Enter Your Reply

Joe Joyce wrote

First, maybe separate the ratings into 3 groups: author rating, verified raters, unverified raters, then show them in order of best rating to worst rating.

There won't actually be unverified raters, because each rating will be keyed to the userid. This prevents ballot stuffing, and it allows raters to change their ratings. I plan to include inventor ratings in the header when they are available, along with figures on the other ratings.

Second, use both types of words for rating. I can see rating a game excellent, but not a favorite, or a game average, but a favorite.

I don't want to overcomplicate things. One of my main goals with a new rating system is to make it easy to use. One possibility is to integrate the new and old rating systems, such that if someone rates a game as Poor or BelowAverage in a comment, it gets recorded as a Dislike, and if someone rates a game as Good or Excellent, it gets recorded as a Like. But a user would still be free to change his ratings in the new system, even favoriting a game he has rated as average in a comment.

Third, group games by both clustering and category. Dimensionality would be one obvious category, as would size, but I would suggest adding a few groupings and categories that aren't differentiated here.

Since this information is already in the database, and ratings will be keyed to ItemIDs, it should be a simple matter to compare the ratings for groups of related games.

The purpose of all this is to direct people to games they might like quickly. We have around a thousand presets now, and a few times that in total variants. If this is to be useful, we should offer patrons a useable search mechanism. Is that possible with the resources we have?

Here are a few things I plan on adding: 1) People who like this game also like these games. 2) Given your likes and favorites, here are other games you may like.