(Insert stupid Blog name here)

Wow, that's quite a lot of reviews.

 

BTW: Why don't you start using half points like you suggested in the forum?

BTW: Why don't you start using half points like you suggested in the forum?

Because these eventually all go up in the AA store, which doesn't support that. So I have to still come up with a 1-5 score.

 

That said, I'm planning to go through and do a separate, revised version of the index updating all of the scores based on a 1/2 point scale. Then if the AA store adds support for it, I'll have the scores ready to go. But with 109 games to re-evaluate, it may take me a little while to get around to it.

The "New" reviews have been submitted to the AA store, except for the Harmony Cart (which doesn't have a store page) and Labyrinth (which is no longer for sale). Not sure if the Incoming! review successfully got through or not - it just sat there saying "wait" until I got tired of doing so.

 

I'm pretty-sure all of my reviews are up in the store now (or will be, once Albert puts them through).

So you going with 1-5? That's not 10 but only 9 values! But I suppose Al wouldn't like 0.5 points, even for a stinker.

 

Currently, even though you are much more honest with your points than others, you still have a lot of 5 point games. Many more than one would expect from a standard bell-shaped curve. So what a are you going to do? Checking for a 0.5 point reduction?

I'll be going with 0.5 - 5.0. It doesn't really matter I suppose, unless or until Albert changes the store scoring. If he didn't implement .5, I'd just round the .5 scores up to a 1. At that point, they're all pretty-much stinkers.

 

As for the 5 point scores, there won't be nearly as many in the revised list. Basically, I've kept mental track of which games are "low fives", "high fours" and so forth. Only games that are the absolute pinnacle of homebrews will get a 5. Games that are merely excellent will get a 4.5.

 

I'll also be revising the scores based on having lived with the games for awhile. Some may go up, but several are certainly going to go down. Part of that will be based on how much I've actually replayed the games since I got them.

Currently, even though you are much more honest with your points than others, you still have a lot of 5 point games. Many more than one would expect from a standard bell-shaped curve.

When pride is the main motivation instead of profit you tend to get better results. Some of the earlier games (i.e. Skeleton+, I'll admit & accept it) may also be ranked higher than they would be today. (This is normal. Something which was exceptional in the past may only be average today.)

True - do any other homebrews besides S+ and MM utilize stereo sound?

Currently, even though you are much more honest with your points than others, you still have a lot of 5 point games. Many more than one would expect from a standard bell-shaped curve.

When pride is the main motivation instead of profit you tend to get better results.

That's true.

 

But I suppose even Nathan is not completely objective and he tends to give higher points too (if you look at the store reviews, there are hardly any reviews with less than 4 points, except for Nathans), just because there are so many other 5 point games and 4 points if quite a step. With 0.5 points steps, he might find it easier to give a game not a 100% rating.

(if you look at the store reviews, there are hardly any reviews with less than 4 points, except for Nathans)

 

90% of the stuff is try-before-buy, so people only buy what they like.

And most people are only motivated to write a review, when they really hated/loved something.

 

So basically AA store customers buy just the games they like and then rate them accordingly

But I suppose even Nathan is not completely objective and he tends to give higher points too, just because there are so many other 5 point games and 4 points if quite a step. With 0.5 points steps, he might find it easier to give a game not a 100% rating.

That's all very true. It's hard to be completely objective, especially being involved with the development of some of the games, but I want to be as fair as possible. So if a game is as good in and of itself as another game that also scored 5/5, it's hard not to give it the same score. That said, I don't consider 5/5 to be equal to 100% when I'm reviewing, I consider it to be 81%-100%, with the scale starting at 0%-20% for a 1/5. If 5/5 was actually just 100%, there'd be very few games getting that score. Two, maybe three.

90% of the stuff is try-before-buy, so people only buy what they like.

And most people are only motivated to write a review, when they really hated/loved something.

 

So basically AA store customers buy just the games they like and then rate them accordingly

Another reason is, that if you buy something because you think it is worth it, you are automatically positively biased. Else you would have to criticize your own decision.

 

If you buy something to test it, this bias is eliminated.