This is the same argument as the one about the blog ratings. Game owners shouldn't be able to suppress reviews just because they don't like them. If the information is false, the review will get rated down. I expect that this will eventually affect its visibility and, if a game has many reviews, how high up the list it comes.

I'd be in favour of an "allow reviews" checkbox which was an all-or-nothing affair; either you accept all of the reviews, good or bad, or you accept none of the reviews, good or bad. Allowing people selectively to list the good reviews while ignoring the bad reviews would just result in stagnation.

I'd also put the power in the hands of the users and allow them to click a link to search all of the reviews on BYOND Members. In this case, it would give the impression that this game doesn't want people to review it, but for those people who care there are still unofficial reviews of the game.


As for the actual issue, holy prima donna Batman. I guess some people hit puberty later than others.

I think I agree with Jt. The all or nothing thing is definitely the better option.



Although, I will say that hub owners should at the very least be able to have authority over which guilds list them (and if not which guilds list them, at least which guilds show up on their hub page)

How much of an upgrade is this? Is it anything like between the Old Layout -> New Layout? Introduction of member pages?

Perhaps the yay/nay option would be good in this situation. If the review receives more negative reviews than positive ones, it doesn't get displayed on the game's hub.

In the end though, this is just how its going to end up when the power is in the hands of a bunch of immature players. I suppose theoretically BYOND's staff could appoint a group of official reviewers who would be the only ones capable of writing formal reviews, but they seem interested in having a more hands-off approach to BYOND's games.

I'm just thinking of http://gamemakergames.com. They have a whole bunch of games listed, but only a few notable ones actually have staff reviews.

Jamesburrow wrote:

Yeah, but then you have to deal with the not-so-popular guids and those guilds that group your game together with games you would really like to not be grouped with.

I don't see how this is any different than someone making a website that lists your game together with others. Its just not something you have control over. If you don't want your game listed, try asking the guild owner to remove your game from the list.

Well, it's one thing to have your game listed, but another to have it advertised on your hub.

Take this for example :
If I decide to make a game, and it becomes rather popular.
A guild owner then decides to place my game in his guild.
I'm like sure! Free publicity! BUT, I don't want his guild appearing on my hub because the guild is infamous for being full of rippers and other ne'er-do-wells. Although I don't mind them seeing my game and deciding to play it (so long as they abide by the rules of the game), I would really rather my game not seem to be officially affiliated with said guild.

If someone builds a website and chooses to list my game, their website does not automatically appear on my hub unless I choose to list it.

It's like any other form of advertisement. We cannot control how third parties advertise, but we CAN choose to not advertise something we may disagree with.

Kikaider wrote:

In my opinion the reviews should be similar to the setup of the default forum. The owner of the hub can delete the reviews as he sees fit.

There's absolutely no point in having reviews if the owner of the game being reviewed can delete any reviews that they don't like. If someone reviews the game saying that it isn't any good, when, in fact, it isn't, and the game owner doesn't like that review because it was negative and deletes it - then what's the point? Its not a review if the object of the review and select which reviews they want.

Just like me, now, reviewing that your idea stinks. If you could delete my review of your idea, this forum would be pretty useless.

reviews are for members only right? i think there needs to be some moderation for trolls, if they post a bunch of ridiculously poorly thought out attack reviews they should lose that ability for a month or something.

Foomer wrote:

I would recommend that adding a game to a guild be a two-party process: The guild owner must add the game and the game owner must approve it for that guild before it is displayed, however that would make it impossible for people to list older games who's owners are no longer available to approve the request.

Agreed. The concern there could perhaps be circumvented by giving the owner a two week grace period to accept or deny it before it is able to be accepted without the owner's consent.