Forums - Reply to Topic

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options Automatically parse links in text

13-06-2005 09:31 PM

Fruit Pie Jones

I'm so vain, I probably think this topic's about me.

I solemnly swear that I will never channel Carly Simon again. Really, it hurt.

13-06-2005 05:15 PM

marko river

Yes

More listing options could be more fun for people.
Still, i would really like to hear Data's reason for saying no, it might give us new aspect. Seriously, you probably had a reason for saying no.

13-06-2005 03:53 PM

Flop

Quote:

Originally posted by A. J. Raffles@Jun 13 2005, 05:03 PM
I don't really know anything about how much work this sort of thing would involve, but I doubt it could be implemented that easily...
Anyway, the difference between 2.5 and 3.49 isn't really all that great, is it? Both mean "sort of OK". :bleh:

I think the difference is pretty big since the score is 1-5. It means that the score can be "wrong" by up to 20 percent.

Edit:
@Reamus: Yeah, excactly like AR.

13-06-2005 03:37 PM

Kon-Tiki

I vote for hexadecimal rating!
...
What? Alright... bineair then :whistle:

13-06-2005 03:04 PM

Data

Hmm Tom has copycated me

I agree with flop on the decimal rating though. (especially for the public rating)

13-06-2005 03:03 PM

A. J. Raffles

I don't really know anything about how much work this sort of thing would involve, but I doubt it could be implemented that easily...
Anyway, the difference between 2.5 and 3.49 isn't really all that great, is it? Both mean "sort of OK". :bleh:

13-06-2005 02:43 PM

ReamusLQ

Quote:

Originally posted by Flop@Jun 13 2005, 07:12 AM
Yeah, you can't have two odd ones out, since two is an even number, so either you guys have to decide which one of you it's gonna be or you have to find a third.

Seriously though, I was thinking that I'd prefer to be able to sort by the public rating, since I trust that one more. This is not a criticism of the reviewers, but since the reviews on this site are made by volunteers, it's only natural that the reviewers tend to review games they alredy know and like, which means most games get a high score. That's perfectly understandable, but it also means that I for one trust the public rating more.

And on that note, I'd really like it if the common rating could be expressed as a decimal number, with just one digit after the decimal point, instead of a rational number, to give a clearer view of what people have voted. It's not necessary to do this with the reviewer score, obviously, since there is only one vote, but when there are many votes (in some cases thousands of votes), a score of three might mean anything between 2.5 and 3.49.

Anyway, I have no idea how hard this would be to implement, so feel free to disregard it. It was just a thought.

so do it like they have on Reloaded yes?

13-06-2005 02:12 PM

Flop

Yeah, you can't have two odd ones out, since two is an even number, so either you guys have to decide which one of you it's gonna be or you have to find a third.

Seriously though, I was thinking that I'd prefer to be able to sort by the public rating, since I trust that one more. This is not a criticism of the reviewers, but since the reviews on this site are made by volunteers, it's only natural that the reviewers tend to review games they alredy know and like, which means most games get a high score. That's perfectly understandable, but it also means that I for one trust the public rating more.

And on that note, I'd really like it if the common rating could be expressed as a decimal number, with just one digit after the decimal point, instead of a rational number, to give a clearer view of what people have voted. It's not necessary to do this with the reviewer score, obviously, since there is only one vote, but when there are many votes (in some cases thousands of votes), a score of three might mean anything between 2.5 and 3.49.

Anyway, I have no idea how hard this would be to implement, so feel free to disregard it. It was just a thought.

13-06-2005 01:49 PM

ReamusLQ

Quote:

Originally posted by A. J. Raffles+Jun 13 2005, 05:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (A. J. Raffles @ Jun 13 2005, 05:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Tom Henrik@Jun 13 2005, 12:20 PM
I want to be the odd one out. (Just like Data) :bleh:

No.

Well, you can't. There can be only one odd one out. Sort of like Highlanders.:P [/b][/quote]
so who's head do we cut off? Data's or Tom's?

And I vote yes

13-06-2005 12:59 PM

A. J. Raffles

Quote:

Originally posted by Tom Henrik@Jun 13 2005, 12:20 PM
I want to be the odd one out. (Just like Data) :bleh:

No.

Well, you can't. There can be only one odd one out. Sort of like Highlanders.:P

This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off