Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
OK, some players here aren't happy with the new system.
Even though they didn't really like the old one, this rating thing is even worse...
An excelent point, by this fellow:
klmz said it to zggzdydp, but he didn't give him the credits when he wrote:
"do you want the movie get published" is better than "do you like watching"
**THIS IS THE DEAL**
I want YOU PLAYERS to put your opinion here.
All you have to say is just to write:
YES -- if you approve it
NO -- if you don't.
IMPORTANT NOTES:
1- I wrote YOU PLAYERS, not JUDGES or PUBLISHERS or WHATEVER unless you're a PLAYER as well.
2- I don't want your reasons. It's all about YES and NO.
3- If you don't know what to say, DON'T POST NO CRAP HERE.
IS IT TOO HARD FOR YOU er.. silly people JUST TO SAY YES OR NO?
Am I being too rude with you sensible people??
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
I like the new voting system in theory, but think it fails somewhat in practice (some newbies giving extremely high ratings for almost all new movies, inflating the ratings of them compared to older publications).
But since meh isn't allowed I'll have to say YES anyway.
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
YES.
More specifically, I think it's a little overly complicated (it feels like Bisqwit had a lot of fun making it), but it's not about the "rating" anyway.
YES
I like being able to rate a movie without having to wait months for publication.
I'd like it even more if it didn't have the technical rating, but I guess that's for another topic ("Do you approve the 'TECH QUALITY' RATING? (no MEH allowed)" :P).
You're just fucking stupid, everyone hates you, sorry to tell you the truth. no one likes you, you're someone pretentious and TASes only to be on speed game, but don't have any hope, you won't get there.
An excelent point, by this fellow:
zggzdydp wrote:
"do you want the movie get published" is better than "do you like watching"
Hey! It was my point! I told him that!
<klmz> it reminds me of that people used to keep quoting adelikat's IRC statements in the old good days
<adelikat> no doubt
<adelikat> klmz, they still do
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Joined: 10/27/2004
Posts: 1978
Location: Making an escape
Warp wrote:
Haven't you noticed the technical rating is optional? If you don't like it, ignore it. It's that simple.
But then I mention that I ignore the rating system as a whole, and then you chastise me for not speaking up any earlier?*
*Possibly because I made mention of a 5-star system while saying such, which I'll admit was probably poorly timed.
A hundred years from now, they will gaze upon my work and marvel at my skills but never know my name. And that will be good enough for me.
Haven't you noticed the technical rating is optional? If you don't like it, ignore it. It's that simple.
You see, if I ignore those ratings, that won't stop other people from still using them and looking at them. This is a problem when they have rated very lowly a good movie, or very highly a bad movie. There is NO possible way to know the real technical quality of a movie, unless you've personally TASed that game before, and even then.
So, that's why the "tech quality" rating is really useless in my opinion: it only harms "new" viewers (they may miss good movies or watch crappy ones hoping for a good one) and players (for obvious reasons).
You're just fucking stupid, everyone hates you, sorry to tell you the truth. no one likes you, you're someone pretentious and TASes only to be on speed game, but don't have any hope, you won't get there.
This is a problem when they have rated very lowly a good movie, or very highly a bad movie.
Ratings are always subjective opinions. Who says that a movie is "good" and that it deserves high ratings? You? That's your opinion. Someone else might have a completely different opinion, and he is completely entitled to it. Who are you to say that someone gave the "wrong" ratings to some movie? There are no "correct" ratings. There are only opinions.
The whole idea of ratings is to show an average of the opinions people have. Even this average must, of course, be taken with a grain of salt. After all, it's just that: Opinions. There are no wrong answers here.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I won't bother to post my thoughts, since pirate sephiroth will just automatically write them off (due to me being a judge, and him being a douche). All I can say is that the new rating system hasn't changed the way I judge, although it has given me more information to use to base my decisions on, which I appreciate.
Who are you to say that someone gave the "wrong" ratings to some movie? There are no "correct" ratings. There are only opinions.
I know. That works great when you're rating something subjective as the entertainment quality of a movie; but the technical quality, as people know it ("how close to perfection this movie is?"), is something objective.
I know I can say "Citizen Kane" is a 10 and a LotR fan can say it's a 2; and that's ok, because that's something subjective.
But if I say Earth's gravity is 9.8 m/s2 and you say it's 1.1 m/s2, then yes, you're wrong. And I don't give a f*ck if that's your opinion.
So, you're right. That's exactly the problem: we don't have any method to get the real tech quality of a movie, only opinions about it; and people shouldn't give a f*ck about them, but instead we have it as a (totally wrong) big number in a table to measure how good a movie is.
You're just fucking stupid, everyone hates you, sorry to tell you the truth. no one likes you, you're someone pretentious and TASes only to be on speed game, but don't have any hope, you won't get there.
but the technical quality, as people know it ("how close to perfection this movie is?"), is something objective.
There's no "how close to perfection this movie is?" anywhere (not anymore, at least). And I don't really understand what else people can understand the technical rating to mean other than their opinion of the technical quality of the run. It's not a math question with one right answer. Why would anyone even think of it as that?
Besides, according to what several people have written in the past, they want the technical rating to be a measure of frame-perfection (regardless of my loud protests against that idea). Whatever floats their boats, I suppose. Well, it is an opinion as good as any. As I said, there are no right or wrong answers, not even in the technical rating.
If you don't like the technical rating, then ignore it. It has become optional, so you don't have to rate. You can also ignore what others have rated. Big deal.
So, you're right. That's exactly the problem: we don't have any method to get the real tech quality of a movie, only opinions about it
Which is precisely what the rating system is asking: Opinions. Nothing more.
and people shouldn't give a f*ck about them, but instead we have it as a (totally wrong) big number in a table to measure how good a movie is.
The table is not intended to be a measure of how good a movie is. It's intended to measure the average opinion of people about the movie. If you don't like it, ignore it.
I already told you my problem has nothing to do with me seeing or using the tech quality rating. It has to do with others using it. If I ignore it, it doesn't change absolutely anything.
Warp wrote:
There's no "how close to perfection this movie is?" anywhere (not anymore, at least). And I don't really understand what else people can understand the technical rating to mean other than their opinion of the technical quality of the run. It's not a math question with one right answer. Why would anyone even think of it as that?
I repeat: most (all) people use the technical rating for "how close to perfection this movie is?"; I know it wasn't your original intention, but that message stood there for so long... And yes, that one is a math question with only one right answer.
I read the forums, and there's always this kind of (stupid) comment: "I think you could maybe shave a frame somewhere, so I will give you only a 9 in tech".
Warp wrote:
Besides, according to what several people have written in the past, they want the technical rating to be a measure of frame-perfection (regardless of my loud protests against that idea).
If people really like this system, then that's great. Probably I'm the only one who thinks this is an awful idea, so I'll just keep silent from now.
You're just fucking stupid, everyone hates you, sorry to tell you the truth. no one likes you, you're someone pretentious and TASes only to be on speed game, but don't have any hope, you won't get there.
e]
I repeat: most (all) people use the technical rating for "how close to perfection this movie is?";
I understand your position - maybe it would help you to think of it more as "How close to perfection do you think this movie is?"
Since it is impossible to know ever know a movie is perfect, then adding the subjective 'you think' makes it the question you desire.
Personally, I use technical rating to asses the tools people used. Bots, decompiling, etc. Since no one else looks at it that way, my opinion is roughly as worthwhile as a furnace in the desert.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
Yeah, I love how you PROGRAMMERS can't follow SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS.
I SAID YES or NO.
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
Yeah, I love how you PROGRAMMERS can't follow SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS.
I SAID YES or NO.
Sorry lord Sephiroth. I didn't not mean to offend his master. I am but a lowly TASer to his majesty. So, thusly, I give thine greatness my final answer.
TITS OR GTFO.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
