The mission scoring "problem" - the matter of taste

[ProudPotter2490]

Hey!
Lol I only had to read a few sentences to know what this was about !

I mean, the taste of that reviewer can be a diametrally oposite to mine.

Well your taste might be different to that of another member and the reviewer. When I see a mission I use what a Mission Reviewer says and take that as a guide. There are various mentalities of Mission Makers. Some prefer to be scrict, one name that springs to mind is Anmac . Some mission makers are very lenient, like Mike Beil !

Think of mission reviewing like a sports game. If there is a foul, the referee managing the game has to decide whether he blows the whistle or shouts "Play on !" One referee might decide it was to tougher challenge and give the foul. Another might think it's okay and play on.

There are missions out there, scored badly I actually like. It's the case for everyone. I've even hear reviewers say they liked the concept but the execution wasn't too good and so physically the mission was only worth a small number.

The point? Opinion. Thats all it is. We don't all agree with eachother but thats life isn't it? On the missions screen, replace 'Release Date' with 'Public Rating' at the top. You'll soon the how opinions of the general public clash with that of a reviewer, even though i'm sure you'll admit 10/10 is overated for some missions .
ProudPotter2490 :afro:

[Acecombat]

Gen. Barron what do you think about www.opflash.org 's mission reviews? I think we've got the most missions after OFPEC properly reviewed and scored along with the most campaigns and Co-op/MP as well.

@Karantan:

We all know where your coming from , all this whining of yours is because your mission didnt get good reviews and according to you 2 reviewers with different mindsets on different websites gave it a similiar scoring and that burned you up and now according to you mission reviewers are basically flawed nearly everytime ? Thats the simple reasoning behind your whole argument which is unreasonable at best. And most mission reviewers do GIVE detailed reviews explaining the weak points and how to improve upon them i do that regularly so if this is coupled with a score whats your whining about?

[dmakatra]

Yeah, make the Members Rating more important! I had that idea like two years ago but no-one replied to the thread. Right now like two or three people vote on the mission, max. Some missions that are shite is on the top of the Members Rating because the author and some of his hired friends have voted and everyone else didn't bother to.

:beat: *Gets Shot* :beat:

[Acecombat]

Well i wouldnt go for audience voting much anyhow. There are some people who consider plopping a few units on a map with random wp's and chasing them all 52km of the islands is good fun and a very well constructed mission  .

[rado1265]

In general, I find the headline score -I don't mean that overview, scripting...numbers, they can stay, because they're somewhat helpful, I mean the main score- rather disturbing.  As I said somewhere: 100 ppl - 100 tastes.

The reviews I find the most helpful are ones where the reviewer describes what the mission is about, in as much detail possible (without ruining any surprises). After that, it is nice to see all the technical points of what the author did good or poorly. I personally don't care about whether the overview had a border, or spilled onto two pages, or anything like that (unless it is really awful).

That's what I'm talking about all the time!  And if that is done, why the hell I need that headline score. If the mission is like 2/10 make this clear in the reviewing, and leave the player the final decision.  With that headline score some people don't smell even a 4/10 or 5/10 missions, truly.  But sadly

I don't like short reviews where the reviewer spends as much time talking about the briefing + overview as they do talking about the mission itself. Recently there seem to be more of these than in the past

you're right here, Herr General, IMO also the quality of the reviewing is on the drop.

Even with any flaws it might have, OFPEC is still the best site for downloading missions.

No argues here!  We all know that, don't we?

[rado1265]

@Acecombat

As always you've got it TOTALLY WRONG.  If I want a better score of my missions, I will make them as long as it needed to get that high scoring of yours, I will not say that that score should be remouved.  And I have seen what the incompetent reviewers can do...

And dismantle from me, would you?

[Acecombat]

LOL i got it wrong so did Anmac , everyones got it wrong it seems apart from you  .

And dismantle from me, would you?

eh?

[rado1265]

Anmac hasen't done a reviewing here, but his little wendetta.

That's all what I have to say to you.

Goodbye, Acecombat!

[greg147]

Remember that the more missions that come out, the better your mission has to be to get a good rating. Some of the first missions that got, say, 7/10 then would get about 2/10 now because they would be compared to really good, new missions.
Way back when the game came out, putting a looping music script in may have impressed the reviewer, but now the scripts have to be more complicated to woo him/her.  

[456820]

well in ways i agree because i have played some 9/10 missions and didnt like them not because there bad mission just because i dont like that kind of mission but have played some lower mission and really enjoyed them its allo about peoples taste

[MachoMan]

Remember, the score isn't all about fun, it also tells a lot about technical soundness!

[Acecombat]

Yeah some people think putting in 75 sound triggers of OWL's voicesaround the AO of the mission  as a very technical achievement  ;D.

OFP is all about fun well for the mainstream public that plays it , ofcourse people can use it for training purpose also and say its a rather neat sim for private use but its primary purpose is enjoyment. Therefore missions that score high on the 'enjoyable and engrossing' part are good. Take Anmacs mission's for example hardly realistic many of them like Assault Hard is which you are a lone SASR sniper vs a trillion soviets with tanks as well. But hey it was very well made and had left you with a very satisfying feeling yet it was hardly based on realism. A balance between both is usually the key.

[Homefry31464]

I fail to see why the system needs to change.  The review covers mainly the technical aspect of the mission... lets have a look at how things are scored... shall we?

This guide below, will help you see how our Score System comes around. Thanks to snYpir & Devilchaser who came up with the Scoring system for the Overall Scoring.

Each item below is marked Zero to Ten. Zero meaning it is not included, or not complete, with One being the next poorest mark. Ten indicates work on a superb level, rarely seen.

Check List:

Overview - Scores for the Overview

Overview Graphic - Scores for the Overview Graphic

Briefing - Scores for the Breifing

Scripting - Scores for the Scripting

Camera - Scores for the Camera

Overall Score - Final Score for the Mission

Overall Mission Scoring:

1-2 - Avoid this Mission at all costs!

3-4 - Perhaps worth a try if you're bored...

5 - Nice, Average Mission... Nothing great, but nothing overtly bad either.

6-7 - Worthy of a try, even if only once.

8-9 - Definately worth downloading, give it a try, you'll not be dissapointed!

10 - Download it now! Can't go wrong with this one!

Now... looking at that the technical aspects of the mission take the forefront, nothing but.  For the very, very large majority of missions, I don't disagree with the author and how they score.  In fact, I see plently of reviews where the reviewer enjoyed playing the mission, but marked the mission lower because of technical faults.  It's been said many times before, the number is an overall representation of the technical aspects of the mission; how it works, if things were spelled correctly, ect.

Just because you disagree with a review a mission recieved doesn't mean we should do away with the number system in place.  Just because it has a little room for opinions in it doesn't mean that the system itself if wrong or bad.  If you do happen to disagree, go ahead and post a comment explaining why you disagree.  It's nice and simple.

[Sui]

Thanks for your input, karantan. We always welcome new ideas.

However I pretty much completely disagree with everything you've said ;D


The reviewing system is based on a hard and fast scoring system, and though reviewer preference and opinion may make make one (or on odd occasions two) points of difference the mission score is reflected by gameplay and technical attributes of the mission itself.

We are an editing site, and as such incorporate editing technique into the score as well as things like gameplay and enjoyment. A reviewer can take points off gameplay for boring walks, but not 4 or 5 like you seem to be implying!
Also, (can't remember who mentioned it) we don't drop points for not having an intro.

I find it interesting the impressions and assumptions people make about our scoring system, when we haven't made the full criteria public!

You're right in that you should definitely read the review, and pay more attention to that than to the score. However the score isn't nearly as useless as you make it out to be
The idea of making user ratings more important isn't bad, but the user ratings can be abused and are less reliable than a verified OFPEC score

Remember, you are always free to post comments disagreeing with the review. It's a community driven system, and we always welcome community input. Just bear in mind that the same sort of rules apply to comments as to the forum. ie. Abuse and slander will earn you warnings/a ban if you can't keep it clean.

Sure, the system isn't perfect, but I don't believe the changes you suggest would be in any way beneficial. At the moment the missions can be sorted by many different stats (popularity, score etc.) which can give you a quick snap shot of our 'good' missions.

Anyway, bottom line: If you don't like the way we do business don't submit your mission
That may sound harsh, and as I hope I've made clear we always welcome suggestions and will always consider them.

/moderators hat on.

On a side note, karatan/ace/everyone else.... I'd ask that you simmer down a little, especially in regards to accusations about our reviewers motives. If you have a problem with a review (or a reviewer), IM  Artak about your concerns. The public forum is not the place to air your dirty laundry, and continuing to do so will earn you a reprimand. Keep it clean please.

[macguba]

Hmmm, interesting point about abuse of user ratings.   After a sudden jump in the number of ratings I suspected the same thing here but thought perhaps it was just people who were sore because they couldn't finish the mission.    It appears not.