A 2/10 mission usually earns that score from errors that occur in the mission, not necessarily the taste of the reviewer. Likewise, a mission earns an 8/10 or 9/10 because everything works right, it is immersive, and it has atmoshpere.
Also, I have heard there is a scoring system in place for members of OFPEC to score the missions. If you think a mission deserves a higher score, score it yourself!
As I said; all that can be explained in the reviewing, so it can be also explained without that number.
You get it all wrong, Student Pilot; I ... akhm ... hate that number scoring system, so why should I score myself?
Yes, I always read the mission's review trough and carefully, don't you? Or you just look at the "number", and you have a decision? You see what I'm talking about?I first look for the description of the mission. If it sounds interesting, I'll look at the number. If the mission is below a 3, I'll move on. A number below a 3 tells me one of two things:
You know; where's the reviewers "right" to decide for me (or even in the name of the site) which mission is good, and which is bad; I mean, the taste of that reviewer can be a diametrally oposite to mine.The confusion implicit in this quote is, I suspect, the nub of the whole problem. The reviewer is not looking to see whether a mission is to his taste or not: he is looking to see whether the mission is any good or not. And he is not deciding for you, he is giving you information to help you decide for yourself.
Don't tell me, dmakatra, that the number tells you how good the particular mission is. If it does, then ...Yes, the number does tell you, roughly, how good the mission is. That is what it is for. Missions scoring 7 are mostly better than missions scoring 3. That's not to say that 3s aren't worth playing - some are. Of course there is the occasional 7 that should be a 3 and vice versa but that doesn't invalidate the system.
One little exsample: some reviewers hate to do a few more paces across the map, they hold that boring, but I don't mind to do a little treking, because I appreciate the realism, so I know that you can't be parashooted right into the middle of the enemy base.
a mission with a 2/10 score have a barely a hundred downloads, a 9/10 mission over a thousand! But what if that "2/10 mission" isn't so bad, and a "9/10 mission" isn't so good? I have the opurtunity to play some, mildly saying, awfull "8/10 missions", and some "3/10"s, which were quite good, much better than that "8/10"s, but that's again can only be the matter of - my taste. So some missions can be-are overlooked because of that mission scoring sistem influence.
My suggestion: leave out that number scoring sistem -it will not be the end of the world because of that change-, and stay only with the (more detailed if needed) mission reviewing; and let the player to decide (thru the playing offcourse) which mission is for him good, playable, enjoyable, and which is not. On that way the missions players can (again) feel more "in to it", and I asure you, the Mission Comments will (again) become more lively. The reviewer can-may point out (if he really must, I rather see them "neutral", eg that they're strictly "technical") his likes or dislikes with the mission thru the review, but in form of personal-technical opinions, not in form of suggestions (which some of them oftenly do, like "this is a must", or "avoid it like a plague" - sic!).
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 :)!
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).
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
Even with any flaws it might have, OFPEC is still the best site for downloading missions. :D
And dismantle from me, would you?
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.
Sui i dont have any complaints about your reviewers , karantan obviously has issues thats the very reason why he even made the thread. He's truly having problems coming to grips with the review system , i guess that was why he sent Anmac an abusive PM after his mission got reviewed here , and frankly speaking i dont see why such people's missions are even reviewed its a waste of time. Ungrateful people do not deserve our time , we waste our time trying to play a mission no matter how crap it might and then post a honest review over what we thought of it and this is what we get in return sniddish comments and abusive PM's.
Thats all from me , the reason i posted this here is quite clear mr karantan made this topic because of personal issues he's had in the past with the system rather then being worried about other peoples stuff.
- Briefing is not good if it doesn't have many pages + pictures.
The single thing that could improve the missions depot the most, IMO, would be having SOME kind of organization of the missions, aside from what is currently available. What I mean is, what if I want to play a flying mission? Well, I'd like to be able to hit a button and only see those kinds of missions. In that case, I would download whatever seems interesting, including missions with 'lower' scores, such as 4-5. Or if I wanted to play with WWII units, or a specific mod or island, etc. It would be hard to implement, and I'm not even sure what catagories you would organize them into, but that would make it so much easier to find the style of mission you want. Perhaps even a simple word search of the mission descriptions would work well for this.
When BIS released their game it came with single player missions, campaigns and multiplayer missions that were at a certain level of quality. As soon as people had learned how to use the editor, they started pumping out their own versions. Unfortunatly most people can not maintain the same standard of quality that the original game makers gave us.
I'm so mad I don't know what to add. >:( >:( >:(
you said that you always welcome and consider the suggestions. That's fine, but did you ever accept any?Yes. I'll give you one recent example. The beta testing party was not a direct suggestion, and some time ago we had considered how to revitalise the beta testing board, but the spark that made it all happen was an IM somebody sent to me suggesting revitalisation of the beta board.
Sui, you said that you always welcome and consider the suggestions. That's fine, but did you ever accept any?I'm sorry karentan, I completely disagree. Whether or not Sui was part of the production of the site isn't to my knowledge. However, he is a Global Administrator and plays an invaluable role in the site.
If you have an issue with a Global Administrator, tough!
when I ask that Sui, I didn't meant him in person, but the whole Admin.Well, replace Sui with all the admins prior to what I said previously.
don't call the ideas from the others moronic, have a little respect,I've seen ideas out there that I consider to be moronic, idiotic or just plain stupid. Bear in mind that's my opinion.
I don't think you meant me.I didn't mean you. This idea is just very unrealistic. It wont happen i'm sorry to say. But if the day comes, i'll say you were right then... But you'll have alot of waiting to do I am sure.
And I know that they can't accept all the suggestions that comes up, but I've get the impression,Well i've told you why they can't accept all or most idea's in my last post. The administation must be very selective on which ideas they choose, for the good of their site.
And you writing like I have something against Sui or someone else. For your information, I have not.I think you have. Against the administration including Sui for not accepting as many ideas as you'd like. Obviously i'm not saying you're on a vendetta against the administration, but it's an issue that annoys you a little ;).
I think you have.
Against the administration including Sui for not accepting as many ideas as you'd like.
i think it was maybe gubes who posted the reviewing 'rules' a while back,Actually it was Artak, Missions Depot Admin. ;)