NVNews Ratings!

[MowTin]

It's nice that we have "feedback threads" but it would be nice if we associated ratings polls to all feedback threads. That way at a glance you can see how everyone rates a game or piece of hardware without having to read through pages of random opinions.

Ideally it would be great if there were a way of seeing an average score.

But at the very least ratings polls should be mandatory for all feedback threads.

[SH64]

I definitely support this idea & even more.

How about if nvnews gets its own game ratings. we simply make a poll thread to rate a certain game & let only nvnews members to vote. when the poll closes say after 4-5 days we gather the avarage score out from the poll (just like how MowTin explained above) & put the final score in the front page. that would be awesome!!

nvnews has so many different users with wide arrange of ideas , interests & views so i think accumulating all that in one final score can give a good indication of how good a game is , for the public aswell as the nvnews members themselves.

i know this is an Nvidia video cards hardware fansite but having our own game ratings would not conflict with the main purpose of this site , Gaming!

[methimpikehoses]

Good idea. The masses will flock to our amazingly accurate ratings. :cool:

[Bearclaw]

I definitley support this idea. :thumbsup:

[einstein_314]

Hmm, sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe make it so you have to be a member for a while or have a minimum post count before you can vote?

[SH64]

Hmm, sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe make it so you have to be a member for a while or have a minimum post count before you can vote?
Yep that might need to be taken into account.

[zer0]

2500 posts minimum :)

[crainger]

I give this idea a 6 out of 7.

[Redeemed]

I give this idea a 6 out of 7.
If only I could get somebody to help me...!

[nekrosoft13]

this would be a good idea ONLY if there was a way to control who votes.

Only people that could vote, are people that actually own/played the product.

Other wise these ratings would be useless because when a person sees a poll he will always pick some option either being based on hype or god knows what else.

And this will result in very inaccurate ratings.


I would say no, since there is no way to control that only people who own/used/played the product to actually vote.

[methimpikehoses]

2500 posts minimum :)

4200 posts minimum :D

[crainger]

this would be a good idea ONLY if there was a way to control who votes.

Only people that could vote, are people that actually own/played the product.

Other wise these ratings would be useless because when a person sees a poll he will always pick some option either being based on hype or god knows what else.

And this will result in very inaccurate ratings.


I would say no, since there is no way to control that only people who own/used/played the product to actually vote.

That's true. We'd have a heap of wh0res messing a good game rating because it doesn't use DX10 and instead looks great and plays smooth as silk.

[Zelda_fan]

That's true. We'd have a heap of wh0res messing a good game rating because it doesn't use DX10 and instead looks great and plays smooth as silk.

Hence a 1000 post minimum to participate. Most people who participate that much in our forums won't pull that ****.

Maybe 1 or 2 will get buy but that's it.

[Q]

Hence a 1000 post minimum to participate. Most people who participate that much in our forums won't pull that ****.

Maybe 1 or 2 will get buy but that's it.

I agree. A 1000 post limit would be sufficient. I'd also suggest a Join Date restriction. Maybe 1000 posts OR 1 year (6 months, whatever) membership before you can vote. We do have some good long time members with less than 1000 posts.

[crainger]

Hence a 1000 post minimum to participate. Most people who participate that much in our forums won't pull that ****.

Maybe 1 or 2 will get buy but that's it.

I was referring to the guys who wont touch a game unless it uses DX10 etc.

HOWEVER, I guess it is their opinion if they feel a game looks crap and they are entitled to it.

Take The Witcher for example. Heaps of people say the game looks crap just because it uses an older engine and DX9, but they game actually looks pretty sharp due to great art, high res textures and clever use of Depth of Field and HDR.

In the end not much I can do. The Pee Cee gamer is a hard one to please...

[OldOfEvil]

I agree. A 1000 post limit would be sufficient. I'd also suggest a Join Date restriction. Maybe 1000 posts OR 1 year (6 months, whatever) membership before you can vote. We do have some good long time members with less than 1000 posts.


Nah, I passed 1k like months ago. :p

[nekrosoft13]

I was referring to the guys who wont touch a game unless it uses DX10 etc.



dude, soon everyone will be demanding dx10.1 ;)

[SH64]

dude, soon everyone will be demanding dx10.1 ;)
Mandatory 4xFSAA support ftw! :D

[lduguay]

Nah, I passed 1k like months ago. :p
+1

Join date : 3 Years + and less that 2K posts :D

[Greeno]

Yeah, I don't have 70,000+ posts, but I'd like to think I'd offer an honest, mature opinion things... I don't own an awful lot of games, but working for a high performance PC builder in the UK, I think i'd be quite insightful if this does spread to hardware :)

Great idea though...

[crainger]

Mandatory 4xFSAA support ftw! :D

It is FTW! BUT very few devs are acyually going to use 10.1. They want to stick with 10. Like Crytek.