Castle Paradox

Squall · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 8:32 am Post subject: We need to set some standards.

It has come to my attention that not all reviewers review games in the same way. Now that's all good and well, otherwise we'd just be reading the same review over and over again. I was just looking at the review lists and I saw some troubling things.

First off, MCW gave "OMG TIT ROXORS" (or however you spell it) a C+ and JSH gave FFH a D. I'm not trying to bring up the "JSH is WRONG" thread, (even though he said he was judging it against commercial games, which I strongly disagree with) but seriously. We need to have some standards to judge against.

I feel that a A+ should be for a game that is absolutly perfect in every way. Walthros should not get an A+ because it has bad graphics. Ok, I don't want to start talking about how Walthros is so much better than anything I could make, but the bottom line is that it could be better, so it shouldn't be considered perfect.

I feel that a F- should be given only to a game that has absolutly no playable content (see OMG TIT ROXORS) but then again, anything that would have been given a F- shouldn't have been given the honor of been reviewed at all. I hate to see these games that deserved better get the absolutly dirt terrible worse possible score. (See SilverWolf's review of Spirit Master and Hachi-Roku's review of Stoneset Saga: Quest of the Unbeloved)

I suggest we create a chart in order to find a good way to compare games to each other and assign it the right letter grade, instead of thinking "that sounds right" and choosing C+. Something like this;

A+ : Absolutly perfect in EVERY way (straight 10's)
A : Extremely good. The best most OHR games can get unless you have divine powers.
A - : Very very good. One of the great OHR games.
B+ : Very good. Falls just short of being a classic OHR game.
B : Very good, but... Just enough flaws to get annoying or detract from the game severely.
B - : Good. Obvious effort, but has some serious flaws.
C+ : Good. Better than average.
C : Average. Not good, not bad.
C- : Below Average. Will need a lot of work before it's good, but shows some promise.
D+ : Poor. Needs some serious work.
D : Bad. The maker should just start over.
D- : Very bad. Where should I begin to list the problems with this game...
F+ : Failure. Has at least a little bit of playability.
F : Failure. It doesn't get a lot worse than this.
F- : Complete Failure. No playability. No enjoyment.
_________________
You got film in my video game!
You got video game in my film!

The Wobbler · Joined: 06 Feb 2003 Posts: 2221

Flamer · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 10:58 am Post subject:

i'm not going to say much, because i'm not capable of reviewing...

so...

here, here, i agree with squall
_________________
If we were a pack of dogs, IM would be a grand Hound, CN would be a very ficious little pitball, and Giz...well, it doesn't matter breed he is, he'd still be a bitch Raspberry!

(no offense to anyone that was mentioned)

Iblis · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 11:05 am Post subject:

I agree for the most part with what you said, although under this system I don't think any game could ever get an A+ or F-.
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano

MultiColoredWizard · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 4:21 pm Post subject:

The review is based on a person's opinion. Not a goddamn standard.

Velduanga · Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 8:50 pm Post subject:

Im afraid Im going with MCW on this one. The real main flaw is that there isnt ENOUGH reviews to gather an opinion from. Take FFH for example. And A+ by MCW and a D by JSH....only two in which someone who hasnt played can use to see if they should play it. Hell Ive played FFH and I didnt like it too much, but I cant review because I didnt finish it (per say of the stated reason). Anyone ever read Electronic Gaming Monthly? On major games they have AT LEAST 3 reviews per game. Sometimes you can see the bias and favorability towards some games in the reviewers, so you can use their opinion to judge for yourself, thats what we should start doing. If you set the grades to a standard... you might as well remove the number scores in the reviews. In other words , GAMES NEED MORE REVIEWS!

PS: yeah theres hippocracy in there ,i know i know...
_________________
If you hit a plane with the soccer, could you afford to fix it? - Shaolin Soccer

"If it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting twice"-Tom Clancy

Fenrir-Lunaris · **WUT** Joined: 03 Feb 2003 Posts: 1747

Despite the fact the the JSH review has brought to light the fact that not everyone is going to like a game, I'll have to agree with both Squall AND MCW's statements. Here's my reasons...

Firstly, everyone IS entitled to their own opinions, regardless of the fact that when some people open their mouths, they sound like idiots. Blasting FFH or Walthros, or any other game for whatever reason is perfectly legitimate UNLESS you have no reason to do so. Take for example a recent review of the Mr.Triangle franchise... which ended up with a C or D I believe. The review itself is critical of the game, but it lists some possible ways to correct these problems and make the game better in the reviewer's opinion. The JSH review of FFH doesn't really do this. If at all. Hence, the JSH review is deserving of the questioning criticism it's getting.

On the other hand, there is a certain unspoken standard that 99% of all OHR games are based against, and for the record it is NOT FFH or Walthros, or Arfenhouse. Maybe Arfenhouse, actually. That standard is that most OHR games have reasonably good graphics, a decent storyline, are not too hard and not too easy, and can be played for an extended period of time, usually 6-8 hours per game. Examples of this are TS1, Walthros, Wandering Hamster, Arfenhouse 3-4, Motherland, Montery Penguin, and about 10 others that for the life of me I cannot remember. The standard for OHR games to meet and beat, is the average of ALL OHR games ever released, from 1997 to 2101. Point is, if you want a sense of what makes a good OHR game, then you should actually play a lot of OHR games. Once you have done that, you'll have a sense of what the standard is, even if it's never said.

Now, it may be that there needs to be a function that allows us to rate reviews. Or it may simply be that there needs to be more reviews, and that their length should be increaced about four times what they are. Go into detail, cover many different things, and suggest ways to improve the experience of the game. A review that doesn't do these things is a failed review, since it either brings nothing but unmerited praise, or unwarranted criticism.

And here I am, seven months later, and about 15 people who siad they would, have not written a certain review.

RedMaverickZero · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:08 am Post subject:

Reviews are informative to two people, the creator of the game, and the OHR community. But I agree, no game should deserve an A+ with the exception of a select few, unless it is so great you piss yourself. Which I haven't yet, so when I do I will let you know. But I will agree with MCW, reviews are opinions. And it's a good way to voice your opinion and try to help others by alerting them of problems and suggestions you have.
_________________
---------------Projects----
Mr.Triangle's Maze: 70%
Takoyaki Surprise: 70%

Squall · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:14 am Post subject:

I never said you couldn't have an opinion.

The final letter grade should reflect the quality of the game in relation to other games that have been reviewed.

If you're reviewing game X, and you think it's better than game Y (which got a B-) and worse than game Z (which got a B+) then give game X a B.

The final score sums up the entire review into one or two characters. If you've never played a game before, you should be able to tell that a game that has an average score of B+ WILL BE BETTER than a game with an average score of B-.

Most people just throw a game a "ballpark" score. "It's pretty good", they think. "I'll give it a...B". Take a look at the other games on the gamelist. What impressions will you be giving someone reading the reviews if you give that game a better grade than another game?

This is also why I made that table thing. So you can translate the overall way you feel about a game into a letter grade. If the game is one of the great OHR games; give it an A. It it's very good and you have fun, but has quite a few flaws; give it a B. If you don't think it's good, and you don't think it's bad, give it a C. If you feel that the game is pretty bad, but at least it's a game; give it a D. If you feel it's a failure of a game, give it a F.

Notice how you have the choice to give the grade that you want to the game. That is called an opinion. I didn't say you couldn't have one. I just want some standards set. We're grading these games against the other OHR games, not how you're feeling at the moment. Also, to give a game a bad score just to spite a different review is just plain wrong. By doing that, you basically say the other review doesn't deserve it's opinion because you feel yours overrides it.

How else can I reenforce this thought? How about this, here's a table of games that have been reviewed:

A+ Walthros
A Arfenhouse 4
A- Memoria
B+ Dreams of the Seven Orbs
B Face
B- FFH
C+ Bomberman Race For The Championship
C Ska-Drummer Man RPG
C- Autumn Dream
D+ Daega
D GundamSigma RPG
D- Spirit Master
F+ Crabs Quest
F Ferocity of the Saiyans!
F- Wandering Monkey

Now, let me illustrate what I mean when I say "make reviews relative to each other". When you review a game, feel free to type whatever in the body. But when it comes down to final score, keep things relative. Imagine the gamelist right above this paragraph are all the games that have reviews. If the game you are reviewing is better than Autumn Dream, then it must be better than a C-. Ok...so go up and ask yourself; is this game better than Ska-Drummer Man? No? Alright, so the game is either a C- or a C. Go back to my score/feeling translation list (that's why I made it). C- "Below Average. Will need a lot of work before it's good, but shows some promise" or C "Average. Not good, not bad". Hmm...you think. I think that it's average. Not good, not bad. Give it a C. There you have it. Let's review one more. Is this game better than Face? Yes? But wait a second, FFH is worse than Face, but you feel the game is worse than FFH! How can this be? Well, folks. This is my problem with the gamelist. According to your reviews, Walthros is better than Arfenhouse 4 is better than Memoria is better than Dreams of the Seven Orbs is better than Face is better than FFH is better than Bomberman is better than Ska-Man is better than Autumn Dream is better than Daega is better than GundamSigma is better than Spirit Master is better than Crabs Quest is better than Ferocity of the Saiyans is better than Wandering Monkey. Do you agree with all of these? I don't.

Again to the scores/feelings chart. There are 15 possible scores you can give to a game, and I made this chart so that each of the feelings are evenly spaced. Spanning all the possible scores in order that you can decide where that game you're reviewing is. This chart of mine isn't opinion, this is a slightly edited version of the standards that most reviewing places have. A spectrum of feelings. Is Arfenhouse 4 perfect in EVERY way?
(continued on next post)
_________________
You got film in my video game!
You got video game in my film!

Squall · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:32 am Post subject:

(apparently there's a length limit...)

Does Dreams of the Seven Orbs just fall short of being an OHR great? Is Bomberman RFTC better than average? Does Daega need some serious work? Until the grades actually reflect how good a game is, it's impossible to find the right final score for the game you're reviewing.
_________________
You got film in my video game!
You got video game in my film!

Fenrir-Lunaris · **WUT** Joined: 03 Feb 2003 Posts: 1747

The thought occured to me that a reviewer could go back and re-review the game. Perhaps they had missed something, perhaps they weren't satisfied with the scores... perhaps there should be a function to allow the reviewer to edit their review?

Velduanga · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 4:48 am Post subject:

....you mean we cant already edit reviews? Er Squall..you make it sound like the final grade is all there is to it. I gave Dream of the Seven Orbs that because it was much better than my presumption, but if you looked at my review, it really wasnt all that better comparatively to the other games. Isn't that why we write stuff down and give separate number grades? Isn't the grade system based PER PERSON? The grade we throw in is what we BELIEVE it deserves,not necesarily what it really is (EX: You buy a car that you like, you research that there are better cars, but if the one you bought is perfect for you, why wouldnt you say it's really good to someone else?). If you put a standard on a belief, we mights as well just have one person doing all the reviews.
_________________
If you hit a plane with the soccer, could you afford to fix it? - Shaolin Soccer

"If it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting twice"-Tom Clancy

RedMaverickZero · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 5:27 am Post subject:

Hehehehe. I'm happy three of my reviews made that list. Makes me feel like I did something right. But I understand the concept of that list as well and I fully agree with it.
_________________
---------------Projects----
Mr.Triangle's Maze: 70%
Takoyaki Surprise: 70%

Squall · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 5:34 am Post subject:

It doesn't matter if it was better than your presumption, or worse than your presumption. All that matters is how good you feel it is. FFVII was worse than what I thought it would be, but I still liked it. Yes, the whole thing is per person. I'm not trying to get you all to look for exactly the same things. I just want you to grade the games against each other. Say there is a game that some people believe is Very Bad (D-), you think it's average (C) Then by all means give it a C. And yes, the entire review IS summed up by the final grade. That's the OVERALL grade. What you think of the game. Aand if the games aren't graded against each other, than what are they graded against?
_________________
You got film in my video game!
You got video game in my film!

MultiColoredWizard · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 5:52 am Post subject:

Squall, you're missing the point entirely. The reviews are based solely on a person's opinion (or bias, in unfortunate cases). Saying "If you're reviewing game X, and you think it's better than game Y (which got a B-) and worse than game Z (which got a B+) then give game X a B. " is like saying that everyone's opinion is exactly the same. And it's not.