Forum - View topicUser rating: Worst ever
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||
|
Im actually of the opposite view here.
I think the ratings are fine (exept worst ever with should be dummed down a bit to be more general or maybe gotten rid of entirely) Its the descriptions I dislike. particularily so-so, it didn't really grab my attention. That is a poor choice for a quality description. Something might not really grab my attention but still be better than so-so. Something may totally grab my attention, but really just isnt that good (not even so-so good). Also, Masterpiece, beyond words is too extreme. Something realistic would be better. I dont like the Excellent and Very Good ones either. Dont miss it and Should be in everyones collection also seems too extreme. even if something is excellent, I wouldnt say everyone should see it. Most stuff isnt for everyone. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
G. Zeus
 Posts: 26 |
|
|||||||||||
Thank you. I've been wondering if that was the proper place for this discussion.
This is a rating/ranking system, it's already given that there are numbers behind those descriptions. I think that using descriptions is fine, they're not meant to be the be all and end all as the basis for giving reviews or ratings after all. To give the users an idea of what may be considered as the "passing grade" is enough. However, as SharinganEye had mentioned, some of the terms in the middle are synonymous so the distinctions among them aren't that clear and there are probably better descriptions that could be used instead to help clear things up.
I think that's somewhat crude since the system would require the works to get a reasonably high rating in every imaginable aspect to get a perfect score. There are a few titles such as Samurai X: Trust and Betrayal which do an excellent job in story, audio, visuals, direction, etc. On the other hand, there are also series such as Yotsubato!, ARIA, and Yokohama Kaidashi Kikou which are not and do not need to be extravagant in some details. Anime and manga of the latter kind would be on the losing end since they would be "penalized" for not making use of features which are unnecessary or even contradictory to the styles or themes of these works. Basically, different genres have different standards.
How about allowing users to give the highest and lowest rating only once? That way, superlatives aren't abused too much (for single accounts anyway). Given the number of ratings already given by countless users, it's probably not a good idea to recall all of those 0s and 10s so the only thing I could think of are adding 11 and -1 to the options. Taking a quote from Highlander: o=|======> There can be only one. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
g0ku
 Posts: 8 Location: Nola |
|
|||||||||||
|
I think jetz had the right idea to rate indiviual categories and then get an average. That would provide the opportunity to reward a show for being outstanding in certain areas but spotlight it's weaknesses and give people a more well rounded idea of what the show has to offer.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Aylinn
 Posts: 1684 |
|
|||||||||||
I don't see need to do this. Why I should give two anime like Kino's Journey and Mushi-Shi different ratings when for me both are on the same level and both deserve 10? I gave 7 series rating Worst ever and for me it means they are completely unwatchable, has nothing I liked and left me with strong negative opinion. I think all this 7 series deserved to get 1(Worst ever) I gave 2 (awful) only this anime that: a) has at least one thing I liked - for example: Gundam Seed Destiny b) started a bit interesting but turned into crap - for example: My-HiME, Black Cat c) or this that admittedly had nothing interesting but didn't leave so negative emotions to be remembered - for example: Gilgamesh |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
G. Zeus
Posts: 26 |
|
|||||||||||
Strictly speaking, it's not really needed but it would be interesting to know which titles are the ones that users think are unsurpassed and without equals. Just an option, not an obligation. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Lee1981
Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||||||
|
I don't think such restrictions are necessary. People should be allowed to rate a series however they want, based upon how they feel about the series. Obviously if Anime News Network wants to instill restrictions, its their site, but I thought the purpose of ratings was to rate an anime based on what rating you feel it deserves. I guess if people are bothered by the phrase "worst ever" then you could replace it with "utter garbage", that way by rating it as such, you are saying that while it may not be the worst anime ever created because that would be a hard feat to accomplish given how much anime there is that exists, it is complete and utter garbage and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever and you absolutely hate it. I guess detailed ratings based on art, storyline, characters, etc. would be a good idea though I'm not sure how much work something like that would be to set up.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
bonbonsrus
 Posts: 1537 Location: Michigan, USA |
|
|||||||||||
OK, After reading this I decided to go through and look at how many I had rated what, and I have a decent balance, however as I looked at them closely, some of them would have been rated a bit different if it would have been just a number scale with a possible suggestion of these clues, but not much off. I like the idea of perhaps changing this that way, however I think those who rate responsibly will still do so, and those who don't won't. Currently there are 11 choices to spread your votes around, not 10. ( I had 7 masterpiece, 40 excellent, 73 very good, 116 good, 103 decent, 75 so-so, 25 not really good, 22 weak, 11 bad 3 awful and 4 worst ever, several not rated, and none rated I hadn't finished.) |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Jedi General
 Posts: 2485 Location: Tucson, AZ |
|
|||||||||||
|
Looking at my list, it's pretty top heavy in terms of ratings. I've seen some or all of 269 titles, and 61% of them are rated Good or higher, while 22% are Unrated and 17% are rated Decent and below.
The breakdown: Masterpiece (32) Excellent (53) Very Good (44) Good (35) Decent (17) So-so (10) Weak (10) Bad (2) Awful (2) Worst Ever (4) Unrated (60) Normally I rate a series by how much something entertained, intrigued or moved me. The more entertaining, intriguing, or moving, the higher the rating, it's as simple as that. Anime succeeds quite well most of the time at providing one or more of those three things, hence why I've rated so many titles rated Good or higher. As far as Worst Ever goes, I only use that with titles I absolutely abhor (which doesn't happen very often, as only roughly 1% of the anime I've watched has been given that rating). EDIT: Fixed a percentage Last edited by Jedi General on Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:01 pm; edited 3 times in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Dan42
Chief Encyclopedist
 Posts: 3791 Location: Montreal |
|
|||||||||||
|
The rating system will not change because
1. Adjectives are less subjective than numbers. 10/10 might mean "anything good" to someone and "impossibly good" to someone else, but anyone who speaks english should have a roughly similar understanding of what "masterpiece" means. 2. Binary systems like Rotten Tomatoes are good if you just want to get an average rating (and you have a lot of users), but the main purpose of ratings on ANN is to classify titles in MyAnime; it would be meaningless to classify your anime list into only 2 categories. 3. A lot of ratings have already been given based on the current terminology; we can't start wildly changing the meaning of what people voted for. But I wouldn't mind improving the terminology as long as it keeps the same meaning. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Ramadahl
Posts: 325 Location: MK, UK |
|
|||||||||||
The way I see it, there are only 2 ways to rate a series - the way you described, or from an objective, critical viewpoint. Personally I take the same approach as you because not only is it easier to do (I don't really want to spend ages writing something up) I also think it's more helpful - if I'm reading the public lists I'm going to be looking for series I might enjoy, after all. When the subject of our anime lists being top-heavy comes around again, I'm always reminded of one user who seemed to be suggesting that they should all turn out as bell-curves  . I would think all our lists should be top heavy... this is a system used by people who like anime, right? 
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Zalis116
Moderator
 Posts: 6897 Location: Kazune City |
|
|||||||||||
But that's merely theoretical -- my list is top-heavy as well. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
selenta
 Subscriber Posts: 1774 Location: Seattle, WA |
|
|||||||||||
|
Yes, but the system is only as trustworthy or representative as the users who use it. If you just rate everything equally good or bad, you're not helping anyone. The point is to rate things in such a way that a higher means that both/either you liked it more or just generally thought it was a better anime; if you do that, it will turn out like a normal distribution, just because it's not centered at 5 doesn't inherently make it less of a normal distribution or bell curve or whatever you want to call it (unless of course you're defining it by the shape as opposed to the statistics behind it... but that's backwards reasoning if you ask me
 ).
I would agree with people who say that it would be best if the average was a 5.0... but in my opinion, that would be for all of anime assuming every show was watched equally by everyone and rated fairly. Obviously, things don't work that way, better shows are watched more, younger audiences don't participate in rating things like older groups do, anime fans over 30 years old are growing in size... but they're not exactly the norm, not to mention the fact that ANN also primarily attracts more dedicated fans. I think the average of 7.4485 (heh, that's down ~0.17 from when I first noticed the stat) isn't too bad actually overall. In my opinion, there's no need to change the system's wording or anything of the sort. I'd say we're just dealing with typical internet using idiots who are determined to be ass holes to everyone who doesn't agree with them. People being a-holes over the internet for no reason aside to make other people suffer is nearly as sure a thing in life as taxes; I just wish they weren't people who generally seem to like anime as a whole trying to further their own opinions through idiotic (and completely ineffective) methods. Any idiot can see that those votes shouldn't be taken seriously, though it does make the math rather difficult
One thing I do wish would be that we could just delete accounts that hadn't been logged in in over 6 months or something.... just some sort of way to deal with those junk accounts whose sole purpose is to trash shows. EDIT: darn, Zalis snuck in there (... wait.... "snuck" isn't a word? I guess I've never written it down before and it looks totally wrong but... "sneaked"? No way, "snuck" is now a word, I declare it so.) |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
ikillchicken
Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||
|
Also, I'll add to that, we not only find out what the Anime is about inorder to see if we'll like it, we also often find out wether its supposedly any good. From reviews to word of mouth, It greatly increases the chances that were going to like what we see. Odds are, if something is good, more people will hear its good and see it. If something is is bad, more people will hear its bad and avoid it.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
musashi1600
 Posts: 198 Location: Hawaii |
|
|||||||||||
|
I personally think a 10-point system is unnecessarily complex as far as rating media goes. A more basic 3 or 4-point scale would work better in my opinion, similar to the one at Anime Mikomi (where the scale is split into Buy, Rent, Watch, and Avoid.) I buy most of the anime I watch, and when I'm looking into a purchase candidate, it has to meet a fixed level of expectation or I don't shell out for it. If I'm looking at a 10-point scale, I'm not going to split hairs on if the title got an overall 7 or 8, I'm just looking at how the points are spread to get a feel for the general opinion of the show. A 10-point scale also complicates the process for people submitting votes, since subjectivity can and will throw votes by a 1-2 point margin either way between two people who have similar feelings about a show. Using Anime Mikomi's scale as an example, it forces voters to objectively say what degree of investment they believe a title is worth, and at the end of the day, that's what matters most.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Ramadahl
Posts: 325 Location: MK, UK |
|
|||||||||||
Well naturally, but what I mean is that people taking the time to make their lists and give ratings on a anime site are going to be people generally like what they see in the medium, and people who just don't like anime very much wouldn't bother at all. Thus unless someone goes out of their way, I'd imagine the ratings on this site will always be skweded upwards.
Hmm, well even if people everywhere randomly picked anime to watch out of all that exists (thus bypassing selection effects such as availability, etc) I suspect many of the lists would still be slightly skewed simply due to peoples differing personalities, and we'd only get a bell-curve by averaging all the results. EDIT: - Argh, 3 people posted while I was posting this... damn, I'm slow.
Hmm, I thought a bell curve (yes, the shape... call me backwards if you will ) was the result from a perfect normal distribution - and we obviously haven't got one of those, not with the source data we're using.
I thought the trust rating built into the encyclopedia worked quite well for that purpose... deleting accounts seems a little drastic. Other than those two points, I agree with everything you said. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group