User Review Overhaul

[DGCae]

I'm going to be completely honest, the User Review section is shit at the moment when it comes to organization. Right now it's a conglomerate of a bunch of reviews for a bunch of games both video and otherwise with absolutely no order or easy way to find what you're looking for without searching for every topic/post that may include the game you're after on the forums. Since the forum is still in the process of getting developed and what not I thought it'd be a good idea to throw in a suggestion on how to organize it a bit better.

• Subsections for the subsections for the subsections. I'm not talking every game, do it like we have on the rest of the forum, Video Games > RPG or Table Top > Card Games... etc.
• Perhaps an alphabetical sort option and a way to jump straight to a specific letter.
• A format requirement for at the very least the title of the topic. The actual review format itself can very from user to user but have a requirement for the title of the review ie. Game Name - Console/PC - Score so it makes it easier on the eyes and easier to find what you're looking for while also working in tandem with that alphabetical sort from before.

I think incorporating any one of these would benefit the forum greatly but personally I wouldn't mind seeing all three for the most optimal experience, but that's just me. I'll even offer to edit titles and sort the stuff myself too for free. Sometimes it sucks being a neat freak. :P

[DGCae]

It's a fairly good system though I think the "review" tag is unnecessary in the actual title. If you are posting it in the User Review section then people are already going to expect it to be a review since that's what the section is for. It may be better to include the system you played the game on in the title instead since a game can vary drastically from system to system (i.e. Arkham Knight for instance). That way a user can search for the title of the game and the system they want to get it on and know exactly what the review will include without having to actually read the review itself. I personally wouldn't like to click on a review only to find out it's based off the PS4 version when I was looking for the PC version, so easiest way to eliminate that is to put the name and system right up there in the topic title.

[Tysakasa]

• A format requirement for at the very least the title of the topic. The actual review format itself can very from user to user but have a requirement for the title of the review ie. Game Name - Console/PC - Score so it makes it easier on the eyes and easier to find what you're looking for while also working in tandem with that alphabetical sort from before.

With regards to this, the way I'm kind of doing it (currently just testing the waters here, reason I only have one review up) is starting with just the title of the game (nothing fancy, just game name plus "review" tagged to it) but when you get inside you have title name, developer, platform, what platform it was review on (unless it's an exclusive game then I don't bother adding this), then the review, which can be a little messy, but again, mostly just testing the waters here and trying to figure out how I want to organize my own reviews if I continue forward with them. Also have a final verdict. Then at the bottom I provide links to official outlets you can buy from (so Steam, GOG, Origin, PSN, LIVE ... Nintendo if they have a web store) in the event you're sold on the review and are a digital purchaser. Won't link to retail stores since I don't know where people are from or if the store even still carries it, nor will I link to third party sellers even if they are legitimate.

As for searching through the section, I think one of the main issues is how some of the filtering ends up global instead of for a specific section. But this is just my guess as I'm not that much in the know with forum development, most I've really done is front end stuff (so organizing the look). But the forum is still in development, as more and more people being to use it more often, the team will most likely adjust things to help streamline certain things and make it easier to navigate based on user usage. They may even offer subsections to users who are frequent reviewers with a following so that they're easier to find while the more casual reviewers will be lumped together the way it current is. Only time will tell as the forum is still in its infancy. The upcoming holiday isn't helping matters either XD Though it may allow for more usage data to be collected as more are likely to start using the forum over the holiday's since there's more free time available to them to check it out.

[gLItcHyGeAR]

I just want to be able to sort the section for reviews for certain games, and sort either from oldest to newest or newest to oldest at my liesure. That should be the bare minimum expected of a review section. If I have to sift through ALL THE REVIEWS for a single game, it's useless to me!

[Nodsaibot]

I don't think you should be bothered by the user reviews (forum) but a proper way to ensure clean reviews is to enforce a format and only allow members with certain rank to post there (eg. after 20 non spam posts)

[Aidy]

I think one of the problems holding the review section back (though probably not for all) is that there is probably a size limit on posts so a longer, more detailed review may need to be chopped up. As Tom said though, the proper reviews aren't going to constitute the review section of this forum.

[Tom]

False accusations are not going to be unnoticed.

Ronnin426850

[Ronnin426850]

I have already addressed all your comments and remarks in previous posts. I will not repeat myself anymore. I will not comment and feed the troll further, go police someone else's suggestions. And seriously think about whether this is a platform that philosophically aligns with your agenda, or is your energy better spent in an echo chamber somewhere else. Bye.

[Tom]

-"I have never done that. I never ever classified anyone's attitude."
Strawman
"That" is not "classifying anyones attitude", "that" is telling me what shouldn't be mean instead of being respectful and cutting on the passive-agression.

-"are you sure EG is the right platform for you? You'll feel right at home in some other forums, where calling out people's tone, morals and ethics is perfectly ok."
Ad hominem + hostility

"A dictionary definition says nothing about established standards of quality. "
There is no standart to write exclusively objective reviews. Get over this, or provide proof besides your opinion, period.

"No, the line is useless and subjective vs useful and objective. If you disagree, you are just wrong. "
Strawman + further contradicting the objective definition, no backing for words provided.

"I did not make the thread, nor am I the only one complaining of the state of the User Reviews section..."
Strawman, your personal needs are expressed in your own first post here, OP doesn't share your thoughts.

"Oh, and the lack of standardization"
Strawman, i didn't mention lack of order, the thesis is about your rhetoric.

"1) your logic is retarded"
Ad hominem

" the usability of the forum is reduced by all the unsorted clutter and low quality shitpost."
Strawman + Ad hominem,

"Once again you're not thinking before you post something."
insult (def: speak to or treat with disrespect )

"I do not seek conversation. I would much rather you stop talking to me. Or at all. My post serves to, as I already said, bring awareness to an issue. I don't want your comments, replies or opinions, "
You are commenting under my post.

" I am objectively, measurably right "
Your post is completely subjective and doesn't contain any objective background or proof.

"if you so much dislike the opinions of people who state issues with the forum, get out of the "Questions & Suggestions", nobody asked you to evaluate people's opinions."
Strawman + hostility

Hope you're proud of yourself, man.
"I don't want your comments, replies or opinions"

Ronnin426850

[Ronnin426850]

"why have you inserted your opinion on what YOU consider "mean""
I have never done that. I never ever classified anyone's attitude. You are the only one focused on expressive correctness here, are you sure EG is the right platform for you? You'll feel right at home in some other forums, where calling out people's tone, morals and ethics is perfectly ok.

"Definition of a review"
A dictionary definition says nothing about established standards of quality. Go write a science report based only on dictionary definition of what "science report" means, and get your ass laughed at by every publisher in existence.
Furthermore, it is not difficult to tell apart useful from useless and objective from subjective, and unless I'm doing guest lecturing at the local class for kids with mental disorders, I should not have to explain why useless and subjective should be clearly separated from useful and objective, like I originally suggested.

"The line turns out to be your personal preference"
No, the line is useless and subjective vs useful and objective. If you disagree, you are just wrong.

"There is a clear line between your personal "needs" and actual objective issues."
I did not make the thread, nor am I the only one complaining of the state of the User Reviews section, therefore it is clear to any individual with capacity for rational though that it is not my personal needs. I have no NEEDS from this forum. I provide to it. My complaints and suggestions are very specific and targeted at the betterment of the forum, and I personally gain nothing from them. You seem to be a really really confused individual if you read a complaint and think it's "personal need". Oh, and the lack of standardization and the mess in the forum is an actual objective issue because it gets in the way of people using the forum. Again, not a matter of opinion, you are just wrong.

"By my logic your personal dissatisfactions with someone's particular review are not the reason for a change"
Yes, but 1) your logic is retarded, and 2) my personal dissatisfaction excluded, the usability of the forum is reduced by all the unsorted clutter and low quality shitpost. Once again you're not thinking before you post something.

"why do you even seek the conversation"
I do not seek conversation. I would much rather you stop talking to me. Or at all. My post serves to, as I already said, bring awareness to an issue. I don't want your comments, replies or opinions, as I am objectively, measurably right and there can be no discussion about it that is not a waste of space and time. Now stop spamming and if you so much dislike the opinions of people who state issues with the forum, get out of the "Questions & Suggestions", nobody asked you to evaluate people's opinions.

[Tom]

If my opinion on what's mean is meaningless to you then why have you inserted your opinion on what YOU consider "mean" in the first place?


"The fact is that a wall of poorly phrased text, containing no objective information and a shit ton of personal opinions is NOT and NEVER WILL BE a review, and it DOES NOT BELONG in the REVIEW section. It belongs in other parts of the forum, dedicated to PERSONAL OPINIONS. "

This is not a fact, but just your personal opinion, contains your preference and is not objective.

Here's the fact:

Definition of a review:
3. countable noun
"A review is a report in the media in which someone gives THEIR OPINION of something such as a new book or film. "
Now the question: "Do you even think about the stuff you're saying?? "


"Other people's opinion on what constitutes "a review" are irrelevant, because there is a very clear line between a review and a shitpost."
The line turns out to be your personal preference which contradicts the very definition of a "media review".

"and this whole thread exists to bring attention to issues. "
There is a clear line between your personal "needs" and actual objective issues.

By my logic your personal dissatisfactions with someone's particular review are not the reason for a change just as the people's dissatisfactions with your opinion is not the reason to silence you, read the post carefully.
Ronnin426850

Also, why do you even seek the conversation if everyone's opinion is absolutely meaningless to you.
Quit humiliating yourself, have some goddamn respect.

[Ronnin426850]

Honestly your opinion on what is "mean" is absolutely meaningless to me.
The fact is that a wall of poorly phrased text, containing no objective information and a shit ton of personal opinions is NOT and NEVER WILL BE a review, and it DOES NOT BELONG in the REVIEW section. It belongs in other parts of the forum, dedicated to PERSONAL OPINIONS.
Other people's opinions on what constitutes "a review" are irrelevant, because there is a very clear line between a review and a shitpost.
And "what some people do" on a forum is exactly the business of a moderator, and this whole thread exists to bring attention to issues.
Do you even think about the stuff you're saying?? "Dissatisfaction is no reason for change", "What other people do is not our business"... By your own logic, be dissatisfied with my rhetoric in quiet, because it's not your business? Jesus...

[Tom]

First of all quit mixing my "Life" with your arguments, even if that's just a phrasing, there is no constructive progression behind that.

Secondly, Some people will do what some people want, "some people's" business is not our business, if you don't agree with their view on how a review should be, then good for you, because their opinion is worth not less than yours. And, guess what, they are going to be dissatisfied with your decision, is it a good reason to not listen to your opinion now ?

This is why the good reason for a change is when objectively there will be improvement for everyone and not simply fix for your personal dissatifaction with the length,
get it now ?

Also, deliberately calling people's reviews a "shitposts" is mean, be responsible.

Ronnin426850

[Ronnin426850]

If you think that's mean attitude, how do you handle life? Some people don't know what a "review" is, that's what I'm saying. Am I wrong? No, I'm not. And yes, the FORUM, in general, is for everyone to share their takes. But the REVIEW SECTION of the forum is for everyone to share their REVIEWS. If something doesn't qualify as a review, it belongs in a different part of the forum.
And dissatisfaction is the only good reason for change. That's what this whole site is about. Get off the white horse and try to browse through the review section and see how many actual reviews are there.

[Tom]

One of the major reasons the User Review section is a mess is that 98% of the people who post there think it's a "General opinions about whatever I wanna talk about" section. Like, reviewing a single item from a game, and the "review" consisting of 4 sentences giving personal opinion about the item - that's a joke. A review should be on a full game or a DLC with 20+ hours of gameplay, and should be informative, objective and well written.
So I believe a section called "I can't write reviews to save my life, but I have a strong opinion about this one thing" should be made to separate those passionate shitposts from the actual reviews.

I have to disagree with the rhetoric here,
i think that everyone should write their review as they please,
"actual" reviews are going to be listed officially for the main site, forum is for everyone to share their takes.
Your personal dissatisfaction with someone's take on this is not a good reason for a change..

Let me make it more objective:
We should add minimum character requirement for the review section posts.
We should also create a new subforum under 'User reviews' called "User Opinions" for short posts.

There you go,
no reason to have a mean attitude.