Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by tikcol View Post
    I find it surprisingly reliable. More often than not when a show or a movie is around 7 on imdb it's because it is no masterpiece and anything below 6 is usually riddled with problems.

    Is the scoring perfect? Nope. Review bombing exists? Yep. It goes both ways though and they usually cancel each other out. See rings of power 10/10 review bombing as the latest example.
    10/10 reviews are more realistic than just giving a 1/10 though because many ppl will just enjoy it for what it is, where the hardcore lore strict fans will hate everything that is not 100% accurate or doesnt portray what they think it should be.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    10/10 reviews are more realistic than just giving a 1/10 though because many ppl will just enjoy it for what it is, where the hardcore lore strict fans will hate everything that is not 100% accurate or doesnt portray what they think it should be.
    You're probably rating too much stuff 10/10 if you think it's normal to do so because people 'like it for what it is'.

    You're biased beyhond belief so I'll disregard your take on anything that has to do with giving a fair assessment of any medium. Be it video games or tv shows
    "In real life, unlike in Shakespeare, the sweetness of the rose depends upon the name it bears. Things are not only what they are. They are, in very important respects, what they seem to be"

    End of quote. Repeat the line.

  3. #63
    Elemental Lord callipygoustp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    8,522
    Would removing score stop review bombing.
    Absolutely not.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by tikcol View Post
    You're probably rating too much stuff 10/10 if you think it's normal to do so because people 'like it for what it is'.

    You're biased beyhond belief so I'll disregard your take on anything that has to do with giving a fair assessment of any medium. Be it video games or tv shows
    Its a simple fact someone is much more likely to rate something a 10/10 than a 1/10, you are the one being biased here if you think a 1/10 rating could even be remotely considered an honest evaluation, just shows you to be completely dishonest.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    Its a simple fact someone is much more likely to rate something a 10/10 than a 1/10, you are the one being biased here if you think a 1/10 rating could even be remotely considered an honest evaluation, just shows you to be completely dishonest.
    You calling someone else dishonest is hilarious.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Rozz View Post
    Not true, because it's toxic in the other direction. MAL for instance has serious issues with popular shows getting review boosted because they're popular. If a show even gets close to beating FMA numerically, they'll actually spam perfect scores to keep their favorite at the top. Theyll also try to nuke the score of the competing show. Similar issues on other sites.

    Those shows are still good, but are they peak of their entire field? No. Or shows with a 9/10 at episode 1. That's stupid.
    Sounds like the part where I said "Ignore the 10s". Ignore the 10s, ignore the 1s, average out and you'll quite likely have a more honest representation of the actual rating of whatever is being rated.

  7. #67
    Moderator Rozz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    Sounds like the part where I said "Ignore the 10s". Ignore the 10s, ignore the 1s, average out and you'll quite likely have a more honest representation of the actual rating of whatever is being rated.
    I'm just referring to how both ends of this end up being the same cycle of toxic scoring behaviors. I think some 10s and 1s are valid opinions, because to certain people things just won't ever be appealing or they absolutely hit every box. But for the most part, 10 and 1 become either 1) political warfare between fans/haters 2) Like vs Dislike

    The issue is that I don't like Like/Dislike options either. Often I don't like something I watched, but I didn't dislike it. It wasn't bad but wasn't for me. Can't do anything about that on services like Netflix.
    Moderator of the General Off-Topic, Politics, Lore, and RP Forums
    "If you have any concerns, let me know via PM. I'll do my best to assist you."

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Xath View Post
    You calling someone else dishonest is hilarious.
    You are one how is always dishonest and cant accept something that is good or not when the proof is right in your face.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Rozz View Post
    The issue is that I don't like Like/Dislike options either. Often I don't like something I watched, but I didn't dislike it. It wasn't bad but wasn't for me. Can't do anything about that on services like Netflix.
    Bolded part is what people not Chronically Online mean by "Dislike".

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    Bolded part is what people not Chronically Online mean by "Dislike".
    Is it? That’s normally what I mean by “didn’t rate, did something else with my life”. If something clearly just isn’t for me then I’m not competent to rate it.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Snufflupagus View Post
    If something clearly just isn’t for me then I’m not competent to rate it.
    You don't need a massive expertise in the field to know you Like or Dislike a media piece.
    Only thing required is that you watch it so that you have knowledge of whether you like it or not - maybe that is something that could be changed on Streaming places and the likes. But even that can easily be cheated by pretending to watch, I suppose.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    You don't need a massive expertise in the field to know you Like or Dislike a media piece.
    Only thing required is that you watch it so that you have knowledge of whether you like it or not - maybe that is something that could be changed on Streaming places and the likes. But even that can easily be cheated by pretending to watch, I suppose.
    And what is the value of broadcasting to the world that you liked or didn’t like a thing, as opposed to whether you thought it was good or not?

  13. #73
    Moderator Rozz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    Bolded part is what people not Chronically Online mean by "Dislike".
    Eh, maybe for you and that's fine. When I dislike something, I got no value out of it or I want the time that I invested back. A solid 'it was okay' isn't something I'd associate with a negative response.
    Moderator of the General Off-Topic, Politics, Lore, and RP Forums
    "If you have any concerns, let me know via PM. I'll do my best to assist you."

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Rozz View Post
    Eh, maybe for you and that's fine. When I dislike something, I got no value out of it or I want the time that I invested back. A solid 'it was okay' isn't something I'd associate with a negative response.
    That's the downside of Like and Dislike system - it's binary. If you want to rate something "It was Okay", then the numerical rating system is better suited for it.

    The former is meant to protect people from clearly negative feedback, lumping both "It was Okay"s with "It was rubbish"s as a mere dislike.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Snufflupagus View Post
    And what is the value of broadcasting to the world that you liked or didn’t like a thing, as opposed to whether you thought it was good or not?
    Ratings are precisely broadcasting your opinion to others who are interested.

    In regards of your post, vote Like if you thought it was good, vote Dislike if you thought not. I'm confused about your question.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Xath View Post
    You calling someone else dishonest is hilarious.
    I also laughed out loud when I read it.

    OT: as others have said removing scores on, say, imdb would just cause viewers to go to rotten tomatoes or whoever still had scores. In all honestly I only think scores really matter for smaller productions that require a separate purchase anyway. I mean I'm not going to refuse to watch something on a subscription service I already have access to because it has a 5 on metacritic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleredar View Post
    Nah nah, see... I live by one simple creed: You might catch more flies with honey, but to catch honeys you gotta be fly.

  16. #76
    Watch what you want, critics be damned and form your own opinions. I don’t pay attention to the meta sites, I watch interviews with the cast and directors and go from there. Took about a week worth of interviews and that influencer disaster to nope out of RoP. Not completely sold yet, but GoT was a surprise.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    Ratings are precisely broadcasting your opinion to others who are interested.

    In regards of your post, vote Like if you thought it was good, vote Dislike if you thought not. I'm confused about your question.
    Okay, let me rephrase it: who could you possibly believe is interested in whether you dislike things or not?

    Particularly when those things "just aren't for you"?

    The value of a numerical rating system is that it (theoretically) collects information on the subject quality of a product. I can hate a film—Hereditary, say, or Twilight—and recognise that it nonetheless had a measure of quality. That's the aim of the approach to like/dislike scales I outlined above:

    Quote Originally Posted by Snufflupagus View Post
    If something clearly just isn’t for me then I’m not competent to rate it.
    With that philosophy, it remains the case: I just wouldn't rate Twilight, because I hated it but it doesn't follow that the product was bad. Millions of people did; my rating would be either objectively wrong (which is preposterous) or useless (in which case it's wasting everyone's time). If a sample population all did that there would be value in the resulting score: people who like X genre/aesthetic/writer/whatever could have some sense of whether or not they're likely to enjoy a given media product; other people who've liked similar stuff liked it too.

    Your approach is that you, personally, decide whether you like or dislike any given thing and then share that information. Even if you didn't like The Return of the King purely on the basis that you just can't stand fantasy. If an entire sample population did that, you'd arrive at a set of totally meaningless ratings torn this way and that by the whims and formal preferences of random people.

    If you watch something and it's just not for you, you're not competent to rate it. Whatever rating you put on it is useless information: Darkeon didn't like this film. Well, with all the respect in the world I don't care what you like or don't like. Your opinion on anything that's "just not for you" is data pollution, so the only rational response becomes:

    Quote Originally Posted by Theangryone View Post
    Watch what you want, critics be damned and form your own opinions. I don’t pay attention to the meta sites, I watch interviews with the cast and directors and go from there...
    Which is barely better (what on earth bearing do interviews with cast and crew have on anything? I'm sure some of the guys on Eragon were lovely people) and which invalidates the whole process and effort of reviewing media products.

    Which leads, ultimately, to my original observation:

    Quote Originally Posted by Snufflupagus View Post
    Really the problem is the weird faith people put in crowdsourced reviews (I love you guys but if I’m honest I don’t give a shit what you think about anything) and the weird attachment people form so they feel review bombing is a worthwhile thing to do. Absent the latter, review “scores” would probably be more reliable; absent the former, we wouldn’t have to worry about all this nonsense and reviews could go back to being a critical engagement with the substance of the thing.
    Last edited by Snufflupagus; 2022-09-05 at 01:37 AM.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Snufflupagus View Post
    Okay, let me rephrase it: who could you possibly believe is interested in whether you dislike things or not?

    Particularly when those things "just aren't for you"?

    The value of a numerical rating system is that it (theoretically) collects information on the subject quality of a product. I can hate a film—Hereditary, say, or Twilight—and recognise that it nonetheless had a measure of quality. That's the aim of the approach to like/dislike scales I outlined above:
    The type of people that are meta-slaves to reviews do, I suppose.

    Review websites are usually big broad strokes and are good for what they are meant to do - see Twilight, as example, IMDB is rating it 5ish. I find that accurate - it's not to give you personally tailored stats.
    A way to battle that specific problem is entirely up to the user - find reviewers that you are aware that align with your personal tastes and, if you really are bothered to look for a review/rating on something, take theirs opinion into consideration.

    --

    Adding an image. And bloody hell, if Twilight (for all it's flaws) isn't a good example for my original premise on this thread lol

    Lots of review bombing. The movie clearly isn't a mudpile of worthlessness.
    Lots of review bloating. The movie cleary isn't a masterpiece for the ages.
    It averages at.. mediocre.

    There's a very specific type pf media that isn't worried about Review Bombing.
    Looking at a Marvel-only score list and, generally:
    Marvel: Endgame wasn't worried about it.
    Iron Man wasn't worried about it.
    Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't worried about it.

    Thor: Love and Thunder was worried about it though...
    Last edited by Darkeon; 2022-09-05 at 01:52 AM.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    The type of people that are meta-slaves to reviews do, I suppose.

    Review websites are usually big broad strokes and are good for what they are meant to do - see Twilight, as example, IMDB is rating it 5ish. I find that accurate - it's not to give you personally tailored stats.
    A way to battle that specific problem is entirely up to the user - find reviewers that you are aware that align with your personal tastes and, if you really are bothered to look for a review/rating on something, take theirs opinion into consideration.

    --

    Adding an image. And bloody hell, if Twilight (for all it's flaws) isn't a good example for my original premise on this thread lol

    Lots of review bombing. The movie clearly isn't a mudpile of worthlessness.
    Lots of review bloating. The movie cleary isn't a masterpiece for the ages.
    It averages at.. mediocre.

    There's a very specific type pf media that isn't worried about Review Bombing.
    Looking at a Marvel-only score list and, generally:
    Marvel: Endgame wasn't worried about it.
    Iron Man wasn't worried about it.
    Guardians of the Galaxy wasn't worried about it.

    Thor: Love and Thunder was worried about it though...
    Twilight is worse than worthless imo because it exemplifies an unhealthy relationship and holds it up as something to be aspired to.

  20. #80
    Maybe the corporations who own every relevant IP should get a thicker skin and do a better job as shepherds of our collective culture?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •