is it me or are the star ratings for this site off?

[traplover19]

not sure if this counts as a necro but the amount of rpg maker games that are average being rated with 1 stars is insane
you would think if the review said average defeat game you expect 3 stars but for some reason they all get one star
especially when it comes to rpgm games

 

[Count Morado]

not sure if this counts as a necro but the amount of rpg maker games that are average being rated with 1 stars is insane
you would think if the review said average defeat game you expect 3 stars but for some reason they all get one star
especially when it comes to rpgm games

You might want to see what the review says, I know there is at least one person who hates RPGM games. No matter their content, they are shit in that person's mind. I would wager, a good number of those reviews that are tanking the average are from similar people. The reviews would need ... reviewed ... and reported if it is simply tanking the rating because of the choice of the game engine, not poor game construction by the developer.

 

[sexypeanut]

I rather use # of likes (relative to how old the game is) and my own criteria (tags, art style, content, etc). Using stars is... suboptimal.

 

[Dagoth Urgers]

The reviews would need ... reviewed ... and reported if it is simply tanking the rating because of the choice of the game engine, not poor game construction by the developer.

As someone who likes RPGmaker games, no it really shouldn't. RPGmaker can have "competent construction" with almost no effort on the developer's part because that's what they're designed for: creating generic and incredibly boring, but competent rpgs.

 

[morphnet]

As someone who likes RPGmaker games, no it really shouldn't. RPGmaker can have "competent construction" with almost no effort on the developer's part because that's what they're designed for: creating generic and incredibly boring, but competent rpgs.

What i think Count Morado was trying to say is that the people are giving bad reviews based on their dislike of the engine and not because they found the game buggy or that the story was lacking etc. so reviews being "reviewed" to make sure the review mentioned things like game play, storyline, assets and not just a long whine about "omg not another stupid rpgm game...learn to code"

Also "Can" and "does" are two different things, I love rpgm games but i've played a few where you could walk over walls in rooms, cross rivers and get stuck, find yourself in a endless convo loop because they forgot to remove the quest item from the players inv etc. but i have downloaded ALOT of them from here and most have not had those kind of bugs and were alot of fun.
Plus i find alot of rpgm games use art styles i like and let me play some of the fetishes i like in a way i feel fits them better than say VN's like the games from H.H.Works.

I think the problem might be that not enough people who like those games review them, if more of us did the ratings would change.

 

[Dagoth Urgers]

not just a long whine about "omg not another stupid rpgm game...learn to code"

No, leave those reviews alone. I don't want to play stupid rpgm games, I want to play smart rpgm games made by people who expand on the engine because they know how to code.

 

[yihman1]

The review system isn't perfect, but it's better than the review system on other pirate sites.

I think some big improvements could be made to the review system. Such as the following:

1) Reviews for different categories than just "Overall" Better would be if there were sub categories for reviews. So you can focus on just 1 area of the game. Suppose a game has great renders, but the story and code sucks. You could toss it a 5 star review on renders alone, and not touch the other stuff. Another game say has a great story but the renders are just average. You could review the story only. I would say "Visual Art", and "Writing", and "Code" should be 3 sub categories to leave reviews about focusing on just 1 thing. Keeping overall reviews as well, but adding these sub categories.

2) Older reviews that are no longer relevant should get deleted. If there is a review about game that's 3 years old giving it a bad review based mostly off of a bug that was patched out 2.5 years ago and it has been long gone... Why is that negative review still there?

 

[morphnet]

No, leave those reviews alone. I don't want to play stupid rpgm games, I want to play smart rpgm games made by people who expand on the engine because they know how to code.

They mean "code" as in use a different engine, people posting in rpgm threads saying it would be better in unity or renpy.
Also alot of western rpgm games use code / scripts from group or coders like yanfly so the code is normally good.

 

[PeterEnis23]

The review system isn't perfect, but it's better than the review system on other pirate sites.

I think some big improvements could be made to the review system. Such as the following:

1) Reviews for different categories than just "Overall" Better would be if there were sub categories for reviews. So you can focus on just 1 area of the game. Suppose a game has great renders, but the story and code sucks. You could toss it a 5 star review on renders alone, and not touch the other stuff. Another game say has a great story but the renders are just average. You could review the story only. I would say "Visual Art", and "Writing", and "Code" should be 3 sub categories to leave reviews about focusing on just 1 thing. Keeping overall reviews as well, but adding these sub categories.

2) Older reviews that are no longer relevant should get deleted. If there is a review about game that's 3 years old giving it a bad review based mostly off of a bug that was patched out 2.5 years ago and it has been long gone... Why is that negative review still there?

These rating system have inherent issues and are certainly not the greatest way to rank games.
I could list tons of problems.

I like your suggestions.
But, again, many problems.
Like, you say "Writing" that is different to "Story". So many people would probably give a great, but poorly written Story a good "Writing" score. Likewise, if it was a poor Story, but well written, most people would probably say "I was in it for the Visuals".

And what constitutes great writing? Whats a great story?
...

Honestly, why I fully understand why people started with rating stuff and while it does make sense in a sense. I truly believe the quality of games does get worse through rating systems in the longer run.

 

[morphnet]

The review system isn't perfect, but it's better than the review system on other pirate sites.

I think some big improvements could be made to the review system. Such as the following:

1) Reviews for different categories than just "Overall" Better would be if there were sub categories for reviews. So you can focus on just 1 area of the game. Suppose a game has great renders, but the story and code sucks. You could toss it a 5 star review on renders alone, and not touch the other stuff. Another game say has a great story but the renders are just average. You could review the story only. I would say "Visual Art", and "Writing", and "Code" should be 3 sub categories to leave reviews about focusing on just 1 thing. Keeping overall reviews as well, but adding these sub categories.

2) Older reviews that are no longer relevant should get deleted. If there is a review about game that's 3 years old giving it a bad review based mostly off of a bug that was patched out 2.5 years ago and it has been long gone... Why is that negative review still there?

I think the main problem is that some of the people reviewing the games don't know how to review a game correctly, they can easily add those points you mentioned in 1 without the need for sub categories. Giving an overall impression of the gameplay, story, writing, art, sound and then finally leave a score i.e.

gameplay 3/5
story 2/5
writing 2/5
art 4/5
sound 3/5

overall / total score 3.5/5

There are even templates used by alot of people on platforms like steam that rate games like this or more in more detail, the problem is alot of people don't leave reviews with the information needed so adding more steps would not really help.

Older reviews could show how far a game has progressed or not in the time it has been here for the few that might look but deleting older ones would either require changes to the sites to auto delete or for mods to have to delete them and the mods have their hands full already.

At the end of the day people just need to start living up to the trust placed in them. The site has a review system because people are being trusted to leave helpful reviews with relevant information as to why someone should or should not take a look at a game.

 

[Deleted member 229118]

I find that many games are praised while being just avarage.
I dont think its the star system that is off.
I think that people seriously need to increase there standerds.
But i am a hatefull old man so...

 

[lemonfreak]

My sig, that is all

 

[dannt]

it depends on the game but it's mostly pretty right with sometimes some nitpicking

 

[monkeycid]

There's that many games that it is almost impossible to justify playing anything that is less than 3 stars and even then I ask myself "should I or shouldn't I?"

But, I often question whether the rating system is entirely based on quality or the likes and dislikes of those voting. I, for one, avoid futa/trans content at all costs but I don't give games a low rating because of it. In all honesty, I'm too lazy to rate most games, good or bad.

Nevertheless, is it entirely plausible to wonder how many great games are being overlooked because they contain NTR, for example?

 

[Deleted member 4671389]

The whole number and star ratings system has got to go. We can't use that when every retard and their mom is making a review that doesn't and shouldn't qualify as a proper review. You have woke idealist and trash that go around review bombing games, think about that one for a bit. Then you have fanboys and cucks who dick ride game devs and blindly defend their games.

I think it was covered by The Quartering who does videos on Odyssey and Youtube. We should adopt a "Play", "Pause" or "Pass" kind of review system. I've bought and played games with good reviews that were garbage or plain sucked.

 

[Meaning Less]

The overall star ratings just signals popularity, the more popular a game is the more hollow positives reviews will flood the metrics.

If you want to use the review system properly ignore the rating and read them, it is the justification behind each review that can be valuable, everything else is worthless especially on a lewd website where most people are reviewing with their dicks.

 

[swizzel9]

Ratings can be misleading if the game has only few people rated it.

Maybe the rating should only be calculated if certain number is reached (like 10 ratings for example).