User Review Requests Archive Discussion!

I disagree with it all, making things even more simple can give serious issues between games that have questionable content. I think for instance any game between 5 and 8, where making things to easy might needlessly give a game review an unnuanced view. A game can be a 6 and be good for some or bad for some, that's why being able to range it as accurately as possible can help differentiate it. As I said, if you make the Graphics/sound/gameplay/etc settings optional and only make a final score scaled to 100 mandatory then users can choose themselves to accentuate whatever they'd likeDaavpuke

I still think bringing it back is a bad idea. The reason it was discarded in the first place was because it was deemed to complex, and wasn't at all made to be used for comparison purposes unlike what public perception would imply, which I wholeheartedly agree with. The current system is fine as is. I say leave the numbers be (that's something for the editorial department to handle, anyway, not us) and instead focus on implementing anything that can improve our reviews.

As others have said, I too would like to see a feedback section on reviews. The thumbs up and down section is nice but it doesn't tell you if you're review was any good as it seems most people recommend your review if you give a game they like a high score and give you a thumbs down if you don't, and vise versa with a game they hate. Feedback would certainly help improve the quality of all reviews for everyone, provided that nobody trolls in it, but we can just mod them.

I really appreciate this discussion, since there are some changes I feel would only be good for everyone involved. :)

I myself am an officer of a reviewers' union, so there have been numerous discussions about what could be improved. One thing that was particularly discussed is the "thumbs up, thumbs down" option, and how it could be made more in the line of rather emphasizing rewarding good writing and arguments instead of just thumbing up if you agree, thumbing down if you disagree. This could be done with the mentioned "comments section" on reviews, though it might turn into the opposite, i.e. a place where people will be insulting each other.

What I'd rather have is to organize the system a bit more like on GameFAQs, having a set, higher word count limit. You notice it already in the review section how most of the reviews are more than just random scribblings.

Organizing reviews would also be a welcome addition, for instance in regards to the top 100 and 500 and in relation to how recommended it is with thumbs-up. Adding an emblem function is something I haven't heard of, but it would be very sweet.

I don't want to sound like just another complainer, but I'd still want to recommend that at least the users get the simple function of being able to rate games by 0.1 increments. I do so and I'm often in a hassle deciding what I should make the score be in 0.5 increments. I don't think there needs to be a system like before, with separate functions, just the option to have 0.1 increments.

Thanks again for the discussion, it's great to see that you're willing to listen so earnestly to the users.

I agree on almost all of those ideas. I especially want to be able to add emblems similar to the staff reviews. Since we can't give specific scores for graphics and audio and so forth, it can be hard to quickly communicate the good and bad things about a game without adding too much text to make the review interesting for the reader. I also like having a feedback box for the writer. I would recommend that a function be implemented where a user can be blocked from giving feedback if the author wishes, so that people who want to attack anyone who disagrees with their points on a game can be safely ignored. Other than that, all the ideas seem good. A sorting feature would be really nice as well. Glad this is being discussed. I look forward to any changes implemented.

I'd love to add my pros and cons, like in official GameSpot reviews.

In general, any new ideas to improve player's reviews are great. In my taste, more we can put in a review, like photos and videos, could really improve the posts and texts. Also, a text editor could help to format the review and make it easy to read and comprehend.

Have to say that the increase of minimum words is almost necessary. Was really sad the number of useless reviews that I found with the minimum words. 100 is very little to add to a minimum that I don't ever consider a text.

The change of the way how we give scores is of low importance, since that a score is just a 'reference' to a game, not what it is. What is important is what you write about it, not in what score you give.

A user filter could be a good idea too, making easier to find the good stuff. Notice that is almost impossible to know a good review to a bad one only looking to its "review deck". Or we find a good review through someone we know or through the "thumbs up or down".

First off, great thread. All of the reviewers are offering great and important suggestions to making reviews easier and more fun to write and discuss.

Here's my thoughts on some of these ideas:

Sorting: Yes. There are some great reviews that desperately need to be seen and read, so being able to sort reviews based on score and reviewer status would be fantastic. I'd hate to let great but up-and-coming reviewers get buried beneath more prolific reviewers, but having multiple ways to sort reviews for each game would be beneficial not only to reviewers looking to help out the community with their advice, but also those looking for strong advice as to whether or not a game is good enough to be worth their time and money.

Score Refinement: As much as I didn't like the change from .1 to .5 differences in score at first, I find that narrowing the gap is important. However, there must be a balance. I feel that while a 1-5 scale is simple, it doesn't really tell whether a game is better than another particularly well. The 1-10 scale is better, but it still feels a bit narrow. I like the 1-10 (.5) level scale a lot as I feel that it nails that balance. It's easy to see if one game is better than another, but also makes it easier for the reviewer to assign a numeric value to a given game. In my opinion, keep the scoring as it is.

Video and Image Integration: Please, please do this. Visual and audio is important in this day and age, and giving the reviewer community some form of visual or audio integration into their reviews would expand the creativity bar considerably. Players could offer their own personal experiences in the game which would broaden the review community, allowing users to check out multiple viewpoints. I know that video reviews are already assignable in the user videos (I've made one myself, and have watched many others), but being able to assign video qualities to the reviews would be great. At the very least offer community reviewers the same reviewing privileges as the staff reviewers like heightened pros and cons, and emblems to signify importances in the game. I feel that community reviewers are at a disadvantage in this department, so this is probably my biggest suggestion to improving the review community.

Thumbs-up and Thumbs-down: The thumbs-down has become abused, so scrapping the thumbs-down button (and using a new sorting system) would allow good reviews to float to the top, regardless of those who simply don't like the game instead of those who don't like the REVIEW. This is a big point, as I've seen some fantastically written reviews get neglected just because their score or content was against the grain. A review that doesn't follow the general trend is bound to have some backlash, which brings down the reviewer morale and can even discourage them from writing more of their well-written reviews. Eliminating the thumbs-down button is a progressive idea, one that will keep morale up and give the better reviews the feedback that they need to prosper.

This is a great discussion that everyone has contributed to with flying colors. I give my thanks to everyone who's offered their ideas to this. As an avid reviewer, I treasure the review community, so I'm very happy that others care so much for the review community. Keep at it, everyone!

A comments section for user reviews would be great and being able to hand out emblems like in the reviews written by GS editors. also I would prefer it if user score on games were based on user reviews only as that increases the chance the people have played the game in question giving the game a more fair and accurate score.

I think that the increase of the minimum word count would help out a lot. Also, I saw a suggestion around here that top 100/500 community reviewers' reviews should be noted as by a top 100/500 reviewer. Because I have no humility and I want everybody to know how great I am.

And "The Bottom Line" taglines, I've never been a fan of them.

Personally, I think the options on Gamespot for user reviews are probably the best around. I wouldn't mind having an option to leave short comments below a user review, though.

• review ``helpful or not'' instead of thumbs, definitely;
• since writing good reviews require MUCH work than just participating/voting in features which often grant several emblems at once, i suggest making more emblems ( with better design) for xxx reviewers, based on quality, helpful, and such -- not just the actual lame top 100, 500, grandfathered;
• fonts for pros, cons, and emblems akin editor review (or limited in order to avoid space abuse/ reserved to top 100?);
• special event(s) with some rewards during the November/December rush when people may read more reviews;
• if feasible, a direct linking ''hours played'' with %achievements/trophies for XBox/PS3 games, to show how far the user has mastered the game, either tightening or not the overall review or the validity of specific details exposed within.

A quote from Master Marcus:

If feasible, a direct linking ''hours played'' with %achievements/trophies for XBox/PS3 games, to show how far the user has mastered the game, either tightening or not the overall review or the validity of specific details exposed within.

Also add steam / raptor / xfire etc. My reason for this is that at least I can see that the revieweractually made an effort of playing the game instead of playing the tutorial (so-to-speak).

Also add those little icons that the gamespot reviewers have.

Thanks for bringing this up Jody, I only really have a couple of things to say.

- Disallow users to review or rate a game if it's not in their tracked, recent played, or game collection #1 Ask the Mods discussion | #2

JodyR

While I see the point in this to stop people hating on games they haven't even played (I have read a few that were so off the wall it wasn't even funny) That would stop people like me from reviewing certain titles like Suikoden 3 which I own but can't add to my collection as it is a US import :PI also tend not to use the tracking or now playing list as I swap titles quite quickly.

- Disallow users to review one specific game across all consoles (text shouldn't be exactly the same due to the console or PC/Mac having different capabilities and controls

JodyR

This I completely agree with. Even multi-platform titles have differences, sometimes quite obviously so. People should only review games for the platform they used, not accross the board as it makes them inaccurate.

I am also in full agreement with others here regarding the increased word count up to maybe 300? I doubt it will stop certain peaople spamming a letter over and over to reach it but it may put some people off.

Okay regarding all these thumbs up/down, tracking, and review feedback discussions... I had a somewhat crazy idea I'd nevertheless like to voice. It involves combining the aforementioned in a relatively whole system - hold your tomatoes. Okay, here goes.

Assuming the necessity to have a game on one of your tracked lists in order to be able to review it IS integrated, along with review comments, why not follow up with something like this:

Instead of the number of users agreeing/disagreeing with a given review, you are given a small notice, below the review link, as to how many users... commented on it. The thing is, only a user who has the very same game on their tracked lists can comment on a review for that game.

It may be just enough to discourage trolls to bother, and will provide feedback on how much folk actually read the thing with an objective point of view, albeit dismissing agreement/disagreement info (which is unneeded really, you don't need to agree on a review to consider it well-written and worthy of your comment).

It will also make commenting on a review for elaboration's sake (before you've brought the game) impossible, but most of us only read and give feedback to see if viewpoints match, right?

I understand it may sound too complex, unthought through (I just came up with this) and definitely borderline impossible to implement, but what the heck, I thought I'd throw in something for discussion. What do you think, guys?

It's good to see that the user reviews are going to be updated for the better. I agree with all the points you listed here Jody. Another thing I would like to see is just a minor formating system where you can change the justification of the text to center justified. Right justified on a form like this just looks sloppy, imo. :) Thanks again.

I too am a bit late but had a message in my inbox requesting my input, so here goes.

I agree the words requirement should be upped, and making it easier to add pictures would be cool to.

I also concur that a "helpfull" or "Not" option would be good for the reviews, this way whatever users feel or find to be the most beneficial will be on top and easier to find for all of us.

Only allowing people to write reviews if they "Own" the game though, I'm not so sure about. If you can rent and beat the game in that time, you should still be able to write a review for it even if it isn't technically part of your collection. But like others said by allowing someone who has at least tracked or had the game in their "now playing" list to write reviews for the game would help offset that.

I'll be looking forward to the review improvements.

Comments on reviews would be nice, though i do get that flame wars could start up. But this is a needed feature and if you could find a way to implement it, nothing better.64316431

Well, one way to make sure there wouldn't be any flame wars would be to somehow tie-in the feedback with the Top 100/500 emblem, meaning only those who have the emblems (plus mods & staff) could post feedback.:P

What do you think, guys?LGTX

It's not a bad idea, but I'm uncertain of it being able to deter any type of trollish comments from cropping up. Adding a game to your tracked list doesn't take much do to, and if that's all that's needed to make a comment, then I don't see too big of a change happening in that regard. Additionally, having to track a game seems a bit pointless just to post a simple comment, especially for older titles.

It's a decent idea, though.

Well, one way to make sure there wouldn't be any flame wars would be to somehow tie-in the feedback with the Top 100/500 emblem, meaning only those who have the emblems (plus mods & staff) could post feedback.:Ptopsemag55

Do many of us who hold the top reviewers emblem often go through reading other player reviews, though? Because if not, then that's kinda of a waste. Such an ability may encourage some to do so, granted, but still. Seems like something that should be open to everyone.

I like:

I really do like the sort review feature. Can we make the top 100-500 reviewers get the nod first as the default sort?

It's hard to find quality user reviews when you have to sift through several pages of "this is the best game evar" or "sucks" before you can find something worthwhile.

Additionally, I think there needs to be an algorithm to detect a user from consistently giving thumbs up and thumbs down on 10s or 1s or any ridiculously skewed review scores. Example: User cannot just walk for stuff review. to 10-20 10-based scores

Idea: Provide featured reviews by users - a review being featured by users should be handled by moderators. Basically highlight the best user reviews.

What I don't like: I don't like the idea of having something in your collection list as a requirement for review. That's just another delay tactic that will not slow down the abusive user from doing the inevitable - provide overly bias review scores.

Top Community Reviewers Badge keeping Badge requirement:

Should at least have 4-5 reviews a year. High quality, non-bias but factual and clean review should be the points for getting a reviewer badge.

I have never been a fan of the current review scoring system. Some may think that there isn't any difference between a 9.1 and a 9.4, but I believe there is. It allowed you to be more precise with your scoring. Does the current scoring system work? Yes, but I believe it took a step backwards with the revamp. For example, the removal of the individual scoring of a games graphics, sound, ect. was a bad move. It gave a summary of what you thought of each aspect of the game, although you should be able to give your own custom score instead of the score you give each category determining it for you (like it was with the old system). Including the badges would be a step in the right direction, but I still think it could be improved over that.

Allowing images, in addition HTML, would definitely be a major enhancement. It would player reviews look more professional and give them much more customizable options for their reviews. Adding player video reviews would also be just as good. The player would feel like a professional editor and reviewer of Gamespot.

Removing the thumbs down option is also a serious concern as well. To me, all that has to be shown is if a review was helpful. If it is, all the many players can give it a thumbs up. No need to see how many thumbed it down (this goes for comments as well). If a player disagrees with a review, well they have the right to but there's no need to thumb down a nicely written review just because you disagree with it. Just don't vote it up. I think removing the thumbs down would help a lot, and it would make writing reviews less "risky".

Having the ablility to sort reviews would also be helpful, and it would give the chance for older reviews to be seen much easier.

Also add steam / raptor / xfire etc. My reason for this is that at least I can see that the revieweractually made an effort of playing the game instead of playing the tutorial (so-to-speak).

Azghouls

I support this. Honesty is obviously important, and doing this eliminates the complaints of "oh this guy didn't play enough of this game to fully judge it" because they've got solid evidence that they actually have.

I used to write more reviews with this site but I rarely do now which I tackled in my own thread on the subject which got picked up in the first post in this thread. I think everyone wants to be able to see and read good high quality reviews but the bottom line I think comes down to that there is no longer any motivation for anyone to do that other than for whatever personal enjoyment they get out of the process. Many years ago, the better reviews managed to bubble their way up into a "Featured Reviews" section and I found that I could often get into that section by writing good reviews. When the section went away, I no longer had any incentive to spend time on a review that would likely disappear in short order and very few people would end up reading.

For me, the most significant thing you could do to re-engage me in the review process is to make it so my reviews (when deserving of course) actually get read by more people and I think the old "Featured Reviews" feature did that well.

The problem I have with the Thumbs Up/Down thing we have now is that it's trying to capture two different things. One is "I agree with this review" and the other is "This is a good review". Those two things are different and you may not necessarily have the same vote on them. I can disagree with a good review that I think is nevertheless worthy of others reading. Likewise, I can agree with a review that is short and to the point but not nessarily I would recommend everyone read.

And in fact, the system is even worse because the labels used are different. On the list of reviews page you see "2 users agree with this review" but on the review details page you see "Rate this review Up/Down". Those are not the same thing!

I would think that rating the quality of a review would be a more useful metric for the rest of the community than how many people agree with it and if we can get those buttons to reflect quality over agreement, I think that would be a plus. Perhaps we need two different sets of buttons? What about a "Would you recommend this review" button? Perhaps each user has a new list of recommended reviews that might discourage people from just adding trash to.

[QUOTE="Azghouls"]

Also add steam / raptor / xfire etc. My reason for this is that at least I can see that the revieweractually made an effort of playing the game instead of playing the tutorial (so-to-speak).

asian_pride69

I support this. Honesty is obviously important, and doing this eliminates the complaints of "oh this guy didn't play enough of this game to fully judge it" because they've got solid evidence that they actually have.

how about access to the Game Emblems for user reviews? maybe restrict their usage to users with a certain amount of recommendations or something if they start getting abused?-The-G-Man-

I thank you gamespot for taking peoples ideas and putting them up for discussion. I believe that having a comments section on the user reviews could help alot as people get to see what people think of the review you have written, and I understand you would also need moderators to help look at these reviews for spam or offensive talk (hint hint im open!). Also perhaps some form of structure to reviews? Give people subheadings to start with so they have topics to talk about and may add or delete sub heading to meet there own personal preference, in my own opinion, if I see a review with no sturcture, i dont read it. There either difficult to read or not detailed enough to meet my personal taste. Hope you read and hope my changes can be taken into effect.

[QUOTE="Azghouls"]

Also add steam / raptor / xfire etc. My reason for this is that at least I can see that the revieweractually made an effort of playing the game instead of playing the tutorial (so-to-speak).

asian_pride69

I support this. Honesty is obviously important, and doing this eliminates the complaints of "oh this guy didn't play enough of this game to fully judge it" because they've got solid evidence that they actually have.

I don't think that's logical. XFire can reduce performance of certain games, or cause other conflicts, so odds are people are not going to use XFire all the time. If I look at my own profile, I have about 5 hours clocked on Crysis, while that really should be about 20 hours seeing as I beat the game twice. Shadow of Chernobyl has 2 hours, and that's probably closer to a 50 in reality, if it weren't for the fact that XFire makes that game crash like every 15 minutes.

Moreover, I think it's a bad idea in general to try and put some sort of control over reviewers. I'm a reviewer here, and I contribute to this site's user section for fun: for the pleasure of myself and for entertaining and informing others, and I'm sure this is pretty much the same for every serious user reviewer on this site. Installing measures to try and verify if people are for real appears to me as megalomanic, and it would create the wrong climate, seeing as they're based on the preassumption that you might be pulling everyone's leg. Add to this the fact that you can usually notice from the review if someone has actually played that game, and there is really no necessity for this measure at all.

Those features look amazing. I would like to add this: Make the user lose all the thumbs up/down when the review has its score dramatically changed or got the text heavily modified (now sure how that could be implemented).

My point on this: I'm quite an old user here in GameSpot and I've seen several reviewers doing this: Post a very posivite review about a popular game just a few days after its release; and then, after a month or less, the reviewer edits substantially the score and the text itself to point aspects that weren't mentioned before.

Those features look amazing. I would like to add this: Make the user lose all the thumbs up/down when the review has its score dramatically changed or got the text heavily modified (now sure how that could be implemented).

My point on this: I'm quite an old user here in GameSpot and I've seen several reviewers doing this: Post a very posivite review about a popular game just a few days after its release; and then, after a month or less, the reviewer edits substantially the score and the text itself to point aspects that weren't mentioned before.

ChristianKiss

I have another suggestion: Could we possibly see an increase on the character count for the review deck? The current maximum of 120 characters is fine and all but it is a tad restricting, I find. If it could be upped to, say, 150 or so (180 tops, maybe?) it would make writing up the deck easier.

If we want the ability to sort reviews or have something like a Featured Review section then obviously you need a way to rank reviews. Here are some of my thoughts on how you could do that.

First, I would say that the score of a review should be hidden from the users. I think giving an explicit score is likely to encourage people to attempt to exploit it. The largest contribution to the score should obviously be from the ratings of other users (thumbs up/down, recommended/not recommended or what other scheme you end up using). Another chunk should be based on the content of the review. If the review is relatively short, then it probably shouldn't get a high score. If the review is one large block of text with no paragraphs, if it has no capital letters (or all capital letters), run-on sentences or lots of slang words and abreviations (lol, rulez, da bomb, pos and so on) or mispellings then that is probably an indication that it's not a very good review.

I would also add a contribution to the score based on the user. If the user has gotten lots of negative review scores, then that should probably lower the score. If the user himself has ranked a lot of other reviews negatively (or vice-versus) then it might be an indication that he's just gaming the system and that should probably affect his score. If a small group of people seem to rank reviews amongst themselve positively or outside the group negatively, that could be an indication of a group trying to exploit the system and that could hurt the score.

And perhaps the user's Gamespot score could add a small piece. A long time or active user might get a slightly higher score. A user with a significant moderation history might get a lower score. I'm not sure about including the number of reviews written though as I wouldn't want to hide users who write few reviews but write really good ones when they do.

And perhaps the negatives I mentioned above get capped so that your past doesn't necessarily destroy anything new you may write, but it at least prevents it from getting a top score and the negatives could fade out over time.

I have another suggestion: Could we possibly see an increase on the character count for the review deck? The current maximum of 120 characters is fine and all but it is a tad restricting, I find. If it could be upped to, say, 150 or so (180 tops, maybe?) it would make writing up the deck easier.

c_rake

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]Well, one way to make sure there wouldn't be any flame wars would be to somehow tie-in the feedback with the Top 100/500 emblem, meaning only those who have the emblems (plus mods & staff) could post feedback.:Pc_rake

Do many of us who hold the top reviewers emblem often go through reading other player reviews, though? Because if not, then that's kinda of a waste. Such an ability may encourage some to do so, granted, but still. Seems like something that should be open to everyone.

I do periodically comb through player reviews on the games that I own, or the ones I'm interested in buying. For example, I read quite a few reviews prior to buying Dead Space recently.

And I have to admit that Kevin Van Ord's reviews (and some of the members' reviews) have helped me to keep me from making a bad purchase decision.

I'm somewhat leery of having a feedback area open to all, as they could easily become another System Wars.:P

It's readily apparent in some areas, Morrowind vs. Oblivion is one. Some who prefer one over the other generally detests the other (I'm a member of the Bethesda Forum, so I see it a lot).:P

Plus, I'm a PC gamer, and I don't see any purpose to a person gaming on another platform commenting on a PC review (or vice versa). Thus, a platform restriction plus owning the game should be tied into any feedback.