Metanet Forums

I'm getting really tired of having to pare down each and every one of my reviews. Does anyone know why the 100-word limit was imposed? I understand that Arachnid or whoever runs this hellhole now wanted to avoid fucking novels, but please. Maybe 200 words? Even 150?

I wouldn't bother asking that this be considered unless I thought it was really, really easy to implement.

Thread instead of direct email because I want to know if you guys agree, or don't have any trouble with it.

EDIT: See Techno's post directly below.

I was about to propose a change of the 50 word minimum to 10. Some of us aren't fancy wi't our type-talk.

Flight wrote:I was about to propose a change of the 50 word minimum to 10. Some of us aren't fancy wi't our type-talk.

I agree with that, too. I feel like the reviews sometimes detract from the maps. But if I want to write a short story, or at the very least some dialog, I see no reason why I shouldn't be able to.

I'll add to OP.

I don't think anything less than 40 words should be allowed. Otherwise you're basically saying, "Play this map because I said so," rather than "Play this map because of (reason 1|2|3)."

I don't think anything more than 120 words should be allowed though. The longest review I've written is 143 words and obviously I had to cut that down quite a bit. I think the problem with such long reviews is that people don't want to read much more than a paragraph about a map. Unless you're really witty or really imaginative with your descriptions (let's be honest, even the best of us aren't good enough to do that with every review) the review itself can become boring and lame.

That's my proposal. 40 to prevent people from just simply saying "play this map" and 120 to prevent people from saying "Reasons why you should play this map: 1, 2, 3...50"

Because people like me don't like reading them.

Manus Australis wrote:...Unless you're really witty or really imaginative with your descriptions (let's be honest, even the best of us aren't good enough to do that with every review) the review itself can become boring and lame...

Isn't that like two a month though? Even if it's three, you could surely come up with something a little bit creative. Also, would it be possible to include a "preview of the review" so that reviewers could make sure all the creative doodads were formatted properly?

spudz wrote: I have had moments like that flag. :[

Someone agreeeeeeees with me!

Manus Australis wrote:I don't think anything less than 40 words should be allowed. Otherwise you're basically saying, "Play this map because I said so," rather than "Play this map because of (reason 1|2|3)."

I don't think anything more than 120 words should be allowed though. The longest review I've written is 143 words and obviously I had to cut that down quite a bit. I think the problem with such long reviews is that people don't want to read much more than a paragraph about a map. Unless you're really witty or really imaginative with your descriptions (let's be honest, even the best of us aren't good enough to do that with every review) the review itself can become boring and lame.

That's my proposal. 40 to prevent people from just simply saying "play this map" and 120 to prevent people from saying "Reasons why you should play this map: 1, 2, 3...50"

Is there any reason not to make it just a little longer? If people really can't read 150 presumably entertaining words, then fine. They don't have to at all. But we might as well have the option. As for the less than 40 bit, well, I agree with you mostly. I can always find something to say about a map. If you can't, you probably shouldn't be a reviewer.

Kablizzy Sucks wrote:Because people like me don't like reading them.

See my argument with pawz.

Kablizzy Sucks wrote: Also, would it be possible to include a "preview of the review" so that reviewers could make sure all the creative doodads were formatted properly?

Agree wholeheartedly, but again, the main reason why I'm complaining about this is that it would be so easy to change.


DISCLAIMER


Typed in a hurry, will be more coherent tomorrow. Cheers.

Jesus guys. Is twenty words going to make the map you review any better? I was joking about the "I need less than 50 words" thing by the way. If you can't write 50 words about a map, you really shouldn't review that map.

If the problem here about stretching the page, then what's up with some guys doing song lyrics or poems? And empty space, but that had it's purpose. <3 Pawz

I honestly don't care about the length of reviews. I'm more interested in the map. If you feel like you need to write an essay on why the map you featured deserved the spotlight, then so be it.

Flight wrote:Jesus guys. Is twenty words going to make the map you review any better? I was joking about the "I need less than 50 words" thing by the way. If you can't write 50 words about a map, you really shouldn't review that map.

If the problem here about stretching the page, then what's up with some guys doing song lyrics or poems? And empty space, but that had it's purpose. <3 Pawz

I honestly don't care about the length of reviews. I'm more interested in the map. If you feel like you need to write an essay on why the map you featured deserved the spotlight, then so be it.

Okay. I'm not making myself too clear here. I just want the option. It's not hard to add to the site; it need not change anything. I'm also not saying that all my reviews are going to triple in length; they aren't. Furthermore, if you don't want to read them, don't. And if someone abused the lack of limits on their reviews, they could be kicked out.

Seems like an easy, painless change to me.

Why should there be a limit at all? There is no requirement to read the review before you play the map! Additionally, I thought the whole point of reviewers were they were people who are good at writing reviews (duh!), so their reviews should therefore be interesting enough to read. If someone is a reviewer, I expect them to be able to captivate me with their writing, even if it is 250 words or even more! Otherwise why even have reviewer nominations?

Minion_of_Pi wrote:Additionally, I thought the whole point of reviewers were they were people who are good at writing reviews (duh!), so their reviews should therefore be interesting enough to read.

Just because you're good at writing doesn't mean you always write something interesting. (Stephen King, anyone?)
I do not think a paragraph is asking too much or too little. I think we should be able to write less than or more than a paragraph, but there's a point at which length would just become ridiculous. My proposal of 40-120 words still stands. It allows something simple to be said about the map or it allows for our Reviewers to expand a little more than they were able to before.

If one is good at writing they should be able to say most everything necessary about an N map in about a paragraph, give or take.

You could always try different methods of creating more potent words, removing the need for more than 100.

sidke wrote:You could always try different methods of creating more potent words, removing the need for more than 100.

I linked you to that, like yesterday. Bastard.

Blackson wrote:

sidke wrote:You could always try different methods of creating more potent words, removing the need for more than 100.

I linked you to that, like yesterday. Bastard.

Xavier

Minion_of_Pi wrote:Otherwise why even have reviewer nominations?

Huh?

Manus Australis wrote:My proposal of 40-120 words still stands.

If that's the best I'm gonna get, fine. A proposal from you would have more weight with Arachnid; will you email him? Or do you want to let a few more reviewers give their opinions?

I wanna write essays. :(

xVxSupremeMastarxVx wrote:I wanna write essays. :(

And I want to read them.

xVxSupremeMastarxVx wrote:I wanna write essays. :(

gloomp essays would be awesome.

But yeah, I like the idea of 40-120. Perfect length for me. :D

I once wrote a 153-word review. Pain to cut that down; I just ripped out an entire paragraph, and in retrospect, it came out as incomprehensible garble. 120 would be easier to reduce to instead of 100 (or 97, as it was with this example).

I really like where the limits are. I don't care how eloquent you think you are, I don't want to read a fucking term paper about how the drones in this map accent the good aesthetics with pleasing game-play. Secondly, half of you don't even write about the fucking map. Sure that's fine with me, but you need more words to continue to not write about the map?

rocket_thumped wrote:I really like where the limits are. I don't care how eloquent you think you are, I don't want to read a fucking term paper about how the drones in this map accent the good aesthetics with pleasing game-play. Secondly, half of you don't even write about the fucking map. Sure that's fine with me, but you need more words to continue to not write about the map?

Since you're too lazy to read the rest of the thread, I'll paraphrase: I think I should have the option to write a little bit more about the map that I think worthy of featuring, since all of you have the option of scrolling right the fuck past my "review."

Anyway, the map I just featured got maybe twenty extra comments and six extra ratings because of the featuring, so it really doesn't matter. The (evidently) few people that bother to read the reviews probably don't mind reading another twenty words.

flagmyidol wrote:Since you're too lazy to read the rest of the thread, I'll paraphrase: I think I should have the option to write a little bit more about the map that I think worthy of featuring, since all of you have the option of scrolling right the fuck past my "review."

No, I understood what you were saying. You have the option to not write a review. there you go. :D options! :DDD

No, without trying to return any wickedness your way, I really think it's just a frivolous change.

There shouldn't be a maximum limit for word count because I'm sure that many people can write good reviews that are a bit longer than normal. And besides, there's no real potential for abuse; nobody should be spamming it because being reviewers they're responsible members of the community, and even if they do, just ban them. It shouldn't happen that often anyways.

A minimum word limit of 50 is definitely a good idea, however, because it really evades total laziness. It forces people to elaborate on their thoughts at least a little bit, and if taken away a significant amount of reviews would turn into "PLAY THA MAP LOL".

Skyling wrote:And besides, there's no real potential for abuse; nobody should be spamming it because being reviewers they're responsible members of the community, and even if they do, just ban them. It shouldn't happen that often anyways.

That's the problem Skyling, most of us aren't responsible members of the community. Look at southpaw.

I shared this idea on the IRC already, but I'll say it again.

If you want to seriously write an essay, write it in Photoshop over the same background color as NUMA. Upload the image and use that as your review.

PROBLEM SOLVED TEMPORARILY.

Flight wrote:I shared this idea on the IRC already, but I'll say it again.

If you want to seriously write an essay, write it in Photoshop over the same background color as NUMA. Upload the image and use that as your review.

PROBLEM SOLVED TEMPORARILY.

I like this idea much more than the 80/120 word count one.