Writing for RPGWatch

In that case, I'd rather wait a few months and take a thorough look at upcoming changes. Revising the review now is kinda pointless as they'll no doubt keep patching it for a while.
 
Something like that could always be done as a "second look" article, if the changes really warrant it. Since DC isn't that RPG focused anyway, I am not sure it's warranted.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,508
A new patch is out. Could you give the new features & improvements a try and include them in the review if they're relevant enough?
I'm starting over with a new play through, and will construct a second look article or make further comments to the submitted review if it changes anything significant - I deliberately avoided talking about bugs in the review for this reason though.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,877
I didn't mean spending hours on the improvements. In most cases a brief look would be enough for an assessment.

Bugs should be mentioned if you ran into them and consider them annoying enough. If the only issue is a couple of floating trees, it's not really worth writing about.
The promise "we'll fix it later" should be countered with "then we'll revise the rating after the patch". ;)
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
I didn't mean spending hours on the improvements. In most cases a brief look would be enough for an assessment.

Bugs should be mentioned if you ran into them and consider them annoying enough. If the only issue is a couple of floating trees, it's not really worth writing about.
The promise "we'll fix it later" should be countered with "then we'll revise the rating after the patch". ;)

Depends if you're reviewing code that's representative of the retail experience. Often you get review code that is a few versions behind retail, because they've had to freeze it earlier. In such cases I try and make a judgement on how likely it is such things are to be addressed by retail. Case in point for my review - there was a really annoying bug where a bit of speech ("That's impossible, commander") would start looping over and over. This drove me (and my wife if she was in the room) mad! I didn't know, but it was present in the retail version briefly, but was fixed in today's patch. My reviews still not out, so would now be out of date if I had mentioned it :p
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,877
Anybody interested in writing a review about the indie RPG & survival mix Black Home - Vermillion Monastery ?
Homepage
YouTube video
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
They offered us a review key. So far it's still available. Which also means that as of now there won't be a review on the Watch.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
I'd like to suggest implementing "half stars" for future reviews. I don't think full stars only represent enough precision for a fair numerical score.

Am I alone in thinking this?
 
I'd like to suggest implementing "half stars" for future reviews. I don't think full stars only represent enough precision for a fair numerical score.

Am I alone in thinking this?

It does make quite a bit swing in perception - 60% vs 80% for one star would be taken badly on sites like metacritic.. but on the other hand RPGWatch has a clear scoring guide and if that's followed without regard for other scoring systems it's not too bad. Plus it really makes you think about which to choose and to justify it when the editors start picking over your review :p
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,877
I'd like to suggest implementing "half stars" for future reviews. I don't think full stars only represent enough precision for a fair numerical score.

Am I alone in thinking this?

No, I agree. I would actually prefer either a scoreless system or a 0 - 10 or 0 - 100 scale. But if it has to be a five star system then half stars should definitely be allowed since every single star is a full 20% plus or minus. This is certainly making it quite difficult for the reviewer. Is the game a 6/10 or an 8/10? No in-betweens. That can be pretty tough to decide in some cases.
Finally, I'd like to suggest that if the stars are kept that the star icons should finally be replaced by something less light yellow and more golden (maybe like —> see attachment)?
 

Attachments

  • star-highlight.png
    star-highlight.png
    1.2 KB · Views: 53
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
Full star:

attachment.php



Half star:

attachment.php


:lol:
 

Attachments

  • adult_star.jpg
    adult_star.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 7
  • child_star.jpg
    child_star.jpg
    23.6 KB · Views: 7
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
NO,NO,NO!!! You still don't get it!!!!! Our scores are NOT a percentage. 5/5 is NOT 100%. Please, READ what our scores mean!!
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
How about watch towers instead? 8/10 watch towers ? better from a PR point of view as well.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
NO,NO,NO!!! You still don't get it!!!!! Our scores are NOT a percentage. 5/5 is NOT 100%. Please, READ what our scores mean!!

I know what your scores mean :)

But I don't think it's a good system, frankly.

There's simply too much detail lost with such a limited system.

Believe me, I was wracking my brain about whether to give Dragon Commander a 3 or 4 based on your system wording - and ultimately, 3 was too harsh.

The wording of 4 is too generous, but it was a better fit.

As I explained to Myrthos - I don't like rating games at all in a review - but since you insist on enforcing a rating, at least it should be a bit more nuanced.

That's just me, however - and it's only a suggestion.

As for the whole "it's not a percentage" - that's nonsense in a logical sense, I'm afraid.

70% says exactly the same as 3.5 - it's all down to personal interpretation.

There's no objective guide to what 70% means, no more than there's a guide to what 3.5 means.

That's why these numerical systems are silly - and though I appreciate your wording, it's simply not wholesome enough for my tastes.
 
Dart, to some extent I agree with you. I'd like to see the scoring re-written since I have the same issues you do. All I was commenting on was equating those scores with a percentage.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Dart, to some extent I agree with you. I'd like to see the scoring re-written since I have the same issues you do. All I was commenting on was equating those scores with a percentage.

People will equate it to a percentage no matter what you write in your wording, though.

Also, 70% to you means something completely different than what 70% means to a random stranger.

The fact that joxer calls it perfect should be evidence enough that something is wrong with it :)
 
Back
Top Bottom