings are just simple estimates as to what people think the quality of a game is when that is the exact opposite of what this topic is about. The GMC (or warrior, at least) is complaining about having the rating system too simple, not too complex.

And you REALLY think that by adding decimals, the people who usually just rate are going to say "Oh hey, I should give them a 1.1 instead of just a 1!" This topic is about fixing teh rating system, not simply adding to it. Not trying to be rude or anything, but I personally would rather just pick a 4 or 5, not somewhere in between.

Devise a rating system that stops people from rating the minimum possible and I'll get back to you.
As Erik Leppen said, the problem lies not within the system itself, it lies within the people who vote. Suck it up and actually make a good game where the good votes overrule the bad ones.

This post has been edited by 2% Milk: Aug 20 2008, 12:39 AM

[Boffel Productio...]

The only change you have to do with the rating system is that players actually have to play the game before rating it.

Else its good, but because people can rate without play it just make the system 50% worse

Example my game was rated 2 times now and none had actually played the game...

[Spikehead777]

If anything, don't worry about the rating system, but change the way you search for games. That way, you can search for a particular game you want to play. If there are excellent games that are poorly rated, flip the rating from show top rated to show low rated. If you happen upon a poorly rated game, and you think it's good, show it off! There is nothing wrong with rating those games you thought were good high, and those games that you though were bad, low. If anything it's the users that need to live with the rating system.

I don't visit the Yoyogames site, much less play games from there, so I'm not sure what all is available on searching and how the ratings are.

[gmXpert2000]

If a game isn't worth taking at least 5 minutes to make a solid review then it's not worth playing. Simple as that.

Not all the time. Many people can leave decent feedback in a simple comment; sometimes "I couldn't find anything wrong with it" is all a game creator needs. Then they know they're doing everything (or most everything) right. It's the unhelpful people who are unwanted, not the ones who write short comments.

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

So that means you're saying, that we should keep the possibility for a 1.0 rating... but delete anybody who chooses it, because they must obviously be a downrater.

[2% Milk]

If a game isn't worth taking at least 5 minutes to make a solid review then it's not worth playing. Simple as that.

Not all the time. Many people can leave decent feedback in a simple comment; sometimes "I couldn't find anything wrong with it" is all a game creator needs. Then they know they're doing everything (or most everything) right. It's the unhelpful people who are unwanted, not the ones who write short comments.

Let's say I were to make a game where all you do is move a soccer ball using the arrow keys. Standard gray background, just one object, one sprite, one room. Someone could say "I couldn't find anything wrong with it" but does that make it worth playing?
Also are you reading between the lines or something? (Or someone else's posts for that matter?) I never said that people who write short reviews are unwanted, just that they're a little lazy to not attach any thought to their ratings.

If a game isn't worth taking at least 5 minutes to make a solid review then it's not worth playing. Simple as that.

Not all the time. Many people can leave decent feedback in a simple comment; sometimes "I couldn't find anything wrong with it" is all a game creator needs. Then they know they're doing everything (or most everything) right. It's the unhelpful people who are unwanted, not the ones who write short comments.

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

So that means you're saying, that we should keep the possibility for a 1.0 rating... but delete anybody who chooses it, because they must obviously be a downrater.

I should be the one using ... I never said that we should delete anyone who uses a flat 1.0, here's what I said:

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding the word 'delete' in there...

This post has been edited by 2% Milk: Aug 20 2008, 12:21 AM

[gmXpert2000]

I should be the one using ... I never said that we should delete anyone who uses a flat 1.0, here's what I said:

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding the word 'delete' in there...

So now you're saying, that we shouldn't remove meaningless ratings?

This post has been edited by gmXpert2000: Aug 20 2008, 12:12 AM

[2% Milk]

I should be the one using ... I never said that we should delete anyone who uses a flat 1.0, here's what I said:

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding the word 'delete' in there...

So now you're saying, that we shouldn't remove meaningless ratings?

Why should we? YoYoGames themselves put the rating of 1 in the rating system, why should they automatically remove them?

[gmXpert2000]

I should be the one using ... I never said that we should delete anyone who uses a flat 1.0, here's what I said:

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding the word 'delete' in there...

So now you're saying, that we shouldn't remove meaningless ratings?

Why should we? YoYoGames themselves put the rating of 1 in the rating system, why should they automatically remove them?

I wasn't saying we should. You were the one to call 1.0 ratings meaningless.

[2% Milk]

I should be the one using ... I never said that we should delete anyone who uses a flat 1.0, here's what I said:

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding the word 'delete' in there...

So now you're saying, that we shouldn't remove meaningless ratings?

Why should we? YoYoGames themselves put the rating of 1 in the rating system, why should they automatically remove them?

I wasn't saying we should. You were the one to call 1.0 ratings meaningless.

I wasn't saying we should remove meaningless ratings... Anyway this argument serves no constructive purpose so I'm out.

This post has been edited by 2% Milk: Aug 20 2008, 03:06 AM

[gmXpert2000]

I wasn't saying we should remove meaningless ratings... Anyway this argument serves no constructive purpose so I'm out.

Argument? I thought we were just discussing whether or not it was a good idea to introduce decimals into ratings...

But either way, the only thing really to do now is wait for Mark's list to be implemented and see how it works out.

EDIT: Spelling mistake...

This post has been edited by gmXpert2000: Aug 20 2008, 04:17 AM

[2% Milk]

I wasn't saying we should remove meaningless ratings... Anyway this argument serves no constructive purpose so I'm out.

Argument? I thought we were just discussing whether or not it was a good idea to introduce decimals into ratings...

But either way, the only thing really to do now is wait for Mark's list to be implemented and see how it works out.

EDIT: Spelling mistake...

ar-gu-ment
noun
1 an exchange of diverging or opposite views
2 a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong

This post has been edited by 2% Milk: Aug 20 2008, 06:03 AM

[Falk Flyer]

You act as if ratings are just simple estimates as to what people think the quality of a game is when that is the exact opposite of what this topic is about. The GMC (or warrior, at least) is complaining about having the rating system too simple, not too complex.

I just noticed this statement now, and I have yet to find warrior's statement about thign sbeing too simple; in fact, his first suggestion was to rate games by five stars instead of six- seems liek that makes the ratings even less complex than they already are.

Suck it up and actually make a good game where the good votes overrule the bad ones.

So are you now saying that the rating system is fine and we should just hope for people to make better games? This topic has become more about the voters than the votes, and now you're blaming the game makers themselves?

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I wonder why nobody's thought of this idea already.
Why don't we have decimals for the ratings? Such as 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 etc...

Why should we? YoYoGames themselves put the rating of 1 in the rating system, why should they automatically remove them?

Devise a rating system that stops people from rating the minimum possible and I'll get back to you.

It looks to me as though you're jumping your opinions around a lot. Maybe you should take a side instead of changing your mind every other post...

[Erik Leppen]

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution.

Then why do you bring it up in his topic? This topic is about finding a solution to the problem of non-representative ratings, not about making the rating system more advanced.

I wonder why nobody's thought of this idea already.

Because other people think of solutions (sorry, couldn't resist saying that)

[2% Milk]

You act as if ratings are just simple estimates as to what people think the quality of a game is when that is the exact opposite of what this topic is about. The GMC (or warrior, at least) is complaining about having the rating system too simple, not too complex.

I just noticed this statement now, and I have yet to find warrior's statement about thign sbeing too simple; in fact, his first suggestion was to rate games by five stars instead of six- seems liek that makes the ratings even less complex than they already are.

Suck it up and actually make a good game where the good votes overrule the bad ones.

So are you now saying that the rating system is fine and we should just hope for people to make better games? This topic has become more about the voters than the votes, and now you're blaming the game makers themselves?

No, but I wasn't proposing decimal values as a solution. It's just easier to tell that a solid 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

I wonder why nobody's thought of this idea already.
Why don't we have decimals for the ratings? Such as 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 etc...

Why should we? YoYoGames themselves put the rating of 1 in the rating system, why should they automatically remove them?

Devise a rating system that stops people from rating the minimum possible and I'll get back to you.

It looks to me as though you're jumping your opinions around a lot. Maybe you should take a side instead of changing your mind every other post...

Maybe you should actually quote my posts in context instead of making it sound like I change my mind every post.

So I've been looking at the game ratings and I've noticed that yoyogames uses a six star system, yet there is like one game that even has five. Also there's a lot of games that have a four stars, which I think are not as good as some of the classics, such as jumper or seilkius. Also its not fair for games with a few ratings to be judged the same as those who have been rated more times.
So I think that yoyogames oughtta fix their rating system.

See that bold? That is the sentence where he says that it is too simple. He's asking for them to make it more complex as the games with a few ratings are judged the same as those who have been rated more times.
Also, I'm not trying to find a solution because it's a retarded effort. We may as well just go with NPT's method:

Make a 1 star rating - really worth 6 stars, that way the haters will really help the games they are trying to hurt.
Make a 5 star rating - really worth 1.3 stars, that way the fan-boys will really be hurting the games they are trying to prop.
Make a 3 star rating - randomly generate a value between 1 and 5, but don't make it like GM's random() function because it might return a zero, and don't forget to use floor() instead of ceil() and round().
Don't allow 4 star ratings, because all the good games seem to gravitate there anyway.
Make a 2 star rating - actually worth 2 stars, because nobody seems to rate games a 2. Maybe, you can make the star for two, bigger than the other stars, in case people just aren't seeing it.

Also for the last time about the decimal ratings: I figured "why don't they, (while they're already working on the rating system) add some more functionality to the rating system as well. For those of us who actually play the game, analyze it, and can actually come up with a solid rating." Also, I know I said

That way far less games will actually be deserving of a flat 1.0 / It's just easier to tell that 1.0 is a meaningless rating.

and you guys say that is contradicting myself, so here I will finally propose a solution: The 1.0 will be rigged with a virus that instantly formats the rater's hard drive. That will get rid of those haters fast.
There. A solution. Of course it wouldn't actually work, but neither would anything else anyone has thought up either.

Here's a basic summary of my posts in this topic (so I won't be misunderstood again ):
1. I suggest having decimals in the rating system to give serious raters more freedom, NOT to try and fix the down-rater problem.
2. As I suggested a lot earlier in this topic, don't show the rating until there is at least 5 votes. (Or more)
I'm not going to try to think of a solution to the down-rater problem. Knock yourselves out.

This post has been edited by 2% Milk: Aug 20 2008, 05:54 PM

[thebogeyman]

The rating system can't/won't get much better in my opinion. Sure there are downraters and upraters. But there is nothing you can really do about that. Sure, it would be nice if the games were more evenly spread out, because right now there are about 50 pages of 3.9 games, it would be a whole lot better if people actually allowed the system to use the 5.0+ as well. But even that is just too much to ask for, because it's just too late. 4.0 has become the "good" rating now. And that's etched into peoples' minds.

And usually the downraters just end up canceling out the people who give just about anything a 5 or 6 ("upraters", if you will).

[the Raven]

While some suggestions can be helpful, vague suggestions are not.

His comment was in no way vague.

If you don't like yoyogames rating system you can just leave. theres always 64digits, game maker station, or game maker games to go to.
64 DIGITS = rated by the public. ?/10
Game Maker Station = rated by the staff. ?/10
Game Maker Games = rated by the public. ?/5

You decide which one is better

YOYOGames has an interesting website, but I have never liked their way of rating the games. It's mostly unfair and very unprofessional.

[samscam]

This might be a stupid idea, but it will solve the downrate problem:
Every added game will start with 0 stars. For every x good votes (I.E.: For every 20 votest that are above 4 stars), a starts added to the rating. So, if the game has x·6 votes that are higher than 4, the game will have a 6 star rating. If anyone wants to downrate the game, it won't work because votes lower than 4 won't count and will just keep the stars as they are. With this system, you could also apply the relative system from the first page, where the game with the best rating gets 6 stars, and the lowest rated game gets 0.

[darkshado]

Well, if I were to devise a rating system for YYG I'd make it so that any with less than 5 or 10 ratings would be seen as unrated so that any downrater wouldn't see an immediate response to rating a game 1 star unless it had more than so many ratings where it would have less effect. I'd then remove any 'outliers' from the ratings, ie if a game was mostly given ratings of 4 or 5 stars then a rating of 1 star wouldn't count in the rating shown. Of course if downraters acted en masse then this wouldn't solve the problem but then again, not much would.

[Yourself]

His comment was in no way vague.

I didn't say his comment was vague, I said his suggestion was vague, because it was since he made no attempt to put forward an actual solution; it was just a complaint about a perceived problem. The post started out as nothing more than a musing with no real notion of what to do about the "problem".

[KC LC]

The rating system is NOT the source of the problem. The problem is the YoYo Games site design.

The solution is to give more games a chance at visibility -- i.e., more first pages. One way to do this is to have separate pages for different genres. Each game would be categorized in ONE particular genre (sorry, cross-genre games... you must pick ONE). There could be 10 -12 different genres.

The YYG front page would just provide links to those genre pages -- along with showing off a few "editor picks" that change periodically. The rest of the games would be on those other pages. This would give many more games visibility on the 1st or 2nd page of their particular genre. Games would be ranked ONLY within their genre -- not against all other games on the site.

I realize that YYG already has several genre categories you can pick, and see the rankings within them. But I'm suggesting this should actually replace the main ranking system. Eliminate it altogether. Instead, put all games into a particular genre where they only compete with other games in that same category.

I believe this is the way to satisfy more people, instead of monkeying with the rating system. As long as all games are ranked against each other in one large group, the problem will continue.