[Questionare]

This random forum game idea came to me to get more people to play your games-Here's how it works, its very simple.


First, you follow the link to the game above you, and play it- After playing their game, you must rate and comment on it.

You must post your relevant comment and rating of the game on this topic after you are done playing it.

Once you have the said information included in your post, you must post a link to one of your games, or just a game in general. (though I'm not really sure why you would do that.)

This post has been edited by KC LC: 04 February 2010 - 01:48 AM

[KC LC]

@Questionare: your intentions are good, but posting random game reviews in a single Community topic isn't useful. Game reviews belong in a dedicated topic for that particular game. So let's not do this.

But if you want to discuss ways we can encourage better (or more) reviews on the GMC, that's fine. Maybe someone has suggestions for GMC policies about reviewing, or suggestions for changes we could make to encourage more reviews.

We all know there's plenty of room for improvement, but our goal should be more reviews posted in the game's topic.

[paul23]

Well you know I always liked to have a "dedicated staff-review-section". - Where I mean with "staff-review" not only the moderators etc, but a moderate group of writers (though limited in size, so that it keeps quality above quantity) who're doing a few reviews a day.. (Not everybody should do there a review, but at least 4-6 reviews should be posted each day)..

[superjoebob]

KC LC, on Feb 3 2010, 05:18 PM, said:

But if you want to discuss ways we can encourage better (or more) reviews on the GMC, that's fine. Maybe someone has suggestions for GMC policies about reviewing, or suggestions for changes we could make to encourage more reviews.

The only thing I can see really working to increase review is to introduce the sort of system Newgrounds has, where everyone has a level and they get skill points for reviewing games. Unfortunately that would be more something for the YoYo Games website, as I don't see how it could ever be incorporated here .

paul23, on Feb 3 2010, 05:25 PM, said:

Well you know I always liked to have a "dedicated staff-review-section". - Where I mean with "staff-review" not only the moderators etc, but a moderate group of writers (though limited in size, so that it keeps quality above quantity) who're doing a few reviews a day.. (Not everybody should do there a review, but at least 4-6 reviews should be posted each day)..

That's actually a damn good idea, I bet you could find a lot of good writers who would be willing to review games *Volunteers*.

This post has been edited by superjoebob: 04 February 2010 - 01:40 AM

[KC LC]

paul said:

I always liked to have a "dedicated staff-review-section". - Where I mean with "staff-review" not only the moderators etc, but a moderate group of writers (though limited in size, so that it keeps quality above quantity) who're doing a few reviews a day..

Being a moderator doesn't have much to do with being a good game reviewer. But I like your idea of a "dedicated review team" chosen from the member ranks for their reviewing skill. It could include moderators, if they're qualified.

Where would the reviews be posted? In the game topic, or in a separate forum?

[coolist]

KC LC, on Feb 3 2010, 08:41 PM, said:

paul said:

I always liked to have a "dedicated staff-review-section". - Where I mean with "staff-review" not only the moderators etc, but a moderate group of writers (though limited in size, so that it keeps quality above quantity) who're doing a few reviews a day..

Being a moderator doesn't have much to do with being a good game reviewer. But I like your idea of a "dedicated review team" chosen from the member ranks for their reviewing skill. It could include moderators, if they're qualified.

Where would the reviews be posted? In the game topic, or in a separate forum?

If they were in game topics then you would have to make it clear that it is a special review.

[BBGaming]

I'd support a re-incarnation of the "staff choice" forum, only with the aforementioned 'reviewer-group'.

[paul23]

KC LC, on Feb 4 2010, 02:41 AM, said:

paul said:

I always liked to have a "dedicated staff-review-section". - Where I mean with "staff-review" not only the moderators etc, but a moderate group of writers (though limited in size, so that it keeps quality above quantity) who're doing a few reviews a day..

Being a moderator doesn't have much to do with being a good game reviewer. But I like your idea of a "dedicated review team" chosen from the member ranks for their reviewing skill. It could include moderators, if they're qualified.

Where would the reviews be posted? In the game topic, or in a separate forum?

Uhm that's what I ment by "not only moderators" (Actually I think mods have more than enough to do already )
Well I *think* the staff-review forum would be a good idea.. If they are posted in the game topic they are either lost because of newer topics, or -if the game is popular enough- lost in the topic after the page flips over. (since I think it's most fair to say that each game should only be visited by such a staff-reviewer once, thus a review at page 3 is never going to be read when page number 5 is reached).
So I think a new (sub) forum would be best. Only thing I fear is that again the popularity of the game drives certain reviews to the top and others "directly" to the bottom, I don't suppose it's possible to make a "custom" order for a certain board, thus ordering it by date-of-topiccreation seems best I think.

[KC LC]

paul said:

Only thing I fear is that again the popularity of the game drives certain reviews to the top and others "directly" to the bottom

Sounds like you're suggesting that topics in the "review" forum would be open for new posts. I think that's a bad idea. That would mean having two active topics about the same game running in parallel in two different forums.

I'd prefer to see members of the review team just post in the regular game topic. Or maybe post a game review in a dedicated forum that's closed to other posts.

[paul23]

KC LC, on Feb 4 2010, 03:00 AM, said:

paul said:

Only thing I fear is that again the popularity of the game drives certain reviews to the top and others "directly" to the bottom

Sounds like you're suggesting that topics in the "review" forum would be open for new posts. I think that's a bad idea. That would mean having two topics about the same game running in parallel in two different forums.

True, though the intention of the review-comments is to comment on the review what agree/disagree you with the reviewer. But I guess that wouldn't work out. - Well in that case it would be by order of topic-starting anyways.

[superjoebob]

What if the members of the review team where to pick games they deemed worthy of review, and then post the review for them in a separate forum dedicated to staff reviews?

[NakedPaulToast]

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it, however the guidelines should indicate that there be no expectation of correspondence from the staff, as to why the review doesn't show up.
  
• If it is well written, thorough and meets the forum requirements, it will become visible. If it doesn't meet the standards, it won't become visible. Simple as that. No whining, no complaining.
  
• No responses to review topics from the membership.
  
• Thoughtful and prolific reviewers could then be considered to moderate that forum, or bypass the mod preview step.

[makerofthegames]

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 09:31 PM, said:

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it

That just ruined it for me right there.

This post has been edited by makerofthegames: 04 February 2010 - 02:39 AM

[Obj_Control]

Wouldn't this require a standardized system? Games could be broken down into many categories, but for simplicity's sake, lets use graphics, story, and gamplay. These would vary among reviewers, so we would need examples of 0s and examples of prefect 10s, and a system whereas every reviewer reviews in a similar fashion. In the w.i.p. section, reviews are worthless because they usually are done from biased point of views. i.e: "I've seen better. 0."

[NakedPaulToast]

makerofthegames, on Feb 3 2010, 09:41 PM, said:

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 09:31 PM, said:

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it

That just ruined it for me right there.

Why?

[Obj_Control]

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 08:00 PM, said:

makerofthegames, on Feb 3 2010, 09:41 PM, said:

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 09:31 PM, said:

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it

That just ruined it for me right there.

Why?

Lots of people posting = Many posts. Many posts = A lot of mod preview. Mod preview = Work for staff. Work for staff = Burden to staff.

[makerofthegames]

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 10:00 PM, said:

makerofthegames, on Feb 3 2010, 09:41 PM, said:

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 09:31 PM, said:

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it

That just ruined it for me right there.

Why?

Because moderator preview and easy on the staff don't mix well.

[Revel]

makerofthegames, on Feb 3 2010, 08:40 PM, said:

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 10:00 PM, said:

makerofthegames, on Feb 3 2010, 09:41 PM, said:

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 09:31 PM, said:

I think a special forum could work, and without becoming to much of a burden on the staff.

Consider the following:

• A forum that is Mod previewed,
  
• Any member can post to it

That just ruined it for me right there.

Why?

Because moderator preview and easy on the staff don't mix well.

That's why they are here. No one is preventing them from grabbing a few more people to do the job.

[NakedPaulToast]

Quote

Lots of people posting = Many posts. Many posts = A lot of mod preview. Mod preview = Work for staff. Work for staff = Burden to staff.

You've just described the constraints for what used to be the experts forum.

Basically a forum with extremely high expectations. As this forum would be.

According to KC, that forum was empty, it was not a burden.

Even the most idiotic amongst us, who see a forum with just a few well written reviews, can probably figure out there idiotic posts aren't welcome. And if they can't, then after pressing submit a few times, they'll figure it out.

A high traffic forum defaulted to mod preview, is a lot of work. A low traffic forum defaulted to mod preview, is not. Especially after it has become established.

[superjoebob]

NakedPaulToast, on Feb 3 2010, 06:31 PM, said:

[*]A forum that is Mod previewed,
[*]Any member can post to it, however the guidelines should indicate that there be no expectation of correspondence from the staff, as to why the review doesn't show up.
[*]If it is well written, thorough and meets the forum requirements, it will become visible. If it doesn't meet the standards, it won't become visible. Simple as that. No whining, no complaining.
[*]No responses to review topics from the membership.
[*]Thoughtful and prolific reviewers could then be considered to moderate that forum, or bypass the mod preview step.

The problem here is that no one is reviewing people's games. I'm not sure that taking peoples games and putting them into a strictly moderated forum is going to gain them any quality reviews. If people are going to write good reviews, why aren't they doing it in the creations forum right now?