Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » OLD BGGBlogs (do not use)

Subject: Informal game rating protocol rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael Von Ahnen
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have read plenty of geek journals that discuss the problem with ratings of games, particular ratings that get skewed from people who have rated games that they have not even played.

How about this? An informal protocol (or gentlemen's agreement) on ratings that if you are going to rate a game on the extreme side (1, 2, 3, or 8, 9, 10), why not write a review of the game so that you can explain your rational? It would show an understanding of the game (or possible a misunderstanding) that would justify being able to influence the overall rating of the game.

Not only would this add credibility to your ratings, but it would also give people who might disagree with your rating another point of view for looking at the game. Not to mention, some peoples gold is other peoples fertilizer. A review blasting Advanced Squad Leader for its complexity might influence somebody to go out and buy it.

Just some food for thought.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Tavener
United Kingdom
London
England
flag msg tools
designer
The overtext below is true.
badge
The overtext above is false.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
so that you can explain your rational
Um, was that "your rationale", or "you're rational"?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Moore
England
Birmingham
flag msg tools
designer
badge
'This War Without an Enemy'
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wouldn't regard a rating of 8 or even 9 as extreme. After all, according to the BGG recommendations a rating of 8 denotes: "Very good game. I like to play. Probably I'll suggest it and will never turn down a game." For me, this applies to a significant proportion of German games (and a majority of those that I buy).

However, I do think it is better not to rate a game that you haven't played. Even after one or two plays, it can often be difficult to judge a game fairly. I always include comments with any rating I give, and if I have only played a game once, I state this at the beginning of my comment.

In any case, you should always treat numerical ratings with caution (particularly as the type of average used can greatly affect the relative position of games in any ranking). I would never purchase a game based on a high rating alone.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Von Ahnen
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It would have to be "your rationale", I have never been accused of being overly rational.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Pranno
United States
Chardon
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That's does it!!! I am going to rate every game I have ever played a 4,5,6 or 7 just to avoid getting nasty messages in my Inbox.

I tend to agree with your sentiments, but outside of rankings games, what purpose does a BGG rating really have?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chester
United States
Temple
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Uh....well, I use them in this way:

I find several people who enjoy the same games I enjoy. I add them to my Geekbuddies list. I then see what other games they've ranked highly which I haven't played or am not familiar with. I read their comments accompanying the ratings. That's the list of games I research for possible purchase in the future.

Some people live in a situation where they can try lots of games before buying them. I don't.

I'm not sure why a person would need to write a review to defend their rating. Don't the 'comments' serve that function. I think of a review as needing to be more systematic and contain information about gameplay and mechanics that I don't really care to include in my regular comments. However, if I write a couple paragraphs about why I like/dislike a certain game...that should make it clear whether my rating should be acknowledged or ignored by the reader.

Anyway, I think game ratings are simply a tool to help organize Geekbuddy lists to get you to the comments section in a more organized way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Pranno
United States
Chardon
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
that should make it clear whether my rating should be acknowledged or ignored by the reader.

But once again we are back to the question "What does a rating have anything to do with except ranking games?". In the end, it is all about the comments, reviews, and even the questions posted on the specific games' pages. True, using the GeekBuddy list in the manner described above is useful. But you still have to rely on the Buddy to have chosen his ratings with the "acceptable" criteria as posed by the originator of this thread.

Personally, I used to browse the Geeklists to find games that I might enjoy. Example: I like Age of Steam. So I will go look up all the Geeklists that contain Age of Steam (hopefully, some of the "not too whimsical" kind) and see what other kind of train, economic, strategic Euros there might be out there. The reason I say used to is because the Geeklists are becoming a bit too diluted with trivial (albeit funny) lists that have very little in the way of gaming cohesion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Curt Collins
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It is quite acceptable to rate a game 1,2, or 3 with only one playing, as you are unlikely to ever play again. A 10 however, needs to be played multiple times before you know it is a real gem. There are alot of bogus ratings here, and I don't even look at a games rating anymore when searching out a new game as they are just too unreliable.

Games that are over commercialized should have a star next to them as a warning.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Haberman
United States
Painesville
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't see any problem with rating a game after only playing it once, as long as you come back and adjust the rating with more playings.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Randy Cox
United States
Clemson
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
1024x768 works just fine - Don't Wide the Site!
badge
Missing old BGG
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd agree with a modification to the geek so that whenever someone enters a rating below 3.01 or above 9.00, they're taken to a screen to enter their detailed review. Of course, they can just type "this game sucks," but then they'll be ridiculed for writing such a crappy review (as well it should be).

At least it would hinder people from extreme ratings (and in my book, ratings from 4 to 9 are not extreme), but it would ultimately just change the top and bottom parameters. Shills will nudge games up towards 9 or down towards 3, thus narrowing the current scale. But it would be fun to watch.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Von Ahnen
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Reviews versus ratings
My angle on this was that if somebody hates a game, tell me why, in more detail than is appropriate for the comments section on the game.

For example, I currently have no plans to ever play Advanced Squad Leader. I got my fill of the rules with the original Squad Leader system. But if I saw a 10 rating with a review to back it up, I might change my mind (not really, just an example for discussion purposes).

Another example, I am not a big fan of the Euro games, because when I get roped into playing them, it is usually is the latest, greatest, newest one that just happens to look and feel like latest, greatest, newest one that I played 3, 6, 9, or 12 months ago. But I have enjoyed listening to Geek Speak and the reviews and they have reviewed my interest, because of the detailed review from Ted.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Eisen
United States
Menlo Park
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I don't agree. I have no interest in reading detailed reviews from people who aren't much interested in writing a review or from people who don't happen to have the skillset to write good reviews.

Let's just accept that some number of ratings will not be accurate to the 4th decimal point and move on.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jefF, There are some who call me... DuneKitteh
United States
Wood Dale
Illinois
flag msg tools
Dune Kitty really does love you, despite any asshattery.
badge
Useless rollover, booya! Dune Kitty says, "deal with it."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it’s pretty much fine the way that it is (there are certainly a lot of other things on BGG that could use fixin’ first). I’ll almost always look at reviews and comments that ARE there and that’ll tell me a lot more than just the rating either way. I just don’t think we need every one of the people that rated a game like Wadjet at a 3 or below to justify it – just the few that explain it pretty much fill in the blanks for the rest. I try to comment on my ratings, but not all... the only game I’ve rated below a 2, I’ve actually written a full review explaining why. Two of my other lower rated games I admittedly haven’t actually even played. ASL is just NOT my cup of tea and it’s more like keeping track of menutia and doing math than a game to me, and Magic The Gathering I just hate the principle behind most CCG’s of having to pay to get better – both might very well be fine games and people may love them to death, but they’re never going to get a good rating from me based simply on what they are and I don’t have to play them to determine that. Some people may have a problem with that philosophy and cry out, “well, how do you know you won’t like it if you haven’t tried it.” To which I usually reply, “I don’t think I need a hot poker jammed into my ear to have a pretty good idea that I won’t like that too.”
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.