How to rate a game

[Sunchaser]

If you would like to rate a game as a user, which distinguishing traits of the game will you evaluate?

Graphic?
Gameplay?
How the game is managed?

And which weight you would give to rach trait?

Thanks

[Nox]

My personal

10% Graphics
10% Immersion
40% Gameplay
15% Balance
15% Activity of admins/devs (lack can bring the game down as well)
10% Technical quality (security, speed...)

It's just what I can think of now, not what I would rate only
I'd probably divide Gameplay into categories, but my brain really down now so I'll edit it eventually

[gnoh]

of the list gameplay to me is the most important to me, the only thing that is more important to me is player interaction, I won't play a game for very long if I don't get involved with a group of players with a common goal.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by how the game is managed, if by admins abusing there rights/sticking up for there friends rather than the right choice that's not good.
I'm not fond of bad language filters that games like seafight have either.

[Xavier]

Starting a new PBBG review site?

For me it's like:

- 70% gameplay (fun, interaction, competitiveness)
- 20% community and support (pleasantness, reliability)
- 10% graphics (consistent and not interfering)

[jannesiera]

Different rating categories are obviously the best. Making a certain category more / less important than others in an overall rating is a bad idea, because importance of a certain category can differ between individuals (it's a matter of taste).

So I would rule out the idea of an overall rating and divide it in different ratings for different categories. When the user is browsing through the list there should, obviously, be an option to browse by category.

What categories you should exactly have doesn't matter that much, as long as all important elements are represented (see replies by now, xavier, gnoh). You need to define a category properly though (e.g. "gameplay" or "immersion" can have very different meanings for different people).

[Sunchaser]

Starting a new PBBG review site?

For me it's like:

- 70% gameplay (fun, interaction, competitiveness)
- 20% community and support (pleasantness, reliability)
- 10% graphics (consistent and not interfering)

Yes Xavier, i want to enhance the standard rating system of top-pbbg.com, giving the possibility to players to rate different aspect of the game. I don't want to make review by myself but rather let the players comment.

I am thinking about putting a limit of a rating a month, based on the IP or the username... and i would structure the comments in

1) positive aspects
2) what can be improved

I would also add the possibility to the visitor push the comment up or down based on the perceived quality and usefulness.

[Chris]

I would also add the possibility to the visitor push the comment up or down based on the perceived quality and usefulness.

You overestimate players' eagerness to rate things. Most toplists have trouble getting rating with a vey simple 1-10 scale. If you make it more complex you are making it even more troublesome to rate.

[jannesiera]

I would also add the possibility to the visitor push the comment up or down based on the perceived quality and usefulness.

You overestimate players' eagerness to rate things. Most toplists have trouble getting rating with a vey simple 1-10 scale. If you make it more complex you are making it even more troublesome to rate.

Agreed. On the other hand like / dislike ratings are much easier then a 1-10 scale.

[bbgames]

I've noticed that the top sites that seem to do best are the ones that A) use a super-simple "I like this game" system(only upvotes, no downvotes), and B) hook into the games they're listing, so that those games can provide voting rewards to their players.

It seems like the games that hit the top of the lists are the ones that have the biggest playerbase and the best voting rewards, typically.

[Nox]

It seems like the games that hit the top of the lists are the ones that have the biggest playerbase and the best voting rewards, typically.

Which is exactly what those sites imho should not be about you don't want to find a game that bribes their players best, but the most enjoyable

Now it depends on Sunchaser, if he prefers more voting but biased or less votes but of higher quality

[raestlyn]

Personally I would love to see a voting site where you could actually see what players think about the game. Higher quality voting site is something that this industry needs imo.

[Chris]

Personally I would love to see a voting site where you could actually see what players think about the game. Higher quality voting site is something that this industry needs imo.

It they like it they play it, if they don't they don't play it Not much to see here. "Quality" game with low players is just a niche game that attracts only certain type of players. The bigger games have more versatile gameplay suitable for everyone and probably less hardcore players who go to the lower size games because it provides content specific to their unique needs. Of course, sometimes the low size games are just crappy instead of niche

[Nox]

Tons of people watching soap operas still don't make them worth seeing...

I mean... okey, it's just my point of view but the games I played... usually the more players the worse I found the game and I often wonder why the heck do so many people play it. And those I find great were played by hundreds/thousands

You know - advertising and connected things are imho often a key feature in number of players - those good games often lack it.

I know - despite advertising people would leave if they don't like the game - well... I don't know, I'm not so sure of it, I sometimes play something and only afterwards more and more realise how terrible it is then quiting not understanding how could I have played such a game... happens
I often get the impression that people play certain games just because many people play it, not because they find them good... you know, the crowd thing...

[Sunchaser]

Hmm, lots of suggestion, thanks...

Basicly i see around a lot of topsites that just take the scripts, change the skin and they get lot of traffic with this voting thing. There are some that seems not managed at all, they include other topsites or sites that are down etc. I agree that the games that are in the top are the ones that have a large player base or a good reward system.

The site I would like to build it's a site where
- players can judge freely a game, and tell what they like or dislike about the game (in a decent way)
- a tool for indipendent game owners to promote their games

Some considerations on rating:

Normally players don't tell what they dislike to the game owners and if they do, their opinion will be in an internal forum or on a forum on the game site. I agree that they maybe don't care to rate, but if they do and give constructive comments, they will be listed in a site where you can search games and decide to play them.
I would like to put a time limit on ratings/comments (a logged account can rate the game once a month).

The method on which base the game position could also be changed. I can customize the game ranking to combine votes from the games and the user votes.

Some consideration on promotions/news:

I would like to add the possibility for the game owners to set a message in html that will be showed in their game box plus in a rolling box that shows all the games text. Game owners can then run some temporary promos and inform the pbbg.com visitors or they can inform them about some interesting game updates.

What do you think about these ideas?

[Chris]

Tons of people watching soap operas still don't make them worth seeing...

You are very wrong here. It is worth seeing *for them*, otherwise they would not watch these. The thing is that you and me and probably everyone else on this forum are niche watchers incapable of understanding the "beauty" of soap operas No matter how much we wanted it, it is not that soap operas sux, it is that we are not normal

I mean... okey, it's just my point of view but the games I played... usually the more players the worse I found the game and I often wonder why the heck do so many people play it. And those I find great were played by hundreds/thousands

But you already played dozens (or hundreds) games. You taste is very sophisticated. Most players are not like that.

You know - advertising and connected things are imho often a key feature in number of players - those good games often lack it.

In general this is correct, but for toplists it is not very important, those who use toplists tend to not advertise anyway.

I know - despite advertising people would leave if they don't like the game - well... I don't know, I'm not so sure of it, I sometimes play something and only afterwards more and more realise how terrible it is then quiting not understanding how could I have played such a game... happens
I often get the impression that people play certain games just because many people play it, not because they find them good... you know, the crowd thing...

I have similar mixed feelings, hard to tell...

Basicly i see around a lot of topsites that just take the scripts, change the skin and they get lot of traffic with this voting thing.

Toplists don't get traffic from games that vote. You get traffic from google, the games votes are merely a bonus. 

[Jerry (WGF)]

If you would like to rate a game as a user, which distinguishing traits of the game will you evaluate?

Graphic?
Gameplay?
How the game is managed?

And which weight you would give to rach trait?

Thanks

Rating games is no exact science, it's all about the overall feeling. One of my favorite games looks hideous, but has a great community, while some others look flashy, but have nothing to offer. Of course, the best is when EVERYTHING is good.