Archive: 42 posts

---

Okay, I know we've had a lot of discussion about the ratings system. I know they're flawed and open to abuse, but I still find myself questioning the rationality of the whys and hows of the reasoning behind ratings. And yes, spam rating, hate-raters, genuine folk, young folk etc. are all included... I'll have to take two relatively recent examples to try and highlight my issues. Apologies to the two creators involved - they're both friends of mine, but they have no idea I'm posting this. First, jwwphotos. He has a perfectly good off-road racing level. It's fun, it's addictive, and it has a lot of appeal. It's currently one of the highest rated levels at 5 stars. However, jww's Space Escape level was a brilliant level, and yet it's currently rated 3 stars. Yes, I know, appeal and simplicity to finish a level is a factor, but it's not about what's right or wrong; it's about the fact that the unfairly low rating of Space Escape is making a mockery of the 5 star rating of the Off-Road Challenge level. Or is it? I don't know any more. Second, coyote_blue's level, Lone Ninja 6. Complex? Yes. Difficult for some players? Perhaps. Entertaining? I (unbiasedly) think so. 3 stars? I beg your pardon? I'm not saying that every level is every player's cup of tea. I'm not saying that opinion is wrong. And LBP is played by lots of youngsters who deserve the right to rate just as much as everyone else. But I despair sometimes when something that has obviously taken lots of time and effort is poo-pooed when compared to other levels which obviously have not. Hey, it's a game, I know that. I've said before that everyone should be encourage to create. But sometimes, just sometimes, I get a tad dismayed at the ratings system, or maybe, however bad the ratings system is, how it is used/abused. Sorry for the long post, and apologies to jwwphotos and coyote_blue for using them as examples. No offence intended.

2009-10-24 23:24:00 Author: MrsSpookyBuz Posts: 1492

---

There is alot to talk about when it comes to ratings, thanks for making the thread. I believe it is an interesting topic to have a discussion on. I also agree, Space Escape should NOT be rated 3 Stars, and while I'm not saying its a 5 Star level it is certainly an above average 4 Star level. I can't comment on coyote_blue's level as I have not played it. But you also forget to mention the people who rate levels 5 Stars at the beginning when a level is first published. I have seen this happen lots of times when friends of the Creator are rating it high at the beginning even if the level does not deserve it...so I guess it can go both ways with people spam rating levels both low and high.

2009-10-24 23:39:00 Author: TheFirstAvenger Posts: 787

---

In Jww's defense, he published during the dark days which I now call the "temporary death of the ratings system." Remember when ratings just didn't work? Yup. Everyone was giving 3 stars since it didn't seem to matter. Well, when they kicked back in, he still had 3 stars. Sad? Yes. The community's fault? Well, not so much. I gave it 5 stars myself, but a lot of good that did. With that said, I do agree that there should be some sort of concession being made, here. Perhaps we can have two online communities. One for adults and one for kids. I'm not sure how we'd enforce that, but at least it would have a place for all the bomb survival and moto jump levels (lol). Hmm... then again, would anyone even post in the kids' section? As for Coyote's level, I just played it today. It is quite a shame that it has 3 stars, but I can see why it does. Young kids don't like "boss" levels, which is exactly what this was. So, yeah...

2009-10-24 23:40:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

I'm still of the strongly held opinion that making ratings mandatory is a mistake, which ultimately skews the ratings unfairly for everyone.

2009-10-24 23:47:00 Author: Gilgamesh Posts: 2536

---

It really depends on how you rate levels. The levels you mentioned are fantastic no doubt, but if we are rating level relative to one another, any level someone has posted on LBPC is a 4 or 5 star level right off the bat, but that's just if you are taking all the levels on LittleBigPlanet into account. I rate based on how fun a level is, I don't compare it to other levels I've played. If I compared every space scenery level to candyk's Starcruiser, I'd be giving most of them 1 or 2 stars. If I compared every alien level to GruntosUK's Mars Attacks series, I'd definitely be giving most of them 1 star. People do rate levels unfairly, I'm not disputing that. People give levels 1 star because they're jealous or just cruel, or even because they didn't understand it. We've thrown around a lot of ideas for improvement, but most of them have some sort of drawback that makes them somehow worse than what we have now, or at least incompatible. I guess we just have to take what we're given in this case.

2009-10-24 23:49:00 Author: BSprague Posts: 2325

---

Agreed. There are a lot of levels I play where I look at the rating and just shake my head. Someone posted on another thread that 4 star levels are about the best most people can hope for in this rating system. I'm just happy we've got a place like LBPC where we can find these non 5 star rated but ultimately awesome levels instead of relying on MM's highest rated pages.

2009-10-24 23:50:00 Author: Morgana25 Posts: 5983

---

This can pretty much apply to reviewers on Video Games too and a whole bunch of other topics. On a subject for review some people are just diehard fanboys and will just rate it 10/10 right off the bat, while bashers rate it so low and there's proof they hardly even tried it. A prime example being the recent Sonic The Hedgehog games. Bashers and Fanboys galore there. Its hard to figure out what the real rating for those games are. With huge jumps in percentage. Personally I think the rating system should show statitics showing the percentage of how many times it was rated X stars, this could show if haters are ruining a levels ratings. Like this for example (also shows what I'm talking about with reviews on Sonic games) http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps3/my/945570.html Using the example from the link above, my personal rating is a 8 on that game, but as you see almost 20% of the people gave it a 10, and almost 20% of the people rated it poorly (with over 5% a 1/10)

2009-10-25 00:41:00 Author: JKthree Posts: 1125

---

I think the rating system should be out of 10 with halves included (like when the ratings are rounded out a level may get like an 8.5 for example). Practically no levels that have a good amount of plays have a 5 star rating, most of the best levels have a 4 rating. So you can have 2 levels, and they are both rated a 4, while one is alright and the other is outstanding, but you can't tell just from looking at it. If it was out of 10 (with halves), the alright one would be say about a 7 to 8, while the outstanding one would be about a 9 to 10.

2009-10-25 00:47:00 Author: ChristmasJew Posts: 431

---

I USED to be really upset about the rating.... when OCK's "218" and "Pulse" dropped to 3 stars I was mortified. I started to think differently about 3 star-rated levels at the release of 2 levels in particular: False Idols 3 from NinjaMicWZ and Crazy Train (hard version) from RangerZero. LittleBigPlanet is now a fairly mature game, and I think just about ALL the adults and hardcore gaming enthusiasts understand what a rating REALLY means. When RangerZero had Crazy Train out there, it seemed the more kids rated it "rubbish" "frustrating" and the such with a low rating, the more hardcore gamers said "hey, cool... this looks like it will be great!". And the people came. With False Idols III it was a fantastic look back at the days of classic 8-bit adventure style.... but with a modern makeover. Stunning. One of the best levels I had ever played.... 3 stars. I think certain levels can wear a lower rating as a medal of honor in LittleBigPlanet. If you start worrying about the rating and stop developing levels for different folks, the non-kiddie gamers will lose out.

2009-10-25 02:19:00 Author: CCubbage Posts: 4430

---

Just who is this jwwphotos guy anyway!!? He's always so controversial! LOL!! MrsSpookyBuz, no issue with me. I scratch my head quite a bit at that myself. I have said many times that I am probably the poster child for the ratings system and I really appreciate you using and recognizing me as a great example for one level arguably overrated and another underrated. I think the answer is I am an enigma. An enigma wrapped in a sandwich, with mayo, served with a pickle and some chips. (psst, that's a joke for those that don't know me well!) Comphermc is correct that the reason Space Escape is 3 stars is due to the ratings bug when I published. If I had waited a week, it would have probably ended up 4 stars just because it is harder than anything else I had done to that point. Especially for any of the younger players that were huge fans of my Baja level. I got several emails from younger players telling me how hard and frustrating it was... even though I know quite a few great levels from my esteemed LBPC friends and family that would make them cry if they ever attempted them. Do I think Baja is 5 stars? Wow.. hard to say. If I had it to do over, I certainly could have done it much better. However, for it's particular genre (fast, fun, multiplayer race level) I think it is a great fun with quite a bit of re-playability. ..at least I know several people that have told me to this day they still enjoy playing it. I do think Space Escape is much better, but it isn't something that I can see someone playing almost every night with their young daughter. To me they really can't be compared that way, just as I cannot compare Blade Runner with Monsters Inc. I think both movies are excellent and worthy of 5 stars, but they are completely different genres. My suggestion to fix the ratings has been for quite some time that the Cool Levels should be divided into Genre of some sort to help differentiate levels. It also wouldn't hurt to have a skill rating of sorts. This would lessen the focus of one particular set of pages and help folks better find what they might be interested in as well as what might be better suited towards their particular skills. ..at least it would give them a heads up of what they are about to select. I would also like to possibly see the feature of not being able to rate unless you competed the level or at least remove the rating from being forced on someone once they return to the pod. Thanks again MrsSpookyBuz!

2009-10-25 02:42:00 Author: jwwphotos Posts: 11383

---

It always comes down to this really: 1- Taste of the mass = brown substance coming out of your butt. This is also amplified by the fact YOU HAVE to rate when you exit a level, a real design flaw. But tackling the subjective part of why a better level is having a less good rating than a snort fest on the first page with 5 stars, you have to remind yourself it's always like that. Real good movies are appreciated by a minority. Real good music too. It's expected that your rating doesn't represent the quality of your work at all times. 2- The best fix MM could do would be to had a genre and difficulty in the level info. Therefore making searchable too. .

2009-10-25 03:36:00 Author: RangerZero Posts: 3901

---

great llevels get 3 star & blank levels with nothing but a scoreboard get 4 star. a little off topic but i reckon they should change the tag system so the same levels dont appear

2009-10-25 05:12:00 Author: lifeiscrapislife Posts: 396

---

I'm still of the strongly held opinion that making ratings mandatory is a mistake, which ultimately skews the ratings unfairly for everyone. This. I can't be bothered with ratings most of the time, so if I like a level it gets 5 stars, if I don't like it, it gets 1. I don't fancy sitting there thinking about it, I'm not reviewing it, I just want to get on and find another level. And last time I checked my levels all had 4 stars apart from Pinball which had 3..I think. That level did better the first time I published it back in November because there weren't any good pinball levels yet

2009-10-25 12:44:00 Author: ARD Posts: 4291

---

I don't think that rating "all or nothing" help anything though. It can just make things worse actually. If you don't know how to rate a level, don't change the number of stars it automatically gives you. This is will be the rating that will influence the level's rating the less. .

2009-10-25 16:39:00 Author: RangerZero Posts: 3901

---

Great levels are 'too complex' for some simple minds of LBP. They want a level they can beat by either holding one button or dodging bombs.

2009-10-25 17:00:00 Author: TheMarvelousHat Posts: 542

---

Ratings are messed because people suck... Okay, not people. Kids. I don't really take into account level ratings anyway, they don't reflect the quality of the level, but whether or not people think is "beneficial" (i.e trophy levels and "OMG 1,000,000 prizes!!!!") and if people think is a little bit tricky (1 star way 2 hard needs infinite lives).

2009-10-25 17:32:00 Author: KoRnDawwg Posts: 1424

---

I actually hate the fact that you can rate any level down, no matter how bad. How is a 7 year old supposed to compete with a 35 year old creator? I'd much rather see a kudos system in place, much like rep on here. You play a level you like, you give them a point. You hate it, don't bother. Obviously that's similar to the hearting system we have now, but it's failing as a rating system due to limited slots. Ideally we'd have an alternative method of favouriting a level, unlimited heart slots and a star rating that is calculated purely on the heart to plays ratio.

2009-10-25 17:39:00 Author: Kiminski Posts: 545

---

This. I can't be bothered with ratings most of the time, so if I like a level it gets 5 stars, if I don't like it, it gets 1. I don't fancy sitting there thinking about it, I'm not reviewing it, I just want to get on and find another level. Sorry Ard, but to me that really makes no sense whatsoever. However, it does show a really good case for not forcing everyone to rate when they finally return to the pod. Oh well.. to each his own I guess!!!

2009-10-25 17:52:00 Author: jwwphotos Posts: 11383

---

Ratings are messed because people suck... Okay, not people. Kids. No no, people also rate irresponsably. Don't you have to proof right here if you read the thread? Look at how ARD admitted he was rating stuff... Rating shouldn't be mandatory and 2-3 menu/window deep. This would prevent bad impulsions, kids and irresponsable ratings. .

2009-10-25 18:12:00 Author: RangerZero Posts: 3901

---

I played LBP with my 7? year old cousin yesyerday. We played a Vagrant Hero level and a BMX ****zit. He rated Vagrant Hero one because he didn't know what to do and it was hard. He rated the BMX ****zit 5 because ?it was fun?. Shows alot about LBPs primary demographic. I no longer wonder why Dreamscape has 3 stars.

2009-10-25 18:22:00 Author: bonner123 Posts: 1487

---

in my time playing lbp, i came across many level which i feel should have many more stars then they currently have. it truly is sad to see an epic level with 3 or less stars, and a 1 second level with H4H in the title with 5, wth is that???????, i try my best to abide by the ratings and go with the little sentence it says about the number of stars given, but if people aren't going to do this there should be a way to skip it, people may just hit x after ending a level and thats automatic 3

2009-10-25 18:55:00 Author: springs86 Posts: 785

---

I do believe that this problem could be solved with categories, mostly. If you think of it, the real problem when a level is wrongly (yes, I do believe that rather getting bad ratings what we're truly getting are WRONG ratings) rated it's that you are getting rated by a kind of public that you didn't want to get, be it kids expecting bombs who get ****** because they enter a difficult and unbeatable -for them- level or more mature players who enter a BMX level, who naturally get annoyed because there's nothing to play there, actually. So rather than categories like "kids" and "mature", categories that have been proposed here, I would go with three simple categories: Survival levels, H4H+Throphy+Miscellanious, and the third category would be the one in wich for example, Jwwphotos space escape level would fall. Basically, the most popular kind of level here at LBPC. With this we would get rid of most of the H4H and pointless levels like the throphy ones and also the bomb survival levels, or floor falling survivals, or everything similar. I'm not saying that this level would be perfect, but it would sure redirect every player to his favorite genre. They wanna create and play bomb survivals? Sure, let them. Same with H4H. But if you want to play a decent level, just head to your section. You would still see loads of crappy levels on the top of the normal levels section, sure, but it would still decreasse the amount of survival and throphy levels a lot. This would require someone from MM to check, lets say, every afternoon the cool pages in every section, but I believe that a "wrong" level in those sections would be easily spotted, so I don't think that it would take much time away from MM, and it sure would make everyone happier. However, I don't think that this would get rid off the bad ratings because of the difficulty or other factors, but I'm sure it would "heal" the overall system.

2009-10-25 19:00:00 Author: Keldur Posts: 628

---

I would personally go for the categories that the game industry already uses: something like Puzzle, Role playing, arcade, challenge.... and also have a difficulty that the author designates. I think that levels may have a bit less attention on cool pages, but that they would be better quality. The point of LittleBigPlanet is to have fun, obviously. If a child is getting into a level in which they aren't having fun, then they are obviously in a place they don't belong in. I've at least had a bit more success in some of my later levels by being a bit more descriptive in my level description of what a player will find during gameplay. Also, designating the title with things like "[Hard]". I've somehow managed to keep a 4 star rating on Vertigo and Destiny.... I was almost POSITIVE these would split to 3 star.

2009-10-25 21:17:00 Author: CCubbage Posts: 4430

---

I'm still of the strongly held opinion that making ratings mandatory is a mistake, which ultimately skews the ratings unfairly for everyone. I agree 100%. I don't believe a player should rate a level unless they played all the way through it. Many times I've returned to my pod without completing a level. Or I join someone else as they are finishing a level and I become the leader at the scoreboard. I don't know how good the level is yet I am still forced to give a rating.

2009-10-25 22:07:00 Author: keell Posts: 69

---

I agree that ratings should not be mandatory, and also, you can only heart a level once - so why do you have to rate it again every time you play it? You should only be given one rating per level, and if you want to change it, you can change it. Just like youtube ratings. Category tags would be huge too, as well as a mandatory difficulty setting that the creator designates upon publishing. Perhaps a 5-level "very easy" to "very hard" scale for difficulty.

2009-10-25 23:20:00 Author: Teebonesy Posts: 1937

---

Sigh. There ISNT a solution. There's either keep the ratings, or do away with them. Unless MM made a way to separate the skilled from the noobs, this is how it'll be.

2009-10-25 23:53:00 Author: Incinerator22 Posts: 3251

---

Sorry for the double post, but teebonesy, MM only keeps the last rrating you gave a level.

2009-10-25 23:57:00 Author: Incinerator22 Posts: 3251

---

Oh, I thought we already moved to the stage where we stopped caring about ratings.

2009-10-26 00:00:00 Author: Syroc Posts: 3193

---

Sorry for the double post, but teebonesy, MM only keeps the last rrating you gave a level. Oh, I didn't know that. Wow, that makes it extra frustrating that they force you to rate EVERY time you play.

2009-10-26 00:00:00 Author: Teebonesy Posts: 1937

---

I'd much rather see a kudos system in place, much like rep on here. You play a level you like, you give them a point. You hate it, don't bother. People would just do K4K, kudos for kudos, and we'd be back at square one. Ideally we'd have an alternative method of favouriting a level, unlimited heart slots and a star rating that is calculated purely on the heart to plays ratio. I like this idea, but it would only work if each player only counted for 1 play in the average, no matter how many times they restarted or revisited. That is actually probably the best alternative I've heard so far, except that there are still H4H levels which would ruin this. I've seen H4H levels with 20 hearts and 10 plays.

2009-10-26 00:07:00 Author: BSprague Posts: 2325

---

People would just do K4K, kudos for kudos, and we'd be back at square one. I like this idea, but it would only work if each player only counted for 1 play in the average, no matter how many times they restarted or revisited. That is actually probably the best alternative I've heard so far, except that there are still H4H levels which would ruin this. I've seen H4H levels with 20 hearts and 10 plays. Yeah, agreed it wouldn't get rid of the H4Hers, but I can live with them tbh. I'm more bothered by people rating 1 star, because they died or didn't get a puzzle.

2009-10-26 01:06:00 Author: Kiminski Posts: 545

---

I'm more bothered by people rating 1 star, because they died or didn't get a puzzle. ^^There's the source of our troubles righty-there, eh? The problem I have with the rating system is that once you reach a certain amount of plays your rating is practically irreversible. Now for some this is a relief, since 4-stars is fine with them. But the levels that TRUELY deserve a 5-star or a rating suitable for their level fall victim to this. This is why people get frustrated with ratings! We're talking about individuals pouring hours upon hours of work (usually) into a good level and then getting firmly rejected by the community! That's why we're frustrated, people! Quality work getting unjust ratings & tags. If anything, at least make it an option and NOT a mandatory choice. People like me usually rush through that segment (honestly, I really don't give much attention to ratings) and almost ensure the level's place in society. I mean, I get the whole "no level's perfect" thing, but who said it had to be? Just next time you choose a rating, at least put a little thought into it before you continue.

2009-10-26 06:13:00 Author: Outlaw-Jack Posts: 5757

---

An idea would be to only let them rate a level if they finish it...

2009-10-26 06:24:00 Author: srgt_poptart Posts: 425

---

i agree. The levels that you hold 1 button in like a motorcross level, can be good, can even be excelent, but in the end, its going to get 4 or 5 stars even if its not excelent, because its simple. While levels that have complex storylines and deep involved characters get left in the dust.... LETS BAN CHILDREN! lol. i joke ofcourse, but the children i believe are the #1 influence for the complex levels getting low ratings. We should have an age appropriate ratings system and all that junk as well as a star ratings system so we know what we are getting in to, and the children can have their section too. Like how youtube has some"graphicish" videos and u have to prove your age. yeah. like that. im sorry i get off topic most of the time, guys.

2009-10-26 06:53:00 Author: poorjack Posts: 1806

---

yeah there isn't really an easy solution to this issue though we just have to live with it :[ i support the age group rating idea thing An idea would be to only let them rate a level if they finish it... yes ^

2009-10-26 08:18:00 Author: rseah Posts: 2701

---

An idea would be to only let them rate a level if they finish it... because that would open up yet another batch of problems: A really bad creator creates a bad level made of Darkmatter and the like gets his friends to all play it and rate it 5 stars, then he places a block of Dark matter over the exit bit so they cant finish therefore they cant rate so wed get a load of :star::star::star::star::star: rated levels, and loads of brilliant, fantastic, beautiful, levels that dont deserve any of that,

2009-10-26 17:15:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

The only issue I can see is that not every level has a scoreboard. How do you handle those levels?

2009-10-27 02:22:00 Author: BSprague Posts: 2325

---

It's not the only issue. This has been suggested many times before, and there are all kinds of issues. For instance, there are more ways to make a level unfinishable than not having a score board. And if a level really sucks, you still have to finish it to rate it. Do you want to run accross an empty level to the other end where the score board is, just to leave a bad rating? And then there's difficult levels. Don't you want to rate a badly made level when its bugs make it too difficult to rate?

2009-10-27 10:39:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Finishing the level and rating it have nothing to do together anyways. It would be a bad idea to rate a level only if you finish it. You CAN see the quality of a level without finishing it. You can see when a freaking hard level is well done but you're not able to finish it. The problem with the game is that it does not promote specifically enough and everybody rates a level all the time. Add to this that there's 3 different rating stats wich are "plays", hearts" and "tags" instead of having multiple stats complementing themselve. It's a really really really bad design that's all. The solution to make it less worse would be to had info in the levels like a difficulty level and also a genre. This would help classify levels therefore help people finding the experience they are looking for. Also, each user would have to set their preference for the cool page results. Per example, you could decide that your cool pages are always under "highest rated, platformer, normal difficulty". In short, everybody would have their own default "cool levels page" reflecting what they like. As for the rating problem it's easy. Don't make the rating feature apparent. Make it more subtle like 2-3 menus deep. This way, it's more of a chore for arrogant people to go give 1 star and it also prevent kids from rating hazardeously. .

2009-10-27 17:19:00 Author: RangerZero Posts: 3901

---

Teehee, I accidentally published the beginning of a new level without locking it last night. It's only 8 seconds long so far but it still got one heart and three stars out of 6 plays.

2009-10-29 16:48:00 Author: Syroc Posts: 3193

---

I just published legend of a hero ch.3, three times new!!!! Someone have to hate me in some way, during the first 6 plays it was rated :star:... what can I say? The single star prevent other players to give it a roll. It is frustrating and daunting to have a row with a newborn level beacause if it will receive 5 stars during the very first plays will be hated and rated 1 on purpose. And the same happened with cave escape... 12.000+ plays (my top score) and :star::star::star:... It's a bad thing to see your newborn level rated :star: in about 20 minutes of life... I can understand 3, but I usually rate 2 only levels that obviously need some heavy improvements, but 1... 1 is reserved for the ****! And there's no fun in seeing your level rated 1 without a reason! Delete - publish. 1 plays - 1 star - 1 heart - Do this make any sense? (I would have taken a picture to prove it!) Delete - publish. No fun anymore.

2009-11-17 20:49:00 Author: Miglioshin Posts: 336

---

How does this sound... What if... 1. Rating was optional and only available if you complete the level. 2. Plays are only counted if the level is completed. 3. A breakdown is shown for amount of players that have completed the level and what they rated it for informational purposes... i.e. 400 ***** 68% 150 **** 25% 14 *** 2% 3 ** 1% 15 * 3% 400 no rating provided 100 level not completed Total rated plays 582 Average rating is figured out by a weighted system with 5 stars being worth 5 points down to one star being worth 1 point. 400 x 5= 2000 150 x 4= 600 14 x 3= 42 3 x 2= 6 15 x 1= 15 Total weighted score= 2663 Total Average would be computed by taking the total weighted score divided by total number of players who rated multiplied by 5 (or total possible if everyone rated it a 5). Total Average= Total weighted score/(total players who rated x 5) 2663/(582*5)= .915 or 92% which is just over a 4 star. Sorry for rambling... This is making my head hurt... I'm not a mathmatician... and this may be how its figured out anyway. Mainly I'd just like to the the star breakdown percentages (like Amazon reviews), and that the ratings be optional and only available if you complete the level. This would encourage those who really want to see the community improve actually be the ones doing the ratings.

2009-11-17 23:05:00 Author: enodrawkcab Posts: 238

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.