Positive-Only Rating System?

wuhsin · August 2013

Vote LIKE/+1 if you support the idea of a rating system that only allows you to Like or +1 quests with a written review, and determines their listing based on the number of Likes/+1's. The reason I'm proposing this idea is because I feel the current system is too negative, it hurts authors to lose adjusted rating points they worked hard to earn, and I don't think trolls should be allowed to grief Foundry authors anonymously. If you vote, your name will be listed, the reason I'm doing this is because I don't want alts skewing results like they could if votes were anonymous. If you don't agree with this idea, vote DISLIKE/-1. Thank you. I hope this poll does not come across biased or confusing, I put forethought into it as requested.

crok2 · August 2013

I can see issues with your proposed system but honestly would support an idea like this. We have seen too many people offended by negative reviews and too many people happy to dole them out anonymously.

saerrael · August 2013

How would this affect younger quests versus older quests, though?

wuhsin · August 2013

saerrael wrote: »

How would this affect younger quests versus older quests, though?

Quests are already automatically taken off the New list after an unknown duration of time that seems to vary from quest to quest. I'm not sure about the Best list, though. You have a legitimate point, older quests would have an advantage. I'm welcome to any ideas as to how we could balance this out.

hybridx04 · August 2013

1) Favors quantity over quality even further than the current system.
2) Favors establishment and status quo. Lists will grow stagnant faster, filled with 15-min quests and possibly farming maps, as the majority of players are merely seeking to fulfill their daily requirements or grind/get loot.
EDIT: There will be exceptions, obviously.... and Cryptic's Featured-at-the-top-of-the-lists thing can possibly overcome some of this, but it may feel like a drop in the bucket to the majority of Authors. Just sayin'.
3) Life isn't fair, no matter how you +1 or adjust it.

The only quantifiable positive I see is the fact that it would remove some of the paranoia, backstabbing and trolling. And -maybe- some people will feel better.

I vote for more accuracy added to the current system. 5 stars... not even able to give 1/2 stars... c'mon. A x.x/10 would be better.
Also, a list between 'New' and 'Best' that acts like a better catalog. With the Feywild addition, perhaps an 'ALL' category subdivided by genre style.

I figured I'd put my reasoning down for my vote =D Have fun with all that.

saerrael · August 2013

wuhsin wrote: »

Quests are already automatically taken off the New list after an unknown duration of time that seems to vary from quest to quest. I'm not sure about the Best list, though. You have a legitimate point, older quests would have an advantage. I'm welcome to any ideas as to how we could balance this out.

One thing that springs to mind would be a negative score per period of time when no rating has been given to a quest above a certain threshold (either rating or how long said quest has been above a certain rating).
But that would not be a simple task to implement, I'm guessing.

zebular · August 2013

. . . . . While this works in social media, I don't see the positives out-weighting the negatives. I actually can see how this would just further be cause for concern as there would be no way to vote on disliking something. Instead, this just allows all UGC to be upvoted regardless of their content and delivery, which doesn't solve any of the current problems we're facing now and would actually just make it even worse. Dislike/-1 is my vote.

wuhsin · August 2013

saerrael wrote: »

One thing that springs to mind would be a negative score per period of time when no rating has been given to a quest above a certain threshold (either rating or how long said quest has been above a certain rating).
But that would not be a simple task to implement, I'm guessing.

Maybe once they hit a certain number of plays, they will be taken off the list, but still searchable. That seems to be the devs' current way of handling that problem, so it shouldn't be that hard for them to implement with all their Godly skill.

wuhsin · August 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . While this works in social media, I don't see the positives out-weighting the negatives. I actually can see how this would just further be cause for concern as there would be no way to vote on disliking something. Instead, this just allows all UGC to be upvoted regardless of their content and delivery, which doesn't solve any of the current problems we're facing now and would actually just make it even worse. Dislike/-1 is my vote.

Thanks for the input, Zeb.

saerrael · August 2013

wuhsin wrote: »

Maybe once they hit a certain number of plays, they will be taken off the list, but still searchable. That seems to be the devs' current way of handling that problem, so it shouldn't be that hard for them to implement with all their Godly skill.

That's not a bad idea. Have a quest only stay on Best when it's under a yet to be determined amount of plays. That would certainly aid in cycling quests more. Aside that, one starring (or otherwise trolling) would have less effect/ become less attractive. And would have Authors create more content if they wish their quest to list once more.

lolsorhand · August 2013

I voted dislike. Explained by Zebular andhybridx - New rating system coming, looking forward to it. But this isn't as bad as you seem to think of it.

amorra · August 2013

People rate low for minor things such as a single typo. This is hardly fair to the author in my opinion. I have to agree that having a +1 or skip vote would be prime. The skip vote could be soft tracked (or tracked via foundry) and used in some way. Both options grant the ability to write a review.

Only being able to vote once per account also. >_> Your opinion of the quest is unlikely to change as you play on another character. Though keeping the option to send feedback is important. (Just not voting.)

vrtesseract · August 2013

A like system would be defiantly more favorable to a person with a lot of friends and someone who has been around a while, I suppose this can be fixed with a like system based on likes in the last 100 plays if your under 100 it shows as 30/45 or something but that would be just as bad as the current system as people will just not like you.

I do agree that the current new/best/review system is confusing. Best from what I can gather IS all. where featured is actually best

I think you should keep the "for review" and "featured" tabs then have a search tab that can be sorted by rating/age/plays which you can sort by best or worst, most plays and least plays, or newest/oldest.

also make sure things on the "for review" list can be actually finished. if no one has updated or reviewed it in over a month remove it. it gets frustrating playing for review missions only to find the chest is not on the map.

eldarth · August 2013

I think if something like this were to be implemented, I'd suggest a degeneration-over-time adjustment. Perhaps something akin to removing 20% of a quests "Likes" every month -- that would alleviate much of the problem of long-standing quests. This would effectively decay the benefit of existing the longest.

zbkolde · August 2013

Deja vu.

http://nw-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?385001-Brainstorm-Positive-Only-Rating-System

rogu3ish · August 2013

I do think the current system needs a bit of work, but I think a positive-only rating system would be less valuable an indicator of quality. Right now negative reviews (legitimate or not) have so much power because your quest's visibility is based solely on that rating when competing amongst *all* other quests. When the categories are added and the UI is improved it may not be such a big deal.

The issue of quest turnover has already been discussed here, at least from the standpoint that a positive-only system would tend to lead to stagnation on the lists. What prevents that now, though? Sure if another quest comes along that is just stellar compared to what's currently on the Best list then it might break in. But eventually that list will be full of quests that are all 'stellar'. Those quests are the ones that would continue to get played, and a whole lot of good (maybe even better) quests would get little or no attention. Do quests right now ever fall off the 'Best' list?

narayansingh · August 2013

I voted dislike/-1.

The only way I would support this type of system is if the number of likes were compared to the number of plays. Such as 100 plays and 90 likes. (90/100) That way you could tell newer maps from older and how well they are really liked.

redneckronin · August 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . While this works in social media, I don't see the positives out-weighting the negatives. I actually can see how this would just further be cause for concern as there would be no way to vote on disliking something. Instead, this just allows all UGC to be upvoted regardless of their content and delivery, which doesn't solve any of the current problems we're facing now and would actually just make it even worse. Dislike/-1 is my vote.

^ This.

Any rating/review system that doesn't allow players to register their dislike of a quest is utterly meaningless.

As Authors we have to remember two very important things:

1) The Rating System is as much, if not more, for Player's benefit as it is ours.
2) If you can't take negative feedback don't press publish.

And the first point is the most important one.

Ratings aren't there just to massage our egos, they are there to give guidance to other players as well - and for every quest there are more players than authors, so any weighting in the system really does need to protect the interests of players.

Players contemplating playing a given foundry quest need to have both good a bad feedback at their disposal if they are to make informed choices about what to play.

I'd prefer moving to a + / - review system, where 0 is the "average" and +5 is exceptional and -5 is unplayable garbage/exploit.

To translate that to the system Wuhsin proposes would also require a -1 / Dislike button.

We simply can not have a "positive only" system that is in any way credible and doesn't look like an artificial way to massage our egos.

I think we really do have to accept that if we can't take the punches along with the praise then we really shouldn't publish - and that applies to all areas of publishing anything.

All The Best

thalazar1 · August 2013

would be nice if quests had 3 ratings.
1-5 story
1-5 gameplay (enjoyment)
1-5 over all design
you rate a quest you pick a star option for all three branches then leave a review (or not)
but that would probably be a programming nightmare

rogu3ish · August 2013

thalazar1 wrote: »

would be nice if quests had 3 ratings.
1-5 story
1-5 gameplay (enjoyment)
1-5 over all design
you rate a quest you pick a star option for all three branches then leave a review (or not)
but that would probably be a programming nightmare

Wow, I *just* posted something like this in another thread. Spooky!

I also don't think it would be a programming nightmare at all. I see it as mainly a UI issue and making it too complex for the player.

eldarth · August 2013

thalazar1 wrote: »

would be nice if quests had 3 ratings.
1-5 story
1-5 gameplay (enjoyment)
1-5 over all design
you rate a quest you pick a star option for all three branches then leave a review (or not)
but that would probably be a programming nightmare

Umm... did you miss this: New Foundry Search (Test-Server)

Edit: D'oh! My bad...misunderstood what you were saying.

But here's a cool graphics of the tagging stuff:

zahinder · August 2013

It doesn't fix the problem of crud missions ballooning and shoving better missions off the lists, and I otherwise don't care if adjusted ratings go down (although I'm not sure the specific formula for adjusted rating makes any GD sense).

I vote dislike.

wuhsin · August 2013

zahinder wrote: »

It doesn't fix the problem of crud missions ballooning and shoving better missions off the lists, and I otherwise don't care if adjusted ratings go down (although I'm not sure the specific formula for adjusted rating makes any GD sense).

I vote dislike.

You're most likely correct. Thanks for the input Zahinder.

thalazar1 · August 2013

eldarth wrote: »

Umm... did you miss this: New Foundry Search (Test-Server)

Edit: D'oh! My bad...misunderstood what you were saying.

nope didnt miss it just completely forgot about that pic

Positive-Only Rating System?

Comments