Site Feedback

Which reminds me, colors should be changed 'cause I can't see anything with the dark theme...

I believe it was changed recently in the search where DLCs were off by default.

However, you can change it back to showing DLCs by going to Search Options > Modifiers > Include DLC.

Ok, thank you. Thing is I use simple http parser to search for time data for my games backlog in form of a google sheet. Well, I'll try change my script somehow (I did it some time ago, and don't really remember how :D). Anyway, thank you for pointing me to the right direction.

A feature I think could be great is uploading images to the site.

I don't know about anyone else, but I personally would like more custom tabs beyond the three already provided. I just enjoy having my stuff well organized.

Site Idea: It really bugs me when a rating says 7.7 (or something like that) since there is no 100 point rating scale. Can we add one of those?

If I understand you correctly, you want to be able to review games with scores like 7.7 and 8.1, right? I would love that as well! At the very least I'd like to have 0.5 intervals, so I could rate a game 7.5 or 8.5 for example. It would be more nuanced and more in line with how most review sites score games.

If I understand you correctly, you want to be able to review games with scores like 7.7 and 8.1, right? I would love that as well! At the very least I'd like to have 0.5 intervals, so I could rate a game 7.5 or 8.5 for example. It would be more nuanced and more in line with how most review sites score games.

In all my time, I have not even seen Everdred acknowledge requests for a 20-point system. I don't think he will ever consider a 100-point system.

Which reminds me, colors should be changed 'cause I can't see anything with the dark theme...

Didn't realize this, I'll try to get it fixed soon.

As for other discussions, a change to the review point system is not out of the question.

I don't know about anyone else, but I personally would like more custom tabs beyond the three already provided. I just enjoy having my stuff well organized.

I was wondering about this one too. Is there actually a reason why it's limited like that? I'm not complaining since I can handle with what we got, but I am actually wondering what's the reason for the limitation out of curiosity. Like, does it demand too much server power or something? I have no idea about that sort of stuff. I wouldn't even be opposed to giving out more custom tabs as a donator perk or whatever if that's the case.
I do find myself sometimes wishing I just had one more custom tab for organization. lol

- Matt

One thing to consider apart from anything else is that if there was to be a review score change, all legacy reviews would just move to their multiple of 10, and this could skew ratings for games that released before the change vs those that released after.

I was wondering about this one too. Is there actually a reason why it's limited like that? I'm not complaining since I can handle with what we got, but I am actually wondering what's the reason for the limitation out of curiosity. Like, does it demand too much server power or something? I have no idea about that sort of stuff. I wouldn't even be opposed to giving out more custom tabs as a donator perk or whatever if that's the case.
I do find myself sometimes wishing I just had one more custom tab for organization. lol

- Matt

Worth noting that until earlier in the year (?) there was only one list available.

Honestly, you should all be using the vastly superior five-point rating system, anyway. 😝 And as an added benefit, it already has increments of 0.5!

I genuinely don't see any rational reasoning why 10 steps aren't enough to rate a game, to be quite honest.100 point scales don't really express that much more than 10 steps. Is it really that important to rate a game 7.7 instead of just 8?
Also no matter how many points there are, it seems to me like people will always ask for more because "they need more nuances". It seems like a never-ending argument from my experience.

- Matt

Honestly, you should all be using the vastly superior five-point rating system, anyway. 😝 And as an added benefit, it already has increments of 0.5!

I was going to switch to 5-point until I saw it was still 10-point, and I didn't know why I'd bother displaying a fake 5-point system so I changed it back :/

I was going to switch to 5-point until I saw it was still 10-point, and I didn't know why I'd bother displaying a fake 5-point system so I changed it back :/

Yeah, it's just the ten-point system in disguise, but I'm one of those people who tend to get caught in the upper echelons of a ten-point scale... even the worst games would score a 5. 🙄 So I still find it easier to analyze a game's merits (or lack thereof) with the notion of a five-point scale: excellent, good, okay, poor, and shit.

I genuinely don't see any rational reasoning why 10 steps aren't enough to rate a game, to be quite honest.100 point scales don't really express that much more than 10 steps. Is it really that important to rate a game 7.7 instead of just 8?
Also no matter how many points there are, it seems to me like people will always ask for more because "they need more nuances". It seems like a never-ending argument from my experience.

- Matt

I agree. Your not going to get more nuance by simply increasing the number of increments. Games are complex forms of media and trying to reduce one to a single number, tier, or word is going to be more a matter of opinion then objective analyses. Different aspects of a game are going to be weighted differently for each individual when they determine what score to give it. This problem gets much worse when it comes to remakes or when a game in a long-running franchise that significantly deviates from the established formula (whether or not it is "faithful" to the series). Review scores are only useful to determine the overall response to a game. The only way to achieve nuance would be to write a full review analyzing the different aspects of the game in question.

Yeah, it's just the ten-point system in disguise, but I'm one of those people who tend to get caught in the upper echelons of a ten-point scale... even the worst games would score a 5. 🙄 So I still find it easier to analyze a game's merits (or lack thereof) with the notion of a five-point scale: excellent, good, okay, poor, and shit.

I tend to rate in the upper echelons too, but that's really because I mostly finish good games that I like playing. There are some notable exceptions, but even then they tend to be a 4-6 at worst (edit: looks like I have rated many games in that range). I don't know that I'd ever beat a game that I had to rate 1.

Which makes me think of a feature request: show stats for how many games we've rated 1-10. It looks like I've rated a lot of 6/10 games, but knowing how many compared to 10/10 would be cool :)

A 100 point rating system is similar to the drive to collect things. People either understand it or they don't, and no amount of explaining is going to do any good. To me, yes it is important to give a 6.4 instead of a 6 or 7. This topic is kinda a pet peeve of mine because whenever it pops up you always get a bunch of people opposing it, which I find really weird or frustrating even. I get that a 20 or a 100 point rating system is not important for everyone and that's completely fine. But it shouldn't be away from anyone if those who want to give a game 88 points can do that. I'm of course ignoring the practicality here. If the system is time consuming to implement or if it could break something then it's a different story. But ever since I joined, a 20 or 100 point system has been the clear number one feature I would like to see on this site.

A 100 point rating system is similar to the drive to collect things. People either understand it or they don't, and no amount of explaining is going to do any good. To me, yes it is important to give a 6.4 instead of a 6 or 7. This topic is kinda a pet peeve of mine because whenever it pops up you always get a bunch of people opposing it, which I find really weird or frustrating even. I get that a 20 or a 100 point rating system is not important for everyone and that's completely fine. But it shouldn't be away from anyone if those who want to give a game 88 points can do that. I'm of course ignoring the practicality here. If the system is time consuming to implement or if it could break something then it's a different story. But ever since I joined, a 20 or 100 point system has been the clear number one feature I would like to see on this site.

We're completely on the same page here. If it's too hard to implement or if it would fuck up the system, then okay, I would totally accept that. I just don't quite understand the negative stance towards the possible change from a user perspective. You could still choose to only score games in increments of 1, it would just give other users the option to be a bit more nuanced. As silly as that might sound to some people, stuff like this matters to others. I just love ranking things. :D

Like, I have many 8s and there is no distinction between them, although I like some of those games more than the others. But it's not enough to give them a 9 or the others a 7. It's hard to explain, but video game scores have been weird for a long time. On sites like Metacritic a 7 is already considered "average" or even "bad". Keeping this notion in mind, the scores 1-6 are almost redundant and it really limits the range of scores you can realistically give.

A 100 point rating system is similar to the drive to collect things. People either understand it or they don't, and no amount of explaining is going to do any good. To me, yes it is important to give a 6.4 instead of a 6 or 7. This topic is kinda a pet peeve of mine because whenever it pops up you always get a bunch of people opposing it, which I find really weird or frustrating even. I get that a 20 or a 100 point rating system is not important for everyone and that's completely fine. But it shouldn't be away from anyone if those who want to give a game 88 points can do that. I'm of course ignoring the practicality here. If the system is time consuming to implement or if it could break something then it's a different story. But ever since I joined, a 20 or 100 point system has been the clear number one feature I would like to see on this site.

I mean, I wouldn't go all up in arms protesting against a change to a 100 step rating. I'm completely fine with using it. I'm on other platforms already that work with that system. It just seems like an unnecessary change on here under these circumstances.

- Matt

I mean, I wouldn't go all up in arms protesting against a change to a 100 step rating. I'm completely fine with using it. I'm on other platforms already that work with that system. It just seems like an unnecessary change on here under these circumstances.

- Matt

This tbh.

What are "these circumstances"? Why "this tbh"? For once it would be nice to hear an actual argument against a 20/100 point system. It's a feature that would be nice for those who care. The ones who don't care can just ignore it and use the other rating systems. It's always this "I don't understand/like/care therefore no one should" BS.

What are "these circumstances"? Why "this tbh"? For once it would be nice to hear an actual argument against a 20/100 point system. It's a feature that would be nice for those who care. The ones who don't care can just ignore it and use the other rating systems. It's always this "I don't understand/like/care therefore no one should" BS.

Mostly the fact that it would kinda mess up all the old ratings from the previous like 9 years or something by automatically adjusting the numbers and, as I'd assume, it's probably a hassle to implement such a site-wide change.
I don't think any platform should ever change their rating system after years of use. It just messes up the system for no reason.

Like NinjaRic said:

One thing to consider apart from anything else is that if there was to be a review score change, all legacy reviews would just move to their multiple of 10, and this could skew ratings for games that released before the change vs those that released after.

In my personal opinion, rating systems should go under the "if you don't like it, don't try to change it. Try to find an alternative that suits you." category because it's such a fundamental thing for a website like this that, for most people, it would just be an unnecessary hassle to change a core attribute of the system that the site worked with for almost a decade, just because a few people would prefer it differently.

But of course, I'm not the one calling the shots. And if the admin/mods would decide to implement it, I'm not gonna complain. It just doesn't seem plausible.

- Matt

Alternative compromise proposal - @Everdred would it be possible to implement 100-point personal ratings that round up or to the nearest multiple of 10 within the publicly viewable database? That could seem to please almost everyone without borking a decade of review data if it's doable.

Alternative compromise proposal - @Everdred would it be possible to implement 100-point personal ratings that round up or to the nearest multiple of 10 within the publicly viewable database? That could seem to please almost everyone without borking a decade of review data if it's doable.

That'd be a great compromise for me personally. As long as I can see my weird 7.7 and 8.1 scores on my page, I'm satisfied. :D

Alternative compromise proposal - @Everdred would it be possible to implement 100-point personal ratings that round up or to the nearest multiple of 10 within the publicly viewable database? That could seem to please almost everyone without borking a decade of review data if it's doable.

I would be leaning towards a 20 point but this is a possibility.

It doesn't necessarily ruin a decade of data as the game pages are already on a 100 point system.

It's a nuisance for those that want to go back and change their reviews. I can't say I would be interested in doing that personally. It's easy to understand the want though. I just played Fallen Order and it felt more like 8.5 than an 8 or a 9 but I made a decision.

A 20-point system was already tested a couple years back and I decided to scrap it. I don't see the system changing in the next 3 months as I'd rather prioritize some other things.

So for everyone discussing, I think some great points were made all around and I'll keep this in mind.

And who knows, sometimes I just get a random inclination to something and it happens in a couple days. (See the platform overhaul)