If a trusted friend told me someone had harassed them, I would steer clear of that person, too, to protect myself. To my ears, this set of guidelines follows the kind of common sense that individuals follow for themselves, and puts into words what women naturally do with each other. If the hosts had a reputation or pushing freshmen or inexperienced drinkers to drink heavily. Tried to enforce a "ratio" of girls to guys. Was racist / homophobic / fatphobic / otherwise bigoted about who they let in or were respectful of at the party.
Let in or was hosted by a person who had sexually harassed any of us or anyone else.ĭidn't let girls mix our own drinks or pick and open their own beers. They decided that when they went out to parties, they would skip or leave any party that: She said she joked to her friends that they should form a "hoe union," and they took to the idea in a surprisingly wholesome way. "It can be fun but sadly it can also be risky, most of my friends and I have had bad experiences." Relatable. "I'm in a college organization that is also big on partying," she wrote. That said, I know I have a long journey ahead.In yet another "Am I The Asshole?" gem of a post, a woman in college wanted to know if she was in the wrong for organizing - what she playfully termed - a "hoe union" among her friends. Higher the score, better the game.Īs we grow-up with the rating scales systems, it's a natural habit of translating everything into that scale. While World War Z, a PVP+PVE game scored 175 and had a bad evaluation because it didn't deliver what it promised (you will see a design difference between both evaluations).Ġ-10 scale or 0-5 stars will always exist as it's burned into our minds since first day of school. What determines if it's a good or bad purchase is leveling what the game offers with your expectation.įor example, American Fugitive, a casual game that scored 128 and was well evaluated because delivers what it proposes to be. The score in this methodology represents what the game offers, not if it is a good or bad purchase. That's why SSP is there, to align expectations about what is offered by the game. My suggestion with this methodology is to focus on what the game offers and what you, as a gamer, is searching for. How much this reviews really helps us decide if the game is a good purchase? How is fair to rate a casual game a 8/10 and give a similar score to a title like God of War? The gaming review publishers use rating scales.Ġ-10 scale reviews usually come with a text that describe the gameplay and a score with a criteria that change to every game that is reviewed (most cases). One of the biggest reasons I started this project is to help us, gamers, make better purchase decisions when buying games. After you read, let me know what you think about it. I built the basis of the methodology and every new published evaluation, redditors criticism and suggestions helps me make it better.Ībout the sentence, "there" would help make it more clear, thanks.Ībout the second point, I just wrote an answer to another redditor on this thread and I will paste a fragment of it below. I love talking about the methodology of this evaluation. I'm very curious to see some additional reviews & breakdowns from you in this general format in the future, but as for this specific case it feels somewhat wonky - maybe I just need to wait to see some more evaluations on your part, or you could do a retroactive analysis of a very well known game to help serve as a baseline. I guess it's just weird seeing it included in this format to no real effect (mostly due to only seeing this format now for the first time), and would instead be interested in seeing how you utilize the section for other games.Īdditionally, while I appreciate the attempt to break apart your overall opinion into different aspects of pros & cons, and while certainly there's a stigma of the X/10 rating system that blankets most things, seeing a final score of 200-and-change out of 1,000 leaves a bad taste in my mouth - maybe the utter scale of difference between the default interpretation (OP only gives it a 26.3% vs my expectation of 65% vs the opencritic scores I'm seeing of 70-73%) is throwing me off, I'm not sure. The second sentence especially seems to be a run-on without clearly establishing anythingĪfter content to help players complete the game is published and DLCs are released doesn't exist any other ELEMENT to keep gamers gathered around the game.Ĭould be as simple as a ", there" between "released" and "doesn't".Īdditionally, this section as a whole seems as though it exists to just provide added "value" to multiplayer games inherently, or at the very least to things that seems more repetitive. I feel the section on the Social Status Potential needs to be reworded for clarity.
0 kommentar(er)
