In my example, the stars are for the author and are not visible publicly because they do not affect weighting. The only thing that affects weighting is the recommendation. The stars and categories I listed are purely for filtering the critic's thoughts so that everyone uses a consistent template. I don't agree with removing the review system entirely because then there is no consistent way to communicate issues with a map. If there is a recommendation option and nothing else, I am more likely to look at a map, recognize that it has problems, choose not to recommend it, and avoid commenting. Now that map is dead with no feedback because I don't feel like typing out categories to explain myself to the author. Conversely, the lack of a clear system means I could pull some arbitrary term out of my ass like "your map is awkward" and the author wont know what to even make of that. And the majority of the people here are unlikely to go into Forge to share their feedback, much less know what they're even saying if they did that.
Cesspool has a 9 star rating and all these other Infection maps have a 10. If that doesn't tell you something wrong with the rating system then I dunno what will. Cus as we all know... CESSPOOL IS THE BEST POOL
If there are no rewards in Forgehub's review system, then why do some of you have the words "Forge Critic" next to your username? If you didn't get that title for writing a review, then how did you get it?
Under these systems with hidden reviews/feedback, could there be an options to reveal the feedback? If the forger is interested in an open dialog about their map rather than just a bunch of separate opinions?
Forge critics are supposed to be people whos review mean more because they know more. Which is weird because war has given me a lot of **** in the past for saying that not everyone's opinion on level design should be equal, some people absolutely have a better grasp. Which is why the forge critic system is so odd given his stance that we're all equal
Now I haven't read the whole thread but I got a coupla points to make... 1. Definitely keep "forge critic" status. They kinda show the review/feedback can be trusted 2. The home page should show map's downloads, likes/recommends and views. Not downloads, comments and views. To do with the actual reviewing here is a possible suggestion: Remove the review section and turn the comments into a place to leave reviews/feedback. The rating system should be scrapped altogether. Maps should be judged on likes/recommends instead. Just change the heading from comments to feedback and arrange it similar to YouTube comments with the reviews/feedback with most likes appearing higher. Feedback can also be like and replied to like comments in YouTube. This is just an idea but it's something
Well, the question that was asked was, "Why don't you write reviews?" My response was essentially, "I don't believe a review from me would help anyone. " Your dissertation on the merits of a review are fine and I don't necessarily disagree, but my experience with similar games is that sharing your work does not necessarily result in a public review or, in the case of this site, public criticism. It's still clear to me that writing a review here will only result in a bunch of reviews of my review This thread is already discussing who's reviews should count and I know I will never be on that list. Therefore I don't write reviews. I like to help people and that usually means a hands-on approach. Anything that I say publicly about your map probably won't help anyone. When I work on things I generally stream it live. People can and will say whatever they want in chat and I love it because it's real-time and much more mutually beneficial.
You didn’t answer my question. I didn't ask what "Forge Critic" means. It's a pretty simple concept. What I asked is how do you ,get that title? What do you have to do or write? How do you earn it? Do you get that title for writing reviews, does someone offer you the title? Or do you have to ask a staff member directly? What is the method by which one aquires that title?
Here's how I'd like the map page to look: *MAP* (Title, description, author, design goals, etc.) Then two buttons: Recommend - once you hit this button you will be prompted to write a recommendation, which your name will be attached to publicly. "When recommending please reference the authors stated goals with the map. Please write a recommendation at least 140 characters long." (This will be the thing that is tallied and referenced during searches of the map page.) Provide feedback - "Please write out your feedback, which will be sent privately to the map author. Be aware the author may choose to publicly reveal your feedback for discussion in the comment section." (This can have the section and stars--actually I'd rather not with the stars--War and Goat are discussing. I really don't care.) Then bellow that will be a regular comments section, which has no power over map placement.
"Whose opinion matters" depends on your intention. Sure, if you just fill out a few categories and leave it at that, you're not helping anyone beyond giving your own personal assessment. And if you decide to write and don't articulate your thoughts well, maybe "your opinion doesn't count." But I still value those more than simply a binary "Recommend or not" system because it doesn't tell me anything about what people actually think, and there's no way to filter or parse their feedback if they decide to share it in the comments. And if they don't and would rather mention it in Forge or a live stream, then why do we even have comments on maps? (On that note, I've gotten some of my worst feedback during a stream because people are watching you make decisions and are judging every one of them.) I'm personally tired of this self deprecating attitude. I don't want to see it reinforced and I don't want to see it perpetuated. Just because "some people know what they're talking about" more than others doesn't mean only 3 people should be allowed to leave reviews. The last thing we need is another official ForgeHub review team. My personal opinion will always be my interpretation and I'll always articulate it with observable traits based on the intention of the design. It's not hard for everyone to do the same, but most people have used ForgeHub to dump their maps, so perhaps it's too much to expect.
The Forge Critic system is also equal, because sometimes people like me, who don't know what they're doing, get Forge Critic status.
Forge Critics will have the ability to impact Community Favorite selections in the future. Note the 'Nominate for Community Favorites' button in the Map Tools sidebar. This will not guarantee that the map will be selected as a top 10 but if enough forge critics agree that this map is 'worthy' then it will be in the top 10 nominations for the general public to vote on. This feature is still in beta but will be available when we resume Community Favorites later this month.
Currently 'Forge Critics' are manually selected by our staff. We look at your map portfolio to determine if you're worthy of the title. In the future, there will be a way to earn this through helpful reviews you provide and other site achievements (ie. Community Favorite placement) but we can talk more about that later.
I think restricting this option to a small group is a step backwards, especially if that group happens to share similar design perspectives. I'd rather see a wide variety of content in the community favorites section, because it's a chance for maps that aren't "obvious features" to be recognized by the community. I don't think that option is as intuitive as the suggestions @Given To Fly and I made, but it would accomplish a similar thing if it was open to more people.