Game reviews

Just posted honest reviews for TOP RATED games. Noticed no one does negative reviews. Is there a "feelings" ratings system here?


I typically only post reviews on games I like because I live in fear of NRR - negative review retaliation. Dumb and unimportant, I know, but there it is.


Is it a good thing to only review games we like?

...because I'm guilty of that, too.

I've almost left a negative review or three, but then I thought about how the author may be a kid who was trying to learn how to write text adventures, and I decided against posting a review. It seemed like being polite at the time, but is it really helping aspiring authors? (It's definitely not helping the Top Rated list!)


I have frequently sent authors constructive criticism via Quest “mail” but only if they’ve asked for it.


Just checked out some of your reviews, Mr. Parser, and, no offense, just reviewing your reviews here, but you could elaborate quite a bit, especially when posting a negative review. (At least make it seem like constructive criticism, you know? Because it really might be a kid who wrote the game.)

Again, no offense. It seems that I mostly agree with your ratings, just not the reviews themselves.

...with the exception of Pick a Letter. That is NOT a text adventure at all, and it's not that impressive. Just an HTML exercise, really.


Yeah, this guy reviewed my Fing Game and said it was "not good at all" and gave it one star. It's a good thing people don't care about reviews here.


Yeah, this guy reviewed my Fing Game and said it was "not good at all" and gave it one star. It's a good thing people don't care about reviews here.

I mean... everybody can't like everything and personally I don't mind critique at all. I don't see the point in leaving a review like the one you got. There's nothing constructive about it at all and it surprises me that the player didn't at least elaborate some,
"It's not good at all because... "
If I were to leave a negative review I'd state what I think needs work etc.
To me it's about respecting the effort of the author and constructive criticism can be really valuable.


I’ve always been a proponent of having someone who could edit “troll reviews”. Those considered troll/bad reviews would be:

  1. Lacking intelligent criticisms (although I could be persuaded that “no word reviews” are better than “[expletive deleted] word reviews like “it can be inproved” or “not gud” or “worst game ever”.

2a. Very low reviews of a game that obviously shouldn’t score low. Really? Who would give Spondre a 1-Star review with the comment “I’d rather not talk about it”. Two strikes there.

2b. Very high scores for a game that doesn’t deserve it. This is a bit trickier but, there are obvious ones that are “school buddy voted”. You know... those awful, incomplete, grammatical nightmare, or simply broken games that get 5-Star ratings from their buddies. http://textadventures.co.uk/games/view/9mgibus_hekb3cz4eazcwa/the-simplest-game-ever-invented

  1. Retaliation reviews - those left as “payback” for a properly reviewed game that a far-too-sensitive author didn’t like.

  2. Mistakingly selecting an unwanted number of stars upon review.

  3. Low ratings due to server or personal PC issues. Things like “game freezes” or “game won’t load” or “doesn’t work on my phone” when in these cases it is NOT related to the author’s code. The mobile bit can be controlled... to an extent... but it’s difficult. You get the point, right?

I know that this might open a can of worms and could create some issues but I’ve volunteered to be responsible to edit reviews that clearly meet one or more of these conditions above. Just a thought.

PS. And how about that weird indentation?! Haha


"Lacking intelligent criticisms..."

Agreed!

"Low/high reviews of a game that obviously shouldn’t score low/high."

The problem here is two-fold. One, the community would have to rely on an editor's opinion of a game and trust that person's judgement. Two, this forces someone to read/play every game that get's reviewed.

"Retaliation reviews..."

These might be hard to spot, but they definitely should be removed, in my opinion. Perhaps a better solution is to let the author respond to the review? Then, when the review thread flames up, everyone else just ignores them.

Mistakenly selecting the wrong number of stars.

Does that really happen?

Low ratings due to things beyond the author's control.

Perhaps another area where an author's response can clear up the review. Personally, when I see this kind of review, I stop reading immediately. Same for the poorly written reviews. I always think, 'This person should NOT be reviewing some one else's work, until they learn proper English.'


EDIT: in almost all cases, wrongful reviews would need to be brought to the attention of the review editor instead of the review editor reviewing ALL Reviews. Also, it’s not quite as hard as it sounds. Those who can place games can easily identify bad reviews.

Does accidentally marking the wrong number of stars really happen? Yes. I’ve done it to someone and someone accidentally had done it to me. The someone being two different people. In both cases, Alex (I believe) corrected the erred review.


In almost all cases, wrongful reviews would need to be brought to the attention of the review editor instead of the review editor reviewing ALL Reviews.

How would you message them exactly? Not everyone is on the forum. Also, off topic, I would like it if one could message the people that categorize games. My current situation is driving me crazy.


How would you message them exactly?

Simply post the issue on the game announcements and feedback forum. I’m sure if there is someone were in charge of editing/reviewing reviews, they would check that forum regularly.

I would like it if one could message the people that categorize games.

I’m also certain that people who categorize games also see the forum regularly.


Sorry.

No more reviews. I will delete my account


I made the mistake of writing reviews of some Quest games years ago. They weren't well-received. It seems telling people their terrible games are terrible is a bad thing and we should all just pretend every awful game we come across is actually some resounding masterpiece.

I can still remember with some amusement the time I mentioned that a crate in a game lacked a description. I never gave it a second thought at the time, it was just something I noticed and figured I'd flag up in a review. Oh, boy, I was wrong there. By the time the flame war ended, the author had claimed I was an idiot who didn't know what a crate was, I shouldn't be writing reviews if I had nothing nice to say, then went and Googled me, found a game I'd written years before and proceeded to tell everyone how crap it was - and then admitted he hadn't actually played it, but apparently he didn't need to play it to tell it was crap.

So yes, negative reviews seldom go down well here.


It seems telling people their terrible games are terrible is a bad thing...

This is SO true and it drives me nuts!

...we should all just pretend every awful game we come across is actually some resounding masterpiece.

I did this once, and I think the sarcasm was lost.


I need to write reviews a certain way? Can't just put stars. It makes me write something. I thought it was okay to play a game and do a review. Thought I was doing my part leaving feedback. I can't write professional reviews. I don't know how to make games better.


There's not really much point in writing a review if the review in question is only a few words long. “This game is great” or “this game is bad” isn't a review and tells people next to nothing about the game in question. Would you play or not play a game if someone said “this game is great”? No, you'd want more detail. Look at film, book or album reviews. They're never just a few words long. They go into great depth about why something is great or why it isn't.

Out of curiosity, I went and played the game in question – Fing – and I agree, it’s a bad game. But then your review is also bad. A proper review would be more along the lines of:

“First of: the intro on the website is bad. I'm told it’s an adult RPG three times – isn't once enough? There's no mention of what the game is about and the author, for reasons best known to himself, informs us that he has PTSD, that the game is a bit glitchy, that sometimes it’s a bit slow, etc. Short of actually saying ‘please don’t play my game’, he couldn’t have found a better way of discouraging people from playing it.

But enough of that, what's the game itself like? The first thing I see is lots of bright pink text on a white background, which is definitely not something you should do. It looks cheap and tacky, not to mention difficult to read. Playing this for any length of time would leave you with a serious headache.

The first room description – if you can call it that – has a dig at Hillary Clinton (ho ho) and informs me that I'm a working class citizen in Hell. With a pistol, spade and potion bag. Why? Well, it doesn’t tell me that but I'm sure there's a good reason for it. My goal is… ? Well, I'm not sure about that either but maybe it'll become clear as I explore.

Off exploring I go. The second room description is this:

You are in Fuck.
You can go north or south.
Darkness and depression fill my soul
And it feels good
It wakes me up
YEAAHHHHH YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, MY PAIN!
WHY I WOULD HURT MYSELF
JUST TO GET BYYYYY
YEAH-AH-AH........

Oh dear God. Yep, lots of words in capitals, switching between “you” and “me” and a location description called, of all things, “Fuck”. There's nothing to examine, nothing to interact with and nothing to do here. South of Fuck is a location called, and I kid you not, “Battle Fucking Room”. Here, apparently, you do battle. No fucking, alas, just battle, with a Decomposing Stallin. Whatever the heck that is. Is it some kind of monster? Or a badly misspelt Stalin? I guess we’ll never know because, like almost everything, there's no description of Stallin / Stalin.

Combat is itself a big disappointment. You type ‘shoot stallin’ and shoot him. He hits you back. You shoot him some more until he’s dead. Yes, it’s that interesting. No effort has been made to pep up the combat and make it interesting to read. When you kill Stallin / Stalin, you gain no reward, return to the “Fuck” room and simply end up wandering back (because there's literally nothing else to do) to the Battle Fucking Room to fight, this time, Shambling Stallin. More combat followed by more wandering through empty rooms with silly names like “That”, “Pussy” and “Ass”. That was about all I could take.

At no point has the author made any kind of effort here. The game has no storyline, the combat system is basic to the point of being irrelevant and if it’s possible to make progress it’s not obvious how. Definitely not a game I could recommend to anyone, except maybe to aspiring authors as an example of what their games will be like if they don’t try harder.

1/10”

Sorry it’s such a negative review, but I honestly couldn’t find a single thing about it to recommend. In a way, it’s disappointing just how bad it is. I used to play a lot of Quest games years ago but gave up because of how bad they were, and I’d hoped that over the years things might have improved. But if this is any example of the kind of games still being produced with Quest, then it hasn’t improved at all. This is probably the worst game I've played in years.


Yes. I wish I could write a review like that, but I can't. (I agree with it.)

I just want to rate games, but it makes me write something. No more reviewing from me.


@ David W:

after reading all of that review, this is what I came away with...

You gave it a 1/10 rating !!!!

I DEMAND an explanation of the '1' score instead of '0/10', lolololololololololol !!!!!!!
(Your review makes no sense to me, lololololol)
(You're being too kind to that game, in your review, hahahahaha)


jmne is our friend, and she's learning to create games.

jmne, that game doesn't seem quite...

Well, with some work, you could get your game in a state worth sharing with the general public.

Submitting a game is pretty much asking everyone to share their opinion of it. Having a few people beta-test it before release is always a good idea, too.


Speaking of testing, I'm sorry I haven't been helping anyone out. When I am online, I'm normally using my phone, so I don't really work with Quest all that often anymore.


Actually no David W, me putting Adult RPG on the game was my attempt at communicating with the guys categorizing my game. Unlike what Xanmag said, I don't think they have read my posts.
My Fing Game is currently categorized as RPG only, in case anyone is wondering. Not sure if it was worth trying to re categorize the game again in the first place.
For the record, my game was originally Adult only, but I thought that if people saw that category, they would think it was porn or something. Just as the dice rolling game I have linked in another thread, I wanted my game to be both Adult and RPG.

Apologies. My game is more me raging/dark humor. I used the game to kill some sick people I met online who should not be named, then I censored the game. Then I made the game into this whole political RPG and comedy. I thought it was funny at least. Donald Trump sings in one of the bars, you get to shoot Stallin, Hitler, and Hillary Clinton in their damn faces, and you get to fight Satan at the end. I think it's incredible for what it is. But I can see why it's more of a niche thing.

I am actually slowly working on that game. For instance, all the enemy attacks are all different colors, green = zombie or Stallin, purple = Humanoid Abomination. All the enemies also have unique look descriptions. I will add some extra side quests, just to add player to NPC interaction and make the game less lonely.

(I thought someone would like my game, Jesus save us all....)


and this is the problem with reviews... opinions/biased-ness .... sighs...

got two totally different context/understanding of the game based on the david w's review post and jmnevil54's response post

(if not in the description already, maybe just put that it's still a work in progress and such type of intent of game, so not to get such un-needed reviews for such a game)


I’ve always been a proponent of having someone who could edit “troll reviews”. Those considered troll/bad reviews would be:

I think it's dangerous to start fidgeting with reviews tbh.
What someone loves, someone else hates. I've tried games on here which has recieved 5-stars all the way through and thought "what the fridge... how can that be... this is utter crap". Would that make my review void since most other peeps don't agree with me? I'd think not.
(I've never given a review, good nor bad. If I would, I'd be sure to be constructive.)

I just don't like the thought that someone else can deem my review unfit.
I mean... isn't that the whole purpose of reviews? It's what one gay/gal thinks.

Instead of rules maybe there should be guidelines?
Be respectful.
Be constructive.
Other than that I'd say anything goes (as long as it's legal and/or in compliance with the community policy)


I think it's dangerous to start fidgeting with reviews tbh

I would never suggest removing/editing honest reviews because, well, you know, that whole freedom of speech thing. But, I would think most would find it useful to be able to dispute/overturn a libelous review if it was found to be misleading or uninformative. It’s the same reason I delete all the spam on the forums. No one wants to click on lukenslow’s IP address link under the guise that it is helpful only to find out he has been lying to us this whole time. Same goes for a one-star review of spondre that reads “I don’t even want to talk about it” or a five star review for ‘The simplest game ever’. I would only propose the ability to edit reviews either:
A. By the author who wrote the review or
B. By some neutral party who can remove reviews if it is blatantly misleading.
I am in no way saying that every review (actually it would be much closer to none) get edited in any way. Feel free to review and give your opinion on games. I love it. But, when a review is unfair and/or misleading, I think it should be editable.

And just for the record, I’m okay with 100% of peoples opinion on this. Kind of playing devil’s advocate, but I am in favor of there being someone who authors and game players can turn to if a review is just flat out wrong or erred.


Well, I'm actually quite surprised at the lack of vitriol following that review. The last time I tried to review some games here, I was flamed for it and got the impression that negative reviews weren't appreciated, even if the games in question were terrible (at least in my opinion).

jmnevil54, if you really want to be a good game writer, see what other people are writing. I don't mean just here, but check out IFDB. See the top rated games on there for an idea of what's popular and what isn’t. Also, check out the games which do well in the yearly IFComp. A Quest game came third in the IFComp a few years back, which is pretty good going because I don't think any other Quest game has ever made it into the top 10 before, so while Quest as a whole might not have the best reputation it just goes to show that if you write a good game, people will like it.

Above all, test your game before it’s released. Get others to test it. Make the introduction interesting. No one wants to read a rant. Also, and I mean this sincerely, get some better ideas. A game in which you just wander around and kill political figures in randomised combat is never going to be welcomed with open arms. Randomised combat, in particular, is one of those things that seldom goes down well. If you still want to have randomised combat, make it a little more interesting to read. This is meant to be a fight to the death with a terrifying enemy. Don't just say ‘you shoot Stallin and he dies’. Pep it up. Make it exciting.

Finally, you say your game is an adult RPG but nothing much of what I saw stood out as adult or RPG. Calling some of the locations by naughty words isn’t adult (more childish, I’d have said), and RPGs generally have you playing a role, which is a lot more involved than simply shooting people. Where's the roleplay for a start?


I feel like if you use the "role playing games are role playing games" excuse, you knock out 90% of RPG games.

Besides, the first few opening paragraphs of my game:

You're in Hell. First circle. Maybe the outer ring, I don't know. Are you freshly dead or are you an old resident to hell? Do you want out of there, are you looking for revenge, or do you just want to have a good time? It's all up to you.
In this game, you are a working class citizen in hell. The game represents the contant struggles of the average citizen in their life, such as survival, politics, work, alcohol, and sin.

My game is really more adult if you actually put the game in the desktop editor and read the whole thing I wrote, but by your standards it would be childish.

My game was really meant to be more expression-istic. I'm not sure how I could make that anymore clear.

You just kind of give me the impression you skimmed over things in my game, and then stopped some time after the second or third dungeon.


I'm not sure how much attention you really expect people to pay to your game. Empty locations with nothing to examine, poorly executed randomised combat, very linear progression - literally following one path because there's nothing else to do - no real plot, etc, doesn't encourage people to make much of an effort.

I gave up after the third dungeon - or first, really, as it's the same dungeon just with a different named mob inside - because there didn't seem much point in continuing. Does the game follow in this vein all the way to the end? Does the combat become more interesting or is it simply a case of SHOOT STALLIN over and over again until you're done? Is there anything to do other than wander around fighting stuff? If I'd seen anything which interested me, or impressed me, I'd have carried on.


Do you not like dungeon type games, have a short attention span, or simply think there isn't more to the game?

As I said, there is some npc interaction, if you got far enough. Not much, but still.


I don't have an issue with dungeon-type games nor do I have a short attention span, but I don't see the point in playing a game for long which starts off as badly as this one. If the game has more to offer than wandering through rooms called "Fuck", "Pussy" and "Ass" and shooting the same monster over and over again, then you should bring the more interesting aspects into play right at the start. After all, the start of the game is the first thing the player will see. If it's isn't any good, they aren't likely to persevere.


If I changed those words, it would ruin the message I wrote down, and at that point I might as well rename all the rooms.

I wasn't sure if people would play a game about me complaining about two pedophiles I met online, hence the hell plotline, hence the minor censorship, hence me cursing.
As I was saying, I had nightmares for 5 straight days in a row, and possibly minor PTSD. And since I was restarting over with my combat code again, I used that game to express myself.

I can't really say much. If people don't like it, they don't like it.

And yes, the game does get better, and it will get better over time.


@David W
Can you please tell me if you read these? Also, please tell me which one you noticed first, and which one stood out the most, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5?

  1. Please equip the Spade or the Pistol.
  2. Equip weapons with "equip".
  3. Save with "save".
  4. Please save after 30 minutes of play, if possible.
  5. Type "heal potion player" or "heal potion me" to heal.

I saw them all as they're in the first location in the game, and they're repeated every time your return to that location. As for which I noticed first, or which stood out the most, I couldn't say. Why?


I was wondering. So are you okay with the order?
I don't know. I thought it should be like this or something.

Type "heal potion player" or "heal potion me" to heal.
Please equip the Spade or the Pistol.
Equip weapons with "equip".
Save with "save".
Please save after 30 minutes of play, if possible.

-+
I don't suppose you recognize this, do you?

It's from the Divine Comedy, Dante's Inferno. I've been meaning to post lines from it in my game, 1 stanza per room. I started last night.


I'm not sure the order really makes a difference, but I'd probably re-word some of the commands. "Heal potion player" and "heal potion me" is a little weird. Why not "use potion" or "drink potion"? You might want to also include a HELP command which displays these options so people can refer to them whenever they need, without having to head back to the first location.

Edit: no, I'm not familiar with the Divine Comedy.


Apologies. That was a faux poem created by a fan.

I found the real one though.

His glory, by whose might all things are mov'd,
Pierces the universe, and in one part
Sheds more resplendence, elsewhere less. In heav'n,
That largeliest of his light partakes, was I,
Witness of things, which to relate again
Surpasseth power of him who comes from thence;
For that, so near approaching its desire
Our intellect is to such depth absorb'd,
That memory cannot follow. Nathless all,
That in my thoughts I of that sacred realm
Could store, shall now be matter of my song.


A. By the author who wrote the review or
B. By some neutral party who can remove reviews if it is blatantly misleading.

Or:
C. Make it possible for the creator to comment on individual reviews.

I think that would be the most fair way to go. People can review how ever they want but if the creator of the game can "answer" the review for all to see I think it would be... good.
I mean, just the possibility of saying thanks for a good review is nice. And to constructively reply to a bad one will help others reading the review to get a more balanced view of the game.


^agreed

*respond ONCE to each review

And I’m in!


@Mr. Parser You didn't review the highest rated games, you just clicked on the bottom category, the unlisted or sanbox section, plus Victorian Detective and Victorian Detective 2.


That is incorrect. I reviewed every game on the first page of the TOP RATED games. My reviews changed the lineup.

I also played a few games that popped up in "LAST PLAYED". (Maybe that's what's confusing you?)


All anyone has to do to see what I've reviewed is look at my profile page.


CheeseMyBaby: "I think that would be the most fair way to go. People can review how ever they want but if the creator of the game can "answer" the review for all to see I think it would be... good."

I'm not sure that's a good idea considering the way this thread has turned out. Can you imagine angry authors responding to every negative comment on their games? It'd be flame war central.

jmnevil54: "@Mr. Parser You didn't review the highest rated games, you just clicked on the bottom category, the unlisted or sanbox section, plus Victorian Detective and Victorian Detective 2."

What difference does it make whether he did or not? He said he posted reviews for top rated games, not ALL the top rated games, just some of them.

And, please God, can we have a proper forum here one day soon? Even something as simple as quoting posts is a major pain.


I would delete my review if I could. Sorry for trouble. Thought we were supposed to rate the games. I only wanted to contribute. I can't write good reviews like David W, anyway. (His post was a fair and honest review.)

Please review the TOP GAMES, David W. Make things right. If we only leave reviews on games we like, the whole process is pointless. Giving 5 stars to 4 star games (or 3 star games) just because of nepotism (or fear of retaliation) is not good.


@Mr. Parser,
I agree. Keep reviewing games and just duplicate your ‘star rating’ as the comment for the review followed by “Please contact me for details on my rating.”
That way you don’t feel like you have to write commentary for the review if you aren’t comfortable doing so AND you open the door to offer your comments IF the author (or a potential player) wants to hear your explanation. Win-win, right?

We need more honest reviews in my opinion be it good or bad. So keep reviewing. I, for one, plan on reviewing more games in light of this thread.

Of course, all of these review issues could easily be solved if authors took their time to PROPERLY beta-test their game.


 just duplicate your ‘star rating’ as the comment

Yes. Very shrewd.


President Grue

I reviewed the top three games today.

The people here, they are good men and women. No one bothered me. Really great people here. My kind of people. We don't like the fake reviews. The fake reviews should all be deleted and the users should have their accounts removed.

I talk to a lot of people on this site. Hundreds of them. Maybe even thousands. You know what they all say? What we all agree on? The fake reviews and the spammers are threatening our values. Once we get rid of all the dirty spammers, we'll see this forum become great again. No more fake reviews. No more spam. And all our games will get better! And they'll get better ratings!

The spammers don't like to see us winning, and we are winning, even though they've got the game rigged.

Let's get rid of the spammers.

Together, we can make text adventures great again!


President Grue

I've been talking to a lot of people on this site since my last post. Probably hundreds of people. Maybe thousands. Most of us say we'd like to be able to mark reviews and posts as helpful. The people want it to say "0 users found this review helpful", and I think they're onto something. They're smart people, the people I'm talking to. They're very smart people, and I talk to them all the time. They want to put a leash on these fake reviews!

This would be a great success, believe me.

It would bring us all one step closer to making text adventures great again!


Is this parody or are you supposed to be serious?



@ Mr Parser: I don't have plans to review any other games. I only played this one because it was mentioned in this thread and I was curious as to whether the author's complaints were valid, and I kinda wish I hadn't bothered. There are times when you see an awful game by someone who has clearly made a real effort with it, and with a better understanding of what they're doing they could actually write a really good game, and then there are the games like this, which are on a whole different level of awfulness, with an author who doesn't even realise how bad it is when it's pointed out to her, and you despair of things ever improving.

In all honesty, I'm not sure people posting proper, detailed reviews of the games would work with the current website setup anyway. It takes times and effort to post a proper review, but it only takes seconds to post useless ones, so in the time someone posts a proper one, ten useless ones have popped up. Until something changes, proper reviews will be hidden by the useless ones, and low ratings for bad games will make no difference when you have multiple ratings of 5 out of 5 for the same games being added every day. There needs to be some serious moderation of the main site to get rid of all the useless reviews and ratings.


He is being a parody, K.V. Thw question is whether he is being a parody for some large statement, for fun and silliness, or both?

I wish KV would come back so everyone could stop arguing.


brought this up in an old thread that had a similar topic:

... more "buracracy/overhead/work/time/moderators/site-forum-features" required ...

have public (anyone/everyone) reviews/likes-hates/stars-points/etc // ("democracy/masses polling")

have a moderator/expert/professional/state-of-quality group having their own reviews/recommends/etc and also a list of public reviews that are deemed good/constructive/non-spam/non-poor-quality-reviews by this group) // ("expert/professional/authority polling")

dealing with bad/unfair/spam-junk-no_quality-short/inaccurate/etc reviews:

same as with posts, be able to flag a review, for a moderator to take a look at the flag/complaint, and see if it warrants removal or not by them


EDITED

I wish KV would come back so everyone could stop arguing.

Is everyone arguing?

I actually think arguments and debates are analogous. So:

Is everyone arguing vehemently over trivial things and being unpleasant in the process?

If so, can't we all just get along?


This isn't really an argument. I've been on forums before where people have been screaming insults at each other and threatening to track people down in real life and murder them. Compared to that kind of thing, this is pretty civil and mild-mannered.


This isn't really an argument...

That's what I was thinking, but I assumed I was missing something.

I'm not one to pass on an opportunity to make a wish come true, though, so I decided to be as vague as possible.


I've been on forums before where people have been screaming insults at each other and threatening to track people down in real life and murder them.

When I found the thread on this forum which includes the crate argument, it was the first time I read one of your posts, David W. That discussion got a little heated, and, for some reason, I thought you were just being argumentative.

I had you pegged completely wrong, and I feel appropriately guilty now.

(I realize that my opinion of you probably doesn't really effect you in any way, by the way. I just try to admit when I'm wrong.)


In my defense, there is another old thread where Alex called you "Dave". When you replied, you called him "Al", and I very much enjoyed that.

(I have a good friend named David who HATES being addressed as "Dave", but he's never thought of fighting fire with fire. He just whines, "stop calling me that!")


I probably was being argumentative because I was surprised at how much the whole thing was being blown out of proportion. It's a crate, people. Not a big deal at all. Did the guy actually quote a dictionary for a description of a crate? I seem to think he did. It's a poor game writer who bashes the reviewer for pointing out flaws in his game. Believe me, I only wish a missing description of a crate had been the game's biggest flaw.

Plenty of people call me Dave so I wouldn't say it bothers me and it's not like I can do much about it anyway. I got the feeling Alex didn't like being called Al, though, which I found quite amusing.


I used to dislike a shortening of my name so much that I filed a Change of Name Deed to officially change it :p

(Turns out that finding certain combinations of syllables uncomfortable is a form of synæsthesia, and is moderately common in autistic people. So, I'm justified in not liking a certain name)


I'm not sure that's a good idea considering the way this thread has turned out. Can you imagine angry authors responding to every negative comment on their games? It'd be flame war central.

1.

If the author can reply to a review once and you can review a game once per... say account? A flame war is not possible.

2.

And.. I mean, since reviews are the subjective opinions of one person I'd like to think that most semi adult people could handle a bad one (review, I mean).


Either way. #1 should render the problem void.

Edit: I accidentally deleted half the text when posting, duh.


I'm not sure that would solve much, though. What if more than one person posts a review of the game and the author is limited to responding to just one of them? What if they've already responded once, and then a second review pops up? They wouldn't be able to respond. And, if they really want to respond more than one time, they can always post on the forum here or register multiple accounts. (Considering the sheer number of 5 star reviews for barely playable games, I'm guessing a lot of people are doing the latter already and have been for a long, long time.)


I mean, of course, that the creator should be able to comment once for every review recieved :)

Like so:

5 stars
Wow!!! This game was amaaaazing lol!!!!!111!!11

Creator reply: Cool, thanks!


1 star
This game sucked donkey ass!

Creator reply: Just like your mom huh?


It would make absolutely no sense to let the author only comment on one review.

And sure, if people want to create several accounts to give several bad reviews of the same game I guess that's possible.
But again... we're all semi adult so I think that would be an extremely rare thing.


You have a tremendous amount of faith in people you know next to nothing about and who you've only met over the internet. Or maybe I'm just way too cynical.


You have a tremendous amount of faith in people you know next to nothing about and who you've only met over the internet. Or maybe I'm just way too cynical.

Heehee. Or maybe both?

If I get crappy reviews when I publish my work it won't matter. I've had a great time working on it and I've learned so much since the start and if someone feel like tearing it to pieces in the review section I just can't be phased about it.
(Then again.. my game is really stupid so maybe it's because I expect crappy reviews, I'm not sure)


This topic is now closed. Topics are closed after 60 days of inactivity.

Support

Forums