ID:260484
 
When a person writes a review for a game, the game's owner should be able to either allow or disallow the review to be shown on the hub. It's my hub, why should other players be able to contribute false information?

Great example: The current Stargate Online issue on the BYOND members page.
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.
As Hazman said. The BYOND Hub is a service to BYOND users. Yurgeta is allowed to put his game on the BYOND Hub and receives free advertising. In return, he must endure reviews and whatnot that are posted on it.

The entire point of the reviews is to better games. In this case, it has clearly proven Yurgeta's incompetence. At least Bovine_Buddy of Cow RP improved himself and his game thanks to the review posted on that hub.

-- Data
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.
Calus CoRPS wrote:
When a person writes a review for a game, the game's owner should be able to either allow or disallow the review to be shown on the hub. It's my hub, why should other players be able to contribute false information?

If the info is false, why not post info to correct it? Or, one could take the cowardly option and delete their hub entry, close down their blog, and generally totally freak out.

On the plus side, now I know of a specific bug I can fix.

Lummox JR
In response to Jtgibson (#3)
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)
In response to Jamesburrow (#5)
Jamesburrow wrote:
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)

In the upcoming site upgrade, being listed in any popular guild is a bonus, so I don't think that'll be an issue.

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR (#6)
How much of an upgrade is this? Is it anything like between the Old Layout -> New Layout? Introduction of member pages?
In response to Flame Sage (#7)
Flame Sage wrote:
How much of an upgrade is this? Is it anything like between the Old Layout -> New Layout? Introduction of member pages?

In some ways not much will change. A lot of the same functionality is still in place, though there are a couple of new perks. Other things are changing a lot more, especially layout of some of the main site. But there'll be more info when we're ready to announce it.

Lummox JR
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.
In response to Lummox JR (#6)
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.
In response to Jamesburrow (#10)
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.
In response to Lummox JR (#4)
Lummox JR wrote:
On the plus side, now I know of a specific bug I can fix.

This wouldn't happen to involve the text that displays stating that the post is a review for x game by x author, would it? I was just about to report that.
In response to Foomer (#11)
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.
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. As for guild listings, I would say add an option for all or not, it really isn't fair to games to have no control over something that is displayed on their hub page , such examples include the "This Game is a Rip" Guild. Also the part that lists other games that users who paly your game play doesn't really belong, it is simply advertising for other games on a game's hub, great for shopping but not for games.
In response to Kikaider (#14)
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.
As I pointed out on that thread, people are fully capable of creating their own hub using PHP and world.Export(), and could do that to try and avoid the reviews. There are no rules in using BYOND's hub to show games.
In response to Foomer (#15)
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.
In response to Jamesburrow (#13)
As I said, ask the guild owner to remove your game from their listing.

When it all boils down to it, the hub is a free service and one is not required to use it. You can always just have a web site for your game like people do with games written in any other language, and host your game's files there.

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.
In response to Foomer (#18)
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.
Page: 1 2