Require for 1-2 and 5 star ratings

hercooles130uscg

I think the Foundry should REQUIRE a review be written for a all 1, 2 and 5 star ratings.

Especially for 1 and 2 star ratings, players should not be able to hide behind anonymity of the internet because they want to be a jerk, vindictive, or just plain refused to read the disclaimers that a quest is story heavy or that players have to control over rewards.

I bet a lot less 1 star ratings will be handed out if the Authors can see who did it. Legitimate reviews are one thing, one star with NO REASON WHY hurts the Quest while providing zero feedback on what can make it better. Often times, you see one star ratings from people just wanting to be a HAMSTER.

In combination with forcing a written review, there needs to be a report review option that other players can click. So any decent human being will see a start rating with a review of "quest sucks" or "<random swear word>" or other useless feedback, after time it will be removed from the rating.

or have a reported review go to the GM and allow the Author to report it. However, abusive reporting of low (but legitimate reviews) will prevent the Author from doing this.

a one star review that reads "Quest needs a lot of work. Story made no sense, and spelling was almost un-readable" it a fine review for a 1 start.

Click 1 star and leaving no review is THE WORST THING ONE CAN DO to a Foundry Author in this game.

auricklemt

I don't care what number of stars is being given, a review should be required. Except that the recalcitrant types will leave useless reviews. Down-voting those kinds of reviews helps, but let's face it: most players don't read through more than a couple reviews, if any at all. So those votes for removal of a bad review will be few and far between.

There is an option that borrows from Amazon, where players can vote in favor of a review that they found helpful (positive or negative). Then the ones that get the up votes are always displayed on the first page of reviews.

shorlong

I'd just like to get A review...but after 24 hours...nothing....heh

hercooles130uscg

auricklemt wrote: »

I don't care what number of stars is being given, a review should be required. Except that the recalcitrant types will leave useless reviews. Down-voting those kinds of reviews helps, but let's face it: most players don't read through more than a couple reviews, if any at all. So those votes for removal of a bad review will be few and far between.

There is an option that borrows from Amazon, where players can vote in favor of a review that they found helpful (positive or negative). Then the ones that get the up votes are always displayed on the first page of reviews.

The reason for requiring a review of a 1 star rating if less about other players reading it and more about forcing players to be held accountable. If they want to rate something 1 star, they should be forced to leave a review, if their review is useless or vulgar or insulting, then the review can be reported and removed.

I don't care if you give me a 1 star and have a good reason, but leaving a one star just because you were in a bad mood, had a beef with the Author, or just plain felt like being a jerk is not acceptable.

kamaliicious

hercooles130uscg wrote: »

The reason for requiring a review of a 1 star rating if less about other players reading it and more about forcing players to be held accountable. If they want to rate something 1 star, they should be forced to leave a review, if their review is useless or vulgar or insulting, then the review can be reported and removed.

I don't care if you give me a 1 star and have a good reason, but leaving a one star just because you were in a bad mood, had a beef with the Author, or just plain felt like being a jerk is not acceptable.

The reviews will be along the lines of "it suxxors!" because you can't force people to write proper explanations of why they think it's 1 star.

I've two starred quests because I felt they weren't up to the average standard of the Foundry quests I've played.

zocat1

If only some ratings require a review you would skew the system towards the non-review required ratings (which is never good).

hercooles130uscg wrote: »

So any decent human being will see a start rating with a review of "quest sucks" or "<random swear word>" or other useless feedback, after time it will be removed from the rating.

A "great" "awesome" "liked it" review is the same quality of feedback as "sucks". It's useless. Should those be removed as well?

boydzinj

Here is my thoughts on reviews:

I got a one star review recently that said, "u suk"
Another 1 star review that said "too easy"
Yet another 1 star review that mentioned, "too hard"
I got a two star review that said, "Great map, hard mobs, funny story. good job." (i wonder what a review would have been for a 5 star?)
I got a 4 star review that told me, "bad humor, mobs thrown all over the place" (I wonder how many stars this person would have given if he thought it was a good foundry quest?)


I could list a few more... the point is... a few weird or one star reviews will not break or make a map. It is the average of them. If you made a good foundry quest and over 100 people have tried it... the average will iron out the weird 1 or 2 star reviews. I have more five star reviews than one and two stars combined. I try to read all the reviews. Sometimes they give me more insight that I have gotten by play testing my own foundry quest.

nezroy123

My favorite review on my quest is a 2-star that just says "hrmm".

This simple vocalization is so tantalizing, so vague, that I keep coming back to it, wondering. "hrmm" you got bad loot? "hrmm" you can't figure out how to use the review interface? "hrmm" you think I'm an idiot? "hrmm" you thought you were playing Tetris and just now realized you were playing Neverwinter? "hrmm" you are hungry and wondering what to eat for dinner?

Please, mysterious reviewer, please come back and tell me what your onomatopoeia was trying to convey!

zahinder

It's also helpful to figure out if someone is just griefing you. On STO there were some very stupid arguments on forums, and some folks, as a result, decided to go through and 1-star all the missions of folks they didn't like.

It would be really helpful to see if someone had, within a short span, 1-starred every mission of yours.

coanunn

hercooles130uscg wrote: »

The reason for requiring a review of a 1 star rating if less about other players reading it and more about forcing players to be held accountable. If they want to rate something 1 star, they should be forced to leave a review, if their review is useless or vulgar or insulting, then the review can be reported and removed.

I don't care if you give me a 1 star and have a good reason, but leaving a one star just because you were in a bad mood, had a beef with the Author, or just plain felt like being a jerk is not acceptable.

This smacks of "I want to be able to confront anyone who doesn't like my work". That is the only purpose to having a named attached to a review, you want the ability to track it to that person. Frankly I'm of the opinion ALL reviews should be anonymous. People can be asshats, and if you aren't prepared for that then perhaps you shouldn't be opening yourself to this type of scenario (your effort being rated by others). That said, people are far more likely to be candid and honest about their disapproval if they do not fear you raging at them about how they "just dont' get it".

kelplankton

All this would to is lead to a million billion "its bad" or "its good" reviews with no content, it wouldn't encourage meaningful feedback at all.

zovya

I don't know. I've never seen anything constructive attached to a 1 star review.

My favorite 1 star review was:

"You should do the world a favor and never write another foundry quest again" That was giggle-worthy. At least he put me down in a funny way.

But seriously, 1 stars and 5 stars never really have anything constructive to say. Not in my quest reviews anyway.

kelplankton

The majority of 1 star reviews I get are usually "loot sucks, wasnt for my class" or "too hard" while all the 4-5 star reviews praise the challenge level of the quest.

Different players have different expectations and likes/dislikes for content, that I can understand, but all the "loot sucks voted 1" reviews are super dumb and not even something I can fix, even if that WAS helpful feedback.

apocrs1980

coanunn wrote: »

This smacks of "I want to be able to confront anyone who doesn't like my work". That is the only purpose to having a named attached to a review, you want the ability to track it to that person. Frankly I'm of the opinion ALL reviews should be anonymous. People can be asshats, and if you aren't prepared for that then perhaps you shouldn't be opening yourself to this type of scenario (your effort being rated by others). That said, people are far more likely to be candid and honest about their disapproval if they do not fear you raging at them about how they "just dont' get it".

This isn't entirely true, In my case a review written wishing death upon my entire family and telling me to go @#$% my mother was over the top and uncalled for.
These reviews should be redacted as I believe they break the ULA and are some what hostile in nature. Trying to provoke a negative response because they enjoy a flame war more than playing the game.
The @handle is at the top of the review so you can see who posted it, I suggest reporting these people right away for ULA violations through the ticketing system under behavior.

firefly113

I always appreciate being able to see who leaves what reviews. There have been cases while I was working on missions in the AE in CoX where someone left a review which was a bit vague. I had a few very good discussions about what they felt could have been done better with my AE. But, maturity goes both ways. If one person isn't willing to give it, it's a hopeless process.

CoX was a community full of great people. As much as I can hope the same for Neverwinter, sadly, this probably won't be the case.

duskdweller78

I don't know if we need a mandatory review, I think we just need Cryptic to remove the anonymity when the user just rates the quest.

It will benefit the quest author in many ways, including and not limited to:
1> jerks won't 1-star you just because they can do it anonymously.
2> you know who 1-starred you, and you will be able to ask him what went so bad (no trolling or stuff, just a polite discussion between two sentient beings).
3> you know who 1-starred you, this guy is usually the one you agreed to trade reviews with, and you didn't mindlessly 5-star his quest (this happened to me yesterday, I know who you are weirdo ). This will allow us to avoid wasting more time reviewing their quests.
4> It will be possible for us to find out if there are some organized quest bashers (for personal or third party profit), and ask Cryptic to have a look at it with concrete proofs.

zahinder

It's a catch-22. On the one hand, it's good to know who's 1 starring everyone. On the other hand, you don't want people doing retaliatory strike on all the fools who don't appreciate their brilliance.

zovya

Devil's advocate: Sometimes a quest needs one star. It's nice to give it without worry of revenge.

boydzinj

I would not worry about it. If it is good, and you can get a few people to view your foundry quests... then it does not matter. However, it is that 100 or so hump to get past. How do you get over 100 people to do your foundry quest? Just remember, if you do one about barbecue sauce and tell people upfront that it is meant to be hard and you want 2+ players to play it.... dont be scared to get 1 star reviews saying they hate bbq and would never eat something like that. Followed by someone who states, "TOO EASY on solo" 3 stars. Then 1 star, "TOO HARD on solo" then 1 star for "u suk"

Those do not bother me, i just look for trends and those that right descriptions and information i take with a grain of sand and see if I can fix it and change it around. I had a bunch of invisible walls - I took them out after a while. I even left a few and made them disappear when specific quests were completed.

Then there is the flip side of that... what if my quest was a terrible quest? I had a bunch of typos and the logic of it... made no sense?

ranncore

I think this is a good idea.

kia7

I agree. We need a report feature, a like/dislike button and more space for reviews. It's impossible not to be vague with your critique when the space you're given is so limited.

I think this thread illustrates the urgency of such an implementation quite nicely:

http://nw-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?235902-Why-are-you-rating-me-down

coanunn

apocrs1980 wrote: »

This isn't entirely true, In my case a review written wishing death upon my entire family and telling me to go @#$% my mother was over the top and uncalled for.
These reviews should be redacted as I believe they break the ULA and are some what hostile in nature. Trying to provoke a negative response because they enjoy a flame war more than playing the game.
The @handle is at the top of the review so you can see who posted it, I suggest reporting these people right away for ULA violations through the ticketing system under behavior.

And while I agree that violations that like need an ability to be reported, investigated and handled by Cryptic I will never believe that you having the handle of the person who did it is a good thing. No, there is no need for you the user to know who left that comment, and trust me there is a back end that will let the devs track the person down and take action for TOS violations such as you are talking about. Anonymity is a double edged sword, it can give the ability for someone to rate it 1 star when it needs 1 star but not be singled out as "just not getting it" but it also lets some of the lowest common denominator to act out. It is not our job as players to police those folks though, there is a reason police enforce the law and not the citizens.

dadeleviathan

Disallowing anonymous reviews would open a can of worms. Not everyone who uses the foundry is amazing. There are people who are going to churn out HAMSTER. Some of those people will give you flowers and cake and hugs for every word of constructive criticism you give them. Others will light you on fire and shoot you out of a canon for not giving them higher than 3 stars. People are not going to honest in their reviews if they feel that they are going to have to risk getting nasty tells from angry foundry authors.

I do, however, think requiring the review field be filled out for 1, 2, and 5 star reviews is reasonable. Especially if the game becomes popular, there will be players who will grief foundry authors by review bombing them. It WILL happen. It's only a question of how often. Giving both devs and authors tools to combat that is a good thing. For example, you are not allowed to give a 1, 2 or 5 star review without an x number of words review. Also allow reviews to be reported to either not having words, for being vulgar, or for being nonsensical (i.e. i'm rating your dungeon a 1 because it had no voice acting). This allows devs to have the power to remove undeserved negative reviews, so a foundry author doesn't see his foundry quest suddenly start nose-diving, because a bunch of players decided it would be fun to play through his quest, and then rate him all 1s, thus reducing his 50 reviews from an average of 4 stars, to a measly average of 2.

valkyryja

It would be nice to see the handle of anyone who rates the quest, regardless of whether they left a comment or not. I received my first one-star review, no comment, no way to see the handle, and brought my rating from a 4.4 to a 4.2. . . this just happened to take place a couple days after an instance of ridiculous guild drama. Of course, there's no way to confirm that it was from them without a handle. But then, how many more times is it going to happen because a few people are unstable?

I can see how it can guilt people into up-reviewing things that possibly deserve one star. I don't know.

hercooles130uscg

zocat1 wrote: »

If only some ratings require a review you would skew the system towards the non-review required ratings (which is never good).




A "great" "awesome" "liked it" review is the same quality of feedback as "sucks". It's useless. Should those be removed as well?

Which is why I said a 5 star should require a review as well, and a review should be at least a sentence long.

However someone saying they liked it or it's great, at least tells the author they did something right. Where as a one star rating of it sucked does not tell the author where they can improve. But yes, even if you loved it, you can find something more to say aside from "great" and those should not count as reviews, because that does not help any other player searching, and just makes it look like you just really didn't care enough about the quest to leave a better review, despite you thinking that it deserved the 5 star you just gave it.

Every rating I have on my is 4-5 stars, and they ALL left pretty good reviews, at least a sentence to a paragraph long. Reviews that were helpful to me as well as other players. Yet the one single 1-star rating I have is mysteriously silent, hiding behind the internet.

hercooles130uscg

coanunn wrote: »

This smacks of "I want to be able to confront anyone who doesn't like my work". That is the only purpose to having a named attached to a review, you want the ability to track it to that person. Frankly I'm of the opinion ALL reviews should be anonymous. People can be asshats, and if you aren't prepared for that then perhaps you shouldn't be opening yourself to this type of scenario (your effort being rated by others). That said, people are far more likely to be candid and honest about their disapproval if they do not fear you raging at them about how they "just dont' get it".

I am sorry, but that may be how you feel, but don't shove words in my mouth.

If someone is too afraid of the repercussions of their one star rating, it is because they rated a one star for a reason other then a legitimate experience. ya there might be vindictive authors out there, but as it stand now, there are a lot of vindictive players that can give 1 star ratings for any reason they wish and there is no way to hold THEM accountable. SO why should they be free to take offense at some comment that that was said in general chat or the forums, and just go and take it out in the authors Foundry content?

No, if someone does not like my work, and they can tell me why they don't, a reason that actually takes the quest into account (and not,"you gave me a bad review so I one starred you") then I can take critism and walk away. If I do not agree with there reasoning, like they just really hated the combat, then there is nothing I can do and I was unable to please that person, oh well, but at least I knew it was something that could have been fixed.

This whole "people can be asshats" is the most cop out excuse that anyone can use. There is never any reason for someone to be an ***, even on the internet. The reason it is so rampant is because no one is ever held accountable for the stuff they do or say anymore. If you want to rate something one star, then you **** well better be able to explain why. If some author retaliates against a legitimate response, then that author is stepping over the line and needs to be dealt with. Just letting people get away with being jerks because "its the internet" is only making things worse.

And in fact, people are FAR LESS likely to be respectful if they know they can hide behind anonymity, the internet proves this every day.

The fact is, griefing will happen. It happened in CO, probably in STO, and it will in Neverwinter. Entire guilds would down rate a quest of a "competitor" or someone they did not like, dropping ratings an entire point. Why did this happen? Because no one was ever held to a higher standard, and they were allowed to be *** hats with zero fear of repercussions.

coanunn

hercooles130uscg wrote: »

I am sorry, but that may be how you feel, but don't shove words in my mouth.

If someone is too afraid of the repercussions of their one star rating, it is because they rated a one star for a reason other then a legitimate experience. ya there might be vindictive authors out there, but as it stand now, there are a lot of vindictive players that can give 1 star ratings for any reason they wish and there is no way to hold THEM accountable. SO why should they be free to take offense at some comment that that was said in general chat or the forums, and just go and take it out in the authors Foundry content?

No, if someone does not like my work, and they can tell me why they don't, a reason that actually takes the quest into account (and not,"you gave me a bad review so I one starred you") then I can take critism and walk away. If I do not agree with there reasoning, like they just really hated the combat, then there is nothing I can do and I was unable to please that person, oh well, but at least I knew it was something that could have been fixed.

This whole "people can be asshats" is the most cop out excuse that anyone can use. There is never any reason for someone to be an ***, even on the internet. The reason it is so rampant is because no one is ever held accountable for the stuff they do or say anymore. If you want to rate something one star, then you **** well better be able to explain why. If some author retaliates against a legitimate response, then that author is stepping over the line and needs to be dealt with. Just letting people get away with being jerks because "its the internet" is only making things worse.

And in fact, people are FAR LESS likely to be respectful if they know they can hide behind anonymity, the internet proves this every day.

The fact is, griefing will happen. It happened in CO, probably in STO, and it will in Neverwinter. Entire guilds would down rate a quest of a "competitor" or someone they did not like, dropping ratings an entire point. Why did this happen? Because no one was ever held to a higher standard, and they were allowed to be *** hats with zero fear of repercussions.

You sir are deluded that the whole world works the way you work and think. As I said there is a reason we have police officers to uphold the law rather than allowing people to do it for themselves. In your own words the person who gave you 1 star is "Every rating I have on my is 4-5 stars, and they ALL left pretty good reviews, at least a sentence to a paragraph long. Reviews that were helpful to me as well as other players. Yet the one single 1-star rating I have is mysteriously silent, hiding behind the internet." and you go on to say you seek a way to "way to hold THEM accountable". That sir is where your idea is flawed. NO ONE has to answer to you as to why they rated something.

Cryptic has standards for what is a "valid" rating and what is not, and THEY will uphold those and THEY can track that user down and hold them accountable EVEN with an anonymous 1 star rating because there is a data trail behind it in the database. YOU as a user have no need of that information.