Bruceswar wrote:Optimus Prime wrote:If you want to know how a player plays, go play them, my friend. You aren't going to understand how they play completely without actually playing them at some point. How many negative feedbacks are average on this site? 2 or 3 for most players max? So you've got someone with 3 people who say they thought he was a little crazy with how he played, so what? If you think being able to see those comments gives you an accurate picture of how someone is as a player then really, something is a bit wrong if you ask me.
The numbers we have now for "feedback" serve the same purpose as the stars will. I bet that easily 95% of the players here do nothing but just take a glance at that 72-0 next to my name and say to themselves "Yeah, with a feedback score like that he must be an alright player" and then just go ahead and join the game. Even if my feedback was say... 25-4 I bet no more than a handful of players will think anything past "Yeah, looks like he's messed up a couple times. I'll skip this one" or "Meh, 4 negs really ain't that bad, I'll take my chances" and off they go joining the game without ever looking at what is actually written.
Almost all of us know that anything written in a negative feedback on this site has to be taken with not one grain, but possibly a small spoonful of salt before taking it into consideration. The ability to comment on gameplay really doesn't help that much.
You are correct that you cannot fully know how a player will play just by reading the feedback. It will however give you a general idea. Now if you get into a game with this player and they make terrible moves or suicide into you than you are able to leave the correct feedback for them with a simple yet true comment. Something along the lines "Player does not understand 8 man escalating games and will suicided into you chasing after Australia" That comment was simple and to the point. Every player after me can read it and decide if they want to deal with this player. I check feedback a lot when it comes to the speed games I play. I have even jumped out of a game because player X joins. I play 8 man freestyle speed games, so in those games other players can really wreck your game with a bad strategy. Most of the players who play this type of game know how to play it, but there is always 1 or 2 who will waste themselves and usually someone else by chasing a bonus. I have seen people spend 15 armies to take Australia over 5 rounds. This makes them A) usually left for dead. B) Not to bright as they will never make those 15 armies back up. Would take 8 rounds and by then cashes are at 100. Pointless and those players are usually dead by then. But in that 15 army sweep they managed to take out another players 2 spots he was dropped there. Leaving him for all but dead. Something needs to be SAID about people like this. The current feedback system allows for it.
But does that general idea really mean much if it is entirely subjective? That's the real issue. By allowing comments you are just inviting retaliation into the system. Even the smallest of slightly negative connotations will cause a player (even though it shouldn't) to go and write something back just to get even. With no comments, and the delay in the rating being displayed until the game is archived you eliminate that problem. By the time the game is archived cooler heads have prevailed and more than likely you won't even remember that game in particular (excluding some extreme cases of course).
So you see someone with a 2.9 rating (let's presume after several months of the system that will be a little on the low side). You say to yourself, weeelllll.....I'm not sure if I want to play someone with that rating, let's see what they are rated for. So, you click on their number, and spend a minute or two glancing through their individual ratings and discover the following:
A. For the most part it seems that player gets a good score for attitude and attendance... that's a good thing
B. Their sportsmanship score is about average across the board (mostly 3 stars with a few 2s and 4s thrown in)
C. Aaah,... but it seems they get consistently bad marks for Teamwork (lots of 1s and 2s)
Now, what can we gather from this with only a mere 60 seconds of scrolling through their page? Well, we notice that this particular player seems to be pretty reliable as far as taking turns and being a good sport are concerned, but that apparently a lot of folks think they are really lacking the the team game area.
Next question: Is this game you are thinking of joining with this 2.9 player a team game? If yes, than I would say that if you are an avid team game player, perhaps find another, but if it's a standard game of a common set-up the individual ratings as you scroll down the screen seem to belie the idea that this is a pretty decent player to have in a game.
All you have to do is learn how to read the trends in a player's individual ratings. Which, is probably easier than trying to sift out somewhat reliable feedback comments from bogus ones.
