Reply to Re: The good, the bad, and the ugly
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
It's good because if the score is true the players that downloads the DMOD can't really be dissapointed.
That's an interesting point that you and redink1 made. But sometimes a game's rating is so widely spread between the reviewers that it's up to the player to decide for himself.
after all the score should only show the entertainment -value of the game, from the players point of view.
That is also my point of view. And by entertainment-value, that should include all aspects of the game that is being rated..which is what I think you're saying.
Only the author can be responsible for his/hers DMOD, who else could?
Yes they are and as Sabre and Redink point out, the reviewer is responsible for writing a well balanced review. However, unfortunately, constructive criticism is in the eye of the reviewer/beholder. Many times a review has upset someone and it's probably hard to find that thin line between justified critique and 'over the edge' smashing.
Basically, imho, Christiian is right. The reviewer just writes about the dmod how he feels that review should be, nothing less, nothing more. But he writes with care not to be too biased.
I think a review is something to use to help an author and to give the player an idea of the game and whether they will download it.
I have written with an eye to constuctive criticism and can only hope it is taken that way.
That's an interesting point that you and redink1 made. But sometimes a game's rating is so widely spread between the reviewers that it's up to the player to decide for himself.
after all the score should only show the entertainment -value of the game, from the players point of view.
That is also my point of view. And by entertainment-value, that should include all aspects of the game that is being rated..which is what I think you're saying.
Only the author can be responsible for his/hers DMOD, who else could?
Yes they are and as Sabre and Redink point out, the reviewer is responsible for writing a well balanced review. However, unfortunately, constructive criticism is in the eye of the reviewer/beholder. Many times a review has upset someone and it's probably hard to find that thin line between justified critique and 'over the edge' smashing.
Basically, imho, Christiian is right. The reviewer just writes about the dmod how he feels that review should be, nothing less, nothing more. But he writes with care not to be too biased.
I think a review is something to use to help an author and to give the player an idea of the game and whether they will download it.
I have written with an eye to constuctive criticism and can only hope it is taken that way.
