Low Quality Reviews on f95

[dusty stu]

Is it just me or do the vast majority of the reviews here on f95 suck?

Bad review bingo checklist:

• New account (free space)
• Filler text to get 200 characters
• Says nothing about game itself
• "ShOwS a LoT oF pOtEnTiAl"
• Go0d Grammer & Speling
• Only talks about the kinks
• Literal bot
• "X game is better/worse"
• Few other posts

Spoiler: lol

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[c3p0]

Is it just me or do the vast majority of the reviews here on f95 suck?

Bad review bingo checklist:

• New account (free space)
• Filler text to get 200 characters
• Says nothing about game itself
• "ShOwS a LoT oF pOtEnTiAl"
• Go0d Grammer & Speling
• Only talks about the kinks
• Literal bot
• "X game is better/worse"
• Few other posts

I rate that 5 stars, as it has potential to become a great thread.
Don't know the overall metrics, but I think a lot of new games featured absolut fabulous reviews aka "although the game is short, it has lot of potential, so I will give the dev 5 star in advancement".
Reason or so I don't know, but reviews need to be readed and then you often see what is chaff and what is wheat. And good reviews are sparse because they need a lot of time.

 

[Lerd0]

Few other posts

..so...99% of the users in this place?

 

[trex999999]

If you didn't have the entertained masses and bots then all you'd have left are the snooty critics (guilty as charged), and all games on this site would have a below average rating.

Whether or not that would be better, I don't know. Having read an unhealthy amount of review sections on this site, I can safely say that most game's ratings are absolutely carried by the first few releases bringing a wave of excitement and 5 star reviews. Obviously, given enough time, 99/100 projects which had 5 star potential will prove without a doubt to have not lived up to that potential, it's just that old reviews don't go away, and most people don't review at all.

That and a lot of people who DO post seem to do their reviewing in the main thread instead, so their dissenting opinions aren't reflected in the rating.

 

[Deleted member 440241]

That and a lot of people who DO post seem to do their reviewing in the main thread instead, so their dissenting opinions aren't reflected in the rating.

Mods won't delete a review in the main thread most of the time. Why would people with critical views on a game take the time to express their opinion when it can vanish without warning?

 

[watdapakisdis]

Just ignore ratings and reviews for new and incomplete games. They're made by coomers and the devs to drive interest for the game.

 

[SharkVampire]

I partly agree with the author's position, and I did come across on blatantly useless reviews myself. In some of these reviews, users even berated the game simply for containing a fetish they hate .
But the way you've framed this post puts you on the same level as those people. Why? You simply voiced criticism without offering anything yourself. How this situation could have been improved in your opinion. Which I think would have been much more valuable in this case. What you describe is true, I have thought about it myself, and I would like to see a system on our site that rewards good reviews and downgrades bad ones to the lowest rank. Of course this is far from ideal and a good system for reviews is something to think about and should be given more attention in this thread.

 

[dusty stu]

I partly agree with the author's position, and I did come across on blatantly useless reviews myself. In some of these reviews, users even berated the game simply for containing a fetish they hate .
But the way you've framed this post puts you on the same level as those people. Why? You simply voiced criticism without offering anything yourself. How this situation could have been improved in your opinion. Which I think would have been much more valuable in this case. What you describe is true, I have thought about it myself, and I would like to see a system on our site that rewards good reviews and downgrades bad ones to the lowest rank. Of course this is far from ideal and a good system for reviews is something to think about and should be given more attention in this thread.

Copy Steam.

Users can up-vote good reviews, which get filtered to to top.



Every game also has 'review score from the last 30 days.'


Good luck getting the mods on this site to implement a new feature. They are as stubborn as they are obtuse.

 

[SharkVampire]

Copy Steam.

Users can up-vote good reviews, which get filtered to to top.
View attachment 2320963


Every game also has 'review score from the last 30 days.'
View attachment 2320958

Good luck getting the mods on this site to implement a new feature. They are as stubborn as they are obtuse.

I was thinking about something like that too. I'm not sure that this is stubbornness, though. As I read few post about the tags situation, people were saying that Sam - admin, working his ass off almost alone, to maintain this site. But if some fellow users who know coding will suggest their help on new features, I doubt he would refuse.

 

[dusty stu]

I was thinking about something like that too. I'm not sure that this is stubbornness, though. As I read few post about the tags situation, people were saying that Sam - admin, working his ass off almost alone, to maintain this site. But if some fellow users who know coding will suggest their help on new features, I doubt he would refuse.

When you put it that way, sucks to be Sam.

Fullstack / plugin-managing is a full time job. I wouldn't want to try and upgrade a long-standing site, either.

 

[Deleted member 440241]

Copy Steam.

Users can up-vote good reviews, which get filtered to to top.
View attachment 2320963


Every game also has 'review score from the last 30 days.'
View attachment 2320958

Good luck getting the mods on this site to implement a new feature. They are as stubborn as they are obtuse.

Reviews are already sorted by date posted, with the most recent at the top of the first page. Reviews can also be liked with higher liked reviews being more heavily weighted when sorting the latest updates page by weighted rating. That's the star button on your filter at the right side of the screen.

 

[JustXThings]

I think the reviewing system is on point. It could be better of course, but I actually prefer that reviews do not get better positions depending on likes or whatever. This is a community and "liked" users would automatically get more visibility. This is not a popularity contest. It cannot work as in Steam.

People just expect the reviewing system to be this homogeneous system that works identically for all kind of games and it is not like that. Similar to how people treat reviews in other media like Amazon or eBay.

Some of my takes about the reviewing system.

1. New accounts

Many people make accounts explicitly to review a title they like, or their first message is a review. That's nothing new. Do people really expect the majority of users here to be some kind of porn critics ? This site is full of lurkers as it should be. I lurked this site for a very long time before I decided to develop my own thing. I have that account still and I never posted a message.

One guy in my threads made a new account only to help me with the UX of my VN. He created a small VN example with the different examples of how I could improve it. Is that a bot ? People create accounts here to download games, not to interact with the community. When they want to interact many times they need new accounts as the first one is tight to an email or a name they would rather prefer not being public.

2. Has potential, shows bla bla, doesn't talk about the game

Just ignore them. These reviews are useless. If the majority of reviews are like this jump ship. Reviewers are taking the time to review something they like and it should show in the review itself.

Believe it or not reviews are a great way of finding the "best" new games. You can sort new games and those with lots of views, likes and reviews are likely worth playing (inspect the reviews first just in case it is full of "potential crap"). Those w/o or very bad are likely not. I did this for a very long time and in very few exceptions I got disappointed.

For older and more established games reviews are useless. Do not even weight sort. Just sort by clicks and likes.

For "average popular" projects it gets tricky, but weighted usually works quite well in my case. I can find most of my preferred games by kink filtering search + sort by weight in the top pages.

3. Only talks about the kinks

These are porn games and kinks are very important. I don't see any issue in that.

--

So, all in all I like the review system given how I use it. It usually doesn't disappoint me and I find everything I am looking for based on the different reviewing system this community provides (likes, views, weighted).

 

[♍VoidTraveler]

I'd say block review rights to everyone who doesn't have at least 1-5k likes and 1k messages.
I think it'd make for a decent trash filter. Not ideal of course, but beats nothing.

 

[fitgirlbestgirl]

This is a community and "liked" users would automatically get more visibility. This is not a popularity contest. It cannot work as in Steam.

I agree with most of what you wrote except for this. I think you overestimate how much of a "community" this is. Are there people who like each other and certain cliques? Sure. But reviews are (regrettably) such a tiny and invisible part of this site that it doesn't really matter. A lot of times when I look at reviews on a game I find the thing I wanted to read like 3 pages in, with multiple likes, buried in a sea of useless "5/5 me think it wery gud" reviews.

 

[JustXThings]

I agree with most of what you wrote except for this. I think you overestimate how much of a "community" this is. Are there people who like each other and certain cliques? Sure. But reviews are (regrettably) such a tiny and invisible part of this site that it doesn't really matter. A lot of times when I look at reviews on a game I find the thing I wanted to read like 3 pages in, with multiple likes, buried in a sea of useless "5/5 me think it wery gud" reviews.

I don't know. I look at reddit and automatically get scared anything could turn into something like that where as a user I must be more careful of where I write, than what I am writing. I prefer unweighted opinions. Neither positive, nor negative weighted. Just there, so that I take them raw and decide by myself whether they are useful or not.

As I mentioned, I hardly read any reviews for larger projects. I only read them when they are between [0-40]. Forty being a VERY high limit. I really need to like a project a lot to read all 40 reviews. And if I really like it, I am more "bonding" with the game community than than evaluating a project I already like. So, it is not that much of a burden going through reviews in my case.

I wish there were less "has potential" reviews to be fair. I don't really know where is this mentality coming from :? But they have slowly become like ads in times before ad-blocker. My eyes / brain just skip them as if they weren't there.

 

[fitgirlbestgirl]

I prefer unweighted opinions. Neither positive, nor negative weighted. Just there, so that I take them raw and decide by myself whether they are useful or not.

There is no such thing as unweighted opinions. Unless you are willing to read all the reviews, the reviews are "weighted" in the sense that you only read the most recent ones. And 90% of reviews tend to be either useless, effusive praise or weird "1/5 I kind of think this is NTR" stuff. The reasonable, thought out critiques are rare and disappear into the later pages.

 

[Meaning Less]

I agree with most of what you wrote except for this. I think you overestimate how much of a "community" this is. Are there people who like each other and certain cliques? Sure.

Thing is, sorting by newest is better, especially when it comes from a website where most reviewed games are incomplete.

There are many reviews of old versions that would be boosted to the top otherwise, not to mention steam review system is horrible (worse than this website) and usually only memes, shitposts or people complaining about DRM get bumped to the top.

Also yeah, right now people are not spamming review likes because they do nothing, but if suddenly those started affecting sorting then you would see way more people abusing this system.

 

[fitgirlbestgirl]

Thing is, sorting by newest is better, especially when it comes from a website where most reviewed games are incomplete.

But it's not better. Again, 95% of reviews have no informational content. Just being newer doesn't make a review automatically more relevant. Usually it's just a flood of meaningless five star reviews.

 

[JustXThings]

There is no such thing as unweighted opinions. Unless you are willing to read all the reviews, the reviews are "weighted" in the sense that you only read the most recent ones. And 90% of reviews tend to be either useless, effusive praise or weird "1/5 I kind of think this is NTR" stuff. The reasonable, thought out critiques are rare and disappear into the later pages.

You are right. I expressed it wrong. I meant users weighting opinions making the system mutable and based on the type of player base a game has, opposed to having a set of rules that never change and are "fair" to everyone.

This has potential is somewhat a recent trend and I feel it also populates mostly some sort of games. It is also related to what to me feels like a new trend in porn games, where devs release very little content from the beginning to start monetizing early and players are somewhat fine with it (but it is how this industry works so blaming on that would be unfair).

If I take one of the games in your signature, which I love btw, as and example and I check the first reviews. I find most of them useful.

https://f95zone.to/threads/defendin...2-white-phantom-games.33797/page-5/br-reviews

(e: holy crap I just opened the spoiler tag =D The Theater worth mentioning ? I should have taken my own game as an example then =) )

 

[Meaning Less]

But it's not better. Again, 95% of reviews have no informational content. Just being newer doesn't make a review automatically more relevant. Usually it's just a flood of meaningless five star reviews.

Well technically thats more because too many reviewers fail to follow the guidelines, I don't blame the system I blame people that can't follow the rules and write reviews here like they write steam reviews.

Many if not all points mentioned by OP are in fact against the guidelines for reviewing a game, the community just needs to report such reviews with more frequency, this way poor reviews are removed and only the helpful ones are left.