Players’ Reviews

[ancestral]

Not sure why this bothers me so much… but it does:

Can you add an apostrophe at the end of this thread’s subject name, to make it Players’ Reviews? Otherwise the subject reads like these are reviews of players (which is just a horrible idea).

[Dugi]

I will try to drop the specific problems, because some important points about the reviews organisation were raised. I am not trying to tell that I hate somebody or not (this is different from suspicions that else somebody hates me).

When I was listing the 8 problems with the review, I described them as reasons why I found it heavily biased, not why it should be heavily biased.

In my opinion, people have rated all the add-ons too highly. Do note it wasn't the worst possible score.

Yes, but it looked like worst possible score with a little bit of concealement. I perfectly agree that most campaigns got too many points in everything, of the kind 10 is brilliant, 9 is pretty good, 8 is good, but not particularly good, 7 is not bad, but having issues, 6 is not good, but serving its purpose, 5 is lower mediocre, 4 and less are various levels of heavy crappiness. If you see usual reviews for games, 70% are usually the worse games, 50% are pretty bad. I did not want to change this thread because everything that I considered less good but not bad would look like worst ever, so I followed the trend. The one who breaks it looks like the worst basher ever (and with combination with other indications about vengeful intentions).

Do I imply those campaigns DO have good dialog? Comparing it to something else doesn't make either better in my opinion.

Mainline is a standard, if I find something like the worse of mainline, I describe it as mediocre. The reviews should be conform to a certain level. If 6/10 is very good in your opinion, let the others know that you oppose to the mainstream ranking. The review of AtS giving it 10/10 for everything is the other extremity of this, if you have seen something better or see some flaws, don't give 10 (default era units are animated and therefore unquestionably better than AtS units, and if To Lands Unknown has 10 for visual part...), even the guy reviewing my campaign was trying not to be so positive.

Seriously, we should make some more rules for the subjective ranking, to prevent discrepancies like this.

Another point is that if you dislike something, without catching what the others like about it (this campaign was actually besides story that you didn't like also about building an army of recalls, which you never did as it seems, and starting from other chapters that you obviously did was meant only as an option for the case of showstopper bugs, not exactly balanced or something), don't review it, or at least try to understand what the people like about it. I don't review hip hop albums, because it would be a meaningless stream of bashing nobody would really read after a few lines, although presenting a different and unusual opinion (though undeniably true). I don't review modern art, because I believe that there is something behind it I can't see.

Can you add an apostrophe at the end of this thread’s subject name, to make it Players’ Reviews? Otherwise the subject reads like these are reviews of players (which is just a horrible idea).

Good idea. I like grammar nazism too.

[Astoria]

(this campaign was actually besides story that you didn't like also about building an army of recalls, which you never did as it seems, and starting from other chapters that you obviously did was meant only as an option for the case of showstopper bugs, not exactly balanced or something), don't review it, or at least try to understand what the people like about it.

This is untrue. First of all, I fear there has been a miscommunication about how I played the add-on. I first played chapter 6-7-8-9 before playing 1-2-3-4-5, and I don't think that changes anything for the 'army of recalls'. Also, I have tried to understand what people like about it so much, and that was also the reason I didn't quit after 5 scenarios. I'm a very big fan of RPGs like Diablo 2, and also RPG wesnoth campaigns/scenarios but I still don't think it's good. To echo vultraz's words again, let's stop cluttering this thread and move the discussion somewhere else.

[vultraz]

Another point is that if you dislike something, without catching what the others like about it (this campaign was actually besides story that you didn't like also about building an army of recalls, which you never did as it seems, and starting from other chapters that you obviously did was meant only as an option for the case of showstopper bugs, not exactly balanced or something), don't review it, or at least try to understand what the people like about it. I don't review hip hop albums, because it would be a meaningless stream of bashing nobody would really read after a few lines, although presenting a different and unusual opinion (though undeniably true). I don't review modern art, because I believe that there is something behind it I can't see.

You can review something you dislike; it's call an outsider's point of view. You're supposed to want reviews and opinions of everyone, not just the people who love your work. And that, I'll be honest, is what it comes across as you want: No more bad reviews for your campaign or any other.

The review of AtS giving it 10/10 for everything is the other extremity of this, if you have seen something better or see some flaws, don't give 10 (default era units are animated and therefore unquestionably better than AtS units, and if To Lands Unknown has 10 for visual part...), even the guy reviewing my campaign was trying not to be so positive.

Firstly, just because they're not all animated doesn't mean they're worse than mainline. I personally love the Chaos and Shaxthal factions in AtS and IftU. Not all are animated; does that demean their worth to me as a player? Yes, they would be even better with animations, I'll grant you that, but that doesn't mean they're bad without them.

Secondly, AtS and TLU have two very different visual styles. TLU went for all out amazing new graphics, and should get a 10. AtS went for a more subtle approach, using custom units, items, terrain, and well done maps to make an enjoyable visual experience. You cannot compare apples and oranges and say the apple isn't as good as the orange because it's red and not orange.

I consider AtS and IftU to be the best campaigns for Wesnoth, and I believe AtS deserves the 10 I gave it, and so will IftU after shadowm gets done revamping it.

[taptap]

Negative reviews:

Yes, negative reviews will happen. It hit Dugi's campaign first, but it won't be the last negative review. (And some mainline campaigns are just lucky they aren't included ) In my opinion, it isn't necessary to answer to reviews, to review reviews, to question reviewers intentions or synthesize reviews to somehow reduce the level of criticism - if there is a dozen reviews per campaign and the page is hopelessly cluttered, it might be necessary to cut down some of them for practical reasons, but this day isn't close. (And even then I would tend to keep the most telling reviews, not necessarily the middling ones.) Having all the criticism and praise out in public is the whole point of having reviews, after all. Also, readers are not dumb, when I read what feels like an obviously biased and unfair negative book review I do sometimes buy the book because of it.

General:

We probably have to add a "reviewed version" so people have a chance to realize whether major changes happened since the review. I would cut the description part and refer to the parent page. I personally won't include numbers in my reviews. I share the feeling that the marks tend to be too high too often and the whole thing easily turns to a competition between campaigns instead of being a service to players. Without numbers everything has to be expressed in sentences - and then the reviewer has to reason, simply "this is good/bad" doesn't convince anyone, but if you give reasons the reader has something to work with.

Legends of the Invincibles:

I have nothing to say about this campaign and personally never touched it because of name, L4 custom units and scenario count, but if you want to discuss it in particular there is a campaign development thread here: http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php ... ead#unread

[Dugi]

You can review something you dislike; it's call an outsider's point of view. You're supposed to want reviews and opinions of everyone, not just the people who love your work. And that, I'll be honest, is what it comes across as you want: No more bad reviews for your campaign or any other.

Reviewing things you don't like usually ends up by bashing anything, and you cannot tell from it what was really bad and what didn't impress you and prejudices took their effect. This particular negative post bashes anything, and it could be really easily shortened to 'I think it sucks, I don't understand why others like it'. That is, unhelpful at all, just to frustrate and deceive its author. And playing something just to be able to review it, without actually enjoying anything frustrates the reviewer and the frustration then flows into the review (I felt exactly like this when I was playing Assassin's Creed III and wanted to finish it so that I could make some conclusions about its quality).
The only one review rule was from the start intended to prevent stuff like this (and I did not expect to happen to me). One super positive review, one super negative review. What can a reader tell from it?

Another problem with negative reviews is that you can't tell what is the opinion of the majority. That is why it should be one synthesis of multiple reviews by many people. You agree that bumbadabums' and your opinion about my campaign is different from the opinion of many others, so a synthesis might be made, based on the positive review (you agree that it is the opinion of majority, I think), adding that not everyone will come to like it (maybe somehow expanding this statement). There might be one thread for reviews put together and some (invisible) reviews people would add (I agree with the current one would be needed in many cases, I believe, people who disagree with something will post about it more naturally).

Regarding your AtS review (didn't realise it was yours initially) - I am not telling that AtS does not deserve a total 10/10. It does, I think that too. But you have noted its flaws and gave for nearly all partial scores it could have 10/10. 10/10 obviously means that you can't think of any problem it has (except possible problems with conception), and in the case of AtS, animations are missing (that is a big flaw, no matter how good their baseframes look while headbutting, but maybe some people have less problems with unanimated units than me). The reviews should not be totally subjective, you should try to be as objective as possible from what you know.

[Astoria]

Another problem with negative reviews is that you can't tell what is the opinion of the majority. That is why it should be one synthesis of multiple reviews by many people. You agree that bumbadadabums' and your opinion about my campaign is different from the opinion of many others, so a synthesis might be made, based on the positive review (you agree that it is the opinion of majority, I think), adding that not everyone will come to like it (maybe somehow expanding this statement). There might be one thread for reviews put together and some (invisible) reviews people would add (I agree with the current one would be needed in many cases, I believe, people who disagree with something will post about it more naturally).

I don't think a synthesis is good for reviews. I think it's best to just list all the reviews and let the reader decide which one he agrees with.

[Dugi]

I first played chapter 6-7-8-9 before playing 1-2-3-4-5

Sorry, but I don't tend to believe you here, because you have stated shortly before that you have played 'part of epizode 1 and epizode 2'.

I don't think a synthesis is good for reviews. I think it's best to just list all the reviews and let the reader decide which one he agrees with.

And is there a way that would let him decide?

If you have problems about misspelling your nickname, make up something easier to remember (I am sure that misspelling your nickname is not any insult for you, because it does not sound like your real name or something).

And after all, everybody ignored my point about a need for some kind of generalised rating to achieve some conformity between the reviews and make them more informative.

[Astoria]

Sorry, but I don't tend to believe you here, because you have stated shortly before that you have played 'part of epizode 1 and epizode 2'.

That's the confusion I talked about. I thought the naming was Episode 1: Chapter 4 for example. So with episode 2 I meant everything in the post-fall part.

If you have problems about misspelling your nickname, make up something easier to remember (I am sure that misspelling your nickname is not any insult for you, because it does not sound like your real name or something).

My nickname is above each of my posts. I don't think it's a lot of effort to look at it when posting. (You can scroll down in the reply screen even, or scroll up if it's a quick reply)

[Dugi]

If you mistake the names of structures of something you are talking about, you can't expect people to write your hard-to-remember nickname correctly.

Also, I have written a lot of things in my post from 6:01 pm, and you replied just to a small part of it, mostly the less important things.

[Astoria]

If you mistake the names of structures of something you are talking about, you can't expect people to write your hard-to-remember nickname correctly. Also, I have written a lot of things in my post from 6:01 pm, and you replied just to a small part of it, mostly the less important things.

As I said, if you want to discuss this more, please move this discussion elsewhere (preferably IRC).

[Dugi]

I was not speaking about personal affairs, just your quick replies have perfectly concealed what I was trying to tell lately:

Negative reviews tend to bash anything. Just see a bunch of negative reviews for other things. It is usually full of bashing everything, with short pauses mentioning that something didn't suck as much. They aren't very informative, and usually tell approximately the same thing, no matter what is reviewed. Ending either with a score like 50% (because 30% should be worse than nothing already, 50% is neutral, average, boring and nothing new) or with scores close to 0% (because they spoke about negative things only).
This means that the negative reviews bear little information, and there is not much reason why should they be posted. Everything has its haters. I know of people who found IftU and AtS boring, although it is considered to be the best piece of work ever by majority (including me, but pleeeaase, animate the units).

[taptap]

You can make exactly the same argument against positive reviews. Something like: "If you like something often you can't really tell what about it you like and when describing it all is sugar-coated "good plot, good scenarios, good units, love it" and you don't have a clear eye for what is bad. You like the author and don't want to offend him etc. etc. Those reviews feel better, but are just as uninformative as outright bashing."

The opinion of the majority simply doesn't matter when you write a review. A review is personal by nature. With more than one review you have a glimpse of different opinions (e.g. how rotten tomatoes aggregates film reviews), but there never will be the single objective review. If I find BMR unbalanced or the story of IftU / AtS broken or the premise of other campaigns where elves happily genocide all orcs outright shocking I will write so in my review regardless of majority opinion. If we police individual opinions how will we ever get an idea what other people think, yet alone majority opinion?

Ultimately, a review isn't a verdict on a campaign but help for players to decide what to play and preferences definitely differ.

[Iris]

My nickname is above each of my posts. I don't think it's a lot of effort to look at it when posting. (You can scroll down in the reply screen even, or scroll up if it's a quick reply)

Note that there are also quote buttons for individual posts under “topic review” (after the post options section) in the post editor when starting a reply.

[Pentarctagon]

I'm a bit confused. What's even the point of having reviews if negative ones aren't allowed? The things people dislike about a campaign are just as important as the things that they liked.