Oh, you're updating to the newest phpBB? Also that site looks beautiful. :P

I've been looking over the pages since my last post, and on the one hand, I really appreciate the positive feedback from my suggestion! I really didn't expect it to be so well-received. Thanks, guys! Now I don't mean to be pompous, but those of you who are against it, and generally supporting a 0-10 system, are not giving very convincing reasons. Your arguments are obtuse and at times sort of slippery; you haven't addressed the primary points in support of a five star system; and so you're coming across as clutching at straws to resist a change. [quote]A 1-5 rating is far less accurate than a 1-10 rating.[/quote] [quote]With more numbers, you can show your opinion for such game in a more specific way.[/quote] [quote]you're reviewing a whole game[/quote] Well golly gee, it's a good thing you're [i]writing an extensive review[/i] alongside your star rating, now isn't it? You've completely glossed over a vital point of my post: that the review system needs to make clear to reviewers and normal users what each distinct point in the score means. [i]Everyone already understands a five star system[/i] which is why I suggested it (that and stars are usually the Primary Goal of modern Mario titles, enforcing them as a thing Mario fangame developers want to get.) The less distinct points there are, the clearer the difference between them is. You don't need "precision" in your overall score because [i]the entire point of the overall score is to simplify your review[/i], and the simplest review you can give is one of five words: Awful, Bad, Average, Good, Excellent. [i]It's true tthat those words are still a bit ambiguous[/i], which is why I added explanations after each star detailing precisely what they mean. [color=yellow]If you think that isn't sufficient precision, then by all means, please post here an out of 10 system [u]with a distinct explanation of each point[/u] and how it differs from the last.[/color] I guarantee that you won't be able to do that, which is why I went for 1-5 instead. Furthermore, I opted for a visual design because pictures are more intuitive than text. Even if we displayed a score as "x/5" in text, that would be insufficient because users would have to actually read and process the score due to the symbols of the numbers 1-5 taking up the same visual space. And using 5 stars allows for them to be crammed into any space the web designer needs them to, whereas fitting 10 stars or a big ol' bar would be much more difficult. [quote="Hypernova"]Instead why not: [size=125][color=#DD2222]★☆☆☆☆[/color] 1 star - red [color=#DD7722]★★☆☆☆[/color] 2 stars - orange [color=#DDAA22]★★★☆☆[/color] 3 stars - yellow [color=#22AA22]★★★★☆[/color] 4 stars - green [color=#2277DD]★★★★★[/color] 5 stars - blue[/size][/quote] First off, of all the details in my suggestion, I least value the coloring, so please don't think I'm pushing too hard for the coloring I originally suggested. Secondly, I regularly interchange the terms copper and bronze in contexts where my main concern is their arguably similar color. Sorry about that! Anyway. Those colors do not clearly represent the relative value of the stars. Sure, they follow the order of the rainbow, but 1. there aren't enough star values for every rainbow color (iirc there are classically 7) and 2. I doubt anyone will associate the order of rainbow colors with quality or worth. In addition, I generally avoid using both red and green when I want to make things distinct, because so many people are red-green colorblind. At worst it will make it awkward for them to figure out what's going on, and at best it will make the design look ugly to them. The reason that ☆☆ and ☆☆☆ are both silver is because [s]copper[/s] bronze is very close to rust or "you suck red" in color, and lacks the "I still did good" effect of silver, so I wasn't comfortable giving it to ☆☆☆ which is meant to symbolize a good effort in a mediocre-to-sorta-good product. If it was an actual bronze [i]medal[/i], then I would be okay with giving it to a 3/5 product. I instead gave bronze to ☆☆. In effect, I interpreted both ☆☆☆ and ☆☆☆☆ as "second place" and ☆☆ as third place. I briefly considered having the ☆☆☆☆☆ flash rainbow colors, but 1. I couldn't represent that in my post and 2. it would probably be irritating to look at. [quote="Kritter"]A healthy compromise for coloured stars would be the score on the games page. When you scroll down the game list you see things listed as just yellow stars, but when you click on the game itself it gives an overall score, something like this, which could also be shown on the separate review pages. [img]http://i.imgur.com/BPwlsvb.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/xBbrgb5.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/FtrZEfc.png[/img] Each game is awarded a star medal which is coloured, but you won't see that unless you click on the game or review, otherwise you simply see the yellow star rating as you scroll down the games page.[/quote] [quote="DJ Coco"]Instead of medals we could have it feature some of the current review animations, maybe even some new ones. Alternatively, I'd also recommend using a Mario face expressing how good the game is (similar to that guy on Newground). 1 stars = Mario looking to the floor in sadness 2 stars = Mario rubbing chin being skeptical 3 stars = Mario holding his hat, looking at the viewer with a slight smile 4 stars = Mario giving a thumbs up with a smile 5 stars = Mario in his jumping pose e.g. [img]http://i.imgur.com/5lkuowU.png[/img][/quote] I presume these enlarged star bars will only be on individual game pages? At any rate, I would basically go for "enlarged emoticons", i.e. just a floating Mario head, and the text should probably be a bit larger. It'll take me a bit to experiment with what you guys are doing here. I would go for a very Paper Mario aesthetic. And don't you [b]DARE USE :soveryhappy: I WILL FIGHT YOU ALL[/b]

[quote="DracoHandsome"]And don't you [b]DARE USE :soveryhappy: I WILL FIGHT YOU ALL[/b][/quote] Not a bad idea... :agree:

The problem with scores in my opinion is not the reduction to numbers, it's that lots of people have different interpretations of what the numbers mean and that makes it difficult to fairly average the review scores. Thus, whatever score system we have, we should assign words to each number. As many words as we need, that's the scale we're going to use. If it's 5, or 10, or 7 or 8 items. Then scores could be shown in various ways. Either by percentage of each score like: 80% GREAT, 10% OK, 10% TERRIBLE or rounding the average: GREAT or having a word with a decimal point, e.g. a game between "ok" and "great" might on average be OK.82. This would of course look better with a graphical representation, and the word being "great" while the "bar" of whatever you want would be filled accurately. So the fuller a good score is the better, but everyone would know what the "numbers" mean. @HylianDev: I'll see what I can do about the svn...

Maybe just drop the numbers altogether and just use a scale of words. Terrible - Ok - Great, etc. It's more specific than something like 6/10. Maybe you can show a percentage of how many users picked each option for a good view of where the community stands on the quality of a game.

That's pretty much what'd the 5-star system would do. Each star would have a name.

I feel like we should keep the review scoring system in 10's, then. We could either keep the 1/10 system as is, make users say that a game is "80% good" or the graphics are "60% great," or just words like "Amazing," "Okay," or "QC is drunk." No matter which one we choose, it's best to keep the scale in 10's because older reviews have used this already and it might cause headaches to switch them to a 5 star system. [quote="HylianDev"]EDIT: The overall scores of the games should be done this way, but maybe we should tape off older reviews, since we can't exactly reconstruct them?[/quote] I should've responded to this sooner, but I think we need to keep the old reviews. Without them, there's no way to tell if an old game is any good or bad unless you played it already. If we're keeping them, however, they still need to have a consistent setup with the new reviews, otherwise it'd be impossible to have an average score system.

^A 10-point system could easily be converted to a 5-star system

[quote="[url=http://phpbb.mfgg.net/viewtopic.php?p=458154#p458154]Blutorus[/url]"][quote="HylianDev"]EDIT: The overall scores of the games should be done this way, but maybe we should tape off older reviews, since we can't exactly reconstruct them?[/quote] I should've responded to this sooner, but I think we need to keep the old reviews. Without them, there's no way to tell if an old game is any good or bad unless you played it already. If we're keeping them, however, they still need to have a consistent setup with the new reviews, otherwise it'd be impossible to have an average score system.[/quote] By "tape off" I meant like, have them in their own section and they'll read kinda differently. They'll still have the 10/10 score and the same sections.

Reading this whole topic is giving me a headache.

[quote="HylianDev"]By "tape off" I meant like, have them in their own section and they'll read kinda differently. They'll still have the 10/10 score and the same sections.[/quote]I think this should be done. Maybe have the review link on the game page be marked as such with a exclamation mark image or something to the side alt-text'd with "Legacy Review".

Here's a good suggestion: Have the ability to make lists per corresponding member of fangames played along with the review score given where applicable. The list isn't limited to fangames dropped, plan to play, and currently playing.

Oh no! So what am I supposed to do when my account dies...? :( What am I gonna do? Will I still be able to make an account named 'AsteriskX'? What's gonna happen? I don't really understand...I mean, like, are the forums gone? Can I have my old submissions on my new one? This might be a problem...

The forums will stay. :biggrin: the site accounts will be your forums accounts now but the old site accounts will stay too and you can link your new one to those old ones. ;) -Source HylianDev

[size=200]What's up with the accounts?[/size] Your forum account will remain, untouched. You will not be able to log into your mainsite account, but you can link it with your forum account to claim your submissions.

What?... What do you mean by dying accounts?

So basically MFGG as a site will die?...No more games, sprite sheets? Only the forums?...

[quote="AsteriskX"]So basically MFGG as a site will die?...No more games, sprite sheets? Only the forums?...[/quote] Read the previous posts.

Guys, don't worry. Just Trust The Fungus. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[quote="[url=http://phpbb.mfgg.net/viewtopic.php?p=460691#p460691]AsteriskX[/url]"]So basically MFGG as a site will die?...No more games, sprite sheets? Only the forums?...[/quote] No, the MFGG site will work better and will use your forum account so you only have to have one from now on.