Echo wrote:

strager wrote:

Rule number one (or maybe not one) of UI design: Don't make the user think.

You need to think when you're rating a map. That's the whole point of a rating?

I want at least 5 options like Gabi suggested.

I was pointing out the flaw in a numbered system. "If I like it, what should I rate? But what if I REALLY like it? But what if I like it more than this one but less than this one? ARG!"

That's how I feel when voting sometimes, and I just don't vote in that case.

How about a nice graphic overlay?

(thumbs down)          (thumbs up)
  BAD |   MEH   |   OKAY  |  GOOD
 *  *  | *  *  * | *  *  * |  *  *

Man, it probably would have been easier to photoshop that than to type it

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

CheeseWarlock wrote:

I think LH is onto something. Though I think of "okay" and "meh" to be pretty much the same thing. Bad-okay-good-great?

But what if someone wants to rate a map "really bad"?

jk

There shouldn't be many OH GOD HORRIBLE maps, so your four choices sound fine.

I do say this would be the best, most agreeable option, by reading this thread:

Strongly Like | Like | Neutral | Dislike | Strongly Dislike

Well, I'm not sure which side should be "Agree". *shrugs* Then, you have it per a difficulty.

Sorry, but Luigi's idea of a graphical overlay to the 10 star system (clarification? That's what it appears to be, judging by the stars he has underneath the words) wouldn't do much. It might even make it worse. :P Right now, around 8 is average. If the average was lower, then maybe his idea would work. But currently? It wouldn't change any of the problems. Looking at the "bad", it might even *encourage* 1s and 2s. Right now, "bads" are often 4s, 5s, and 6s. 7 is 'eh...'. It's just how the scale has mutated on osu!. Which is part of the problem.

Mappers expect super high ratings on their maps. If they get below an 8, they think people hate their maps. Or many mappers do, at least. I don't think that myself. :P

Judging by the votes, I say this should be brought up at the next community meeting. Then we could have a "for real" vote, since this was just on whether we (AKA peppy) should consider it, and we have a lot of "yes"s compared to "no"s and "maybe"s. So we could discuss it more (AKA peppy could think about it more) at the next community meeting, assuming we have one. This would probably be the biggest topic there... That, and peppy's vacation. TELL US MORE DANG IT ><;

instead of like not like etc etc why not a rating going from bad to good - i think this rating is more neutral and more orientated on the beatmap and not personal preference

also maybe a notification to rate the map on the map itself. and not how a player like it. of course if there is a hard map a not so good player will have problems with a hard beatmap and will maybe not like it (rate it bad - but the map maybe is not bad)

But i dont think this system can be used in practical! people will still rate a beatmap on their on feeling.... if the player has a problem play this beatmap, maybe get angry and sad trying to play it he maybe rate it bad.

Hanyuu wrote:

instead of like not like etc etc why not a rating going from bad to good - i think this rating is more neutral and more orientated on the beatmap and not personal preference

It is supposed to be personal preference, though.

But this is the problem players complain (sorry example Mogsworth recent beatmap). This map start this discussion because it is a hard map to play and Mogsworth complain about people rate it 1 but it is a good map but very hard to do.

Easy is easy, they can just play that. Not being able to do Crazy means you aren't that skilled yet and should play an easier difficulty.

Anyways, ratings are how much you *like* it. That's the only way we can judge it. Seriously. osu! isn't full of professional critics, it's full of people who vote by their feelings. If they think it's a good map, they give it a high rating. If they think it's a bad map, they give it a low rating. Also, the song is part of the map. Just to clarify that. So if you pick songs like I do, don't expect high ratings. ;) I don't expect high ratings, and I've been just fine, just fine.

About the only way for us to determine how good it is is how much fun we had, so yeah. We just play and rate, we don't look through the map and determine what rating it should get.

Ekaru wrote:

Easy is easy, they can just play that. Not being able to do Crazy means you aren't that skilled yet and should play an easier difficulty.

Anyways, ratings are how much you *like* it. That's the only way we can judge it. Seriously. osu! isn't full of professional critics, it's full of people who vote by their feelings. If they think it's a good map, they give it a high rating. If they think it's a bad map, they give it a low rating. Also, the song is part of the map. Just to clarify that. So if you pick songs like I do, don't expect high ratings. I don't expect high ratings, and I've been just fine, just fine.

About the only way for us to determine how good it is is how much fun we had, so yeah. We just play and rate, we don't look through the map and determine what rating it should get.

yes you correct me and you have my thought but i think this is the reason a better or new rating is not possible in practice

i read the trough the thread and i'm kinda split.
on one hand, our system is really unstable.
on the other hand, the suggested 3 vote system wouldn't be accurate enough.
And a 5 vote system would be the same again.
4 vote system sounds the most reasonable.

Actually i don't give a crap about votings.
I mean, ranked maps are ranked maps right?

If i were to agree to a few ideas here i'd
choose LuigiHann's

LuigiHann wrote:

(thumbs down)          (thumbs up)
  BAD |   MEH   |   OKAY  |  GOOD
 *  *  | *  *  * | *  *  * |  *  *

idea.
The idea to revote later,
and the idea to rate every diff seperatly
and make a overall rating out of those ratings.

+ ingame comment system please. (max 50 letters)

You like writing a poem for your posts?

Ryuukun wrote:

idea.
The idea to revote later

This has been suggested before. I think it was declined for technical reason? Unsure.

Ryuukun wrote:

+ ingame comment system please. (max 50 letters)

Use the beatmap's thread. If you are stressing in-game, there's been a feature request on that, too.

strager wrote:

Ryuukun wrote:

idea.
The idea to revote later

This has been suggested before. I think it was declined for technical reason? Unsure.

This was not possible, because with old votes it was not recorded who voted what, so you can't change your vote. If a new system is made, then all votes need to be reset and this feature can also be added at the same time.

I don't see why votes would need to be reset, the current average could just be ported over. And especially if we switched from a 10-star system to something that's essentially a 5-star system, all specific votes (at least, votes made since the rating spread was implemented) could just be ported over.

LuigiHann wrote:

I don't see why votes would need to be reset, the current average could just be ported over. And especially if we switched from a 10-star system to something that's essentially a 5-star system, all specific votes (at least, votes made since the rating spread was implemented) could just be ported over.

The problem is that seeing as the current rating system is so ambiguous, the ratings now are also ambiguous. Also since with a new system a 7 rating may be better than how it is now, newer maps will inherently have lower ratings than the maps before this system is implemented.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

I think the current rating system speaks its own flaws pretty well. Out of the hundreds of ranked beatmaps, I know at least half of those are ranked 8.0-8.9. In fact, 11/12 of my ranked beatmaps fall under this category =p.

That really shouldn't happen.

I like the way it is now...
I rate it the 1 or 10 way most of the time when I'm lazy lol...
If the ratings were changed to your suggested method then beatmap ratings would be more dynamic and high high's and low low's ( bipolar ratings )
( a change rating thing might be good )

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

Skyripper made a very good point. Actually, most maps nowadays fall into the 7.8 - 8.8 category.
Disguised keep-aliver.

EDIT: 60% yes, 18% no, 21% maybe.

here is a question for you all who are not happy with the system right now.

do you not get satisfied untill your map is rated 9.5+??

do you expect every single player on osu to vote 9 or 10??

what will change peoples oppinions off voting if the scale became smaller?

if im correct, then if someone votes a 1 that means the map is unrankable according to some of you, then......
lol you should be really happy if someone voted 10 on your maps, because that states that the map was absolutly perfect. every note, every combo color, every hitsound, spacing and the song. sorry to burst your bubble but no map is worth a 10 then if that is how you think. there is always a small flaw in maps.

AND PEOPLE HAVE OPPINIONS OF HOW BIG/SMALL THESE FLAWS ARE

people are really generous.

I'm trully sick of hearing new suggestions for this subject over and over.

The rating system is ok as it is.
There will ALWAYS be players that will rate your map low, even if you think that your map deserves a high rating.
You can't call them "trollers" for doing this.
Maybe they really disliked the map... or the song... Maybe they doesn't like story boards... Maybe they even dislike you.
All of these previous reasons are valid in order to rate your map as they please.

Letting everyone know who voted 1 or any other score, in my opinion, is not etic.
Votes are supposed to be personal / secret. We shouldn't change that for a whine.

61% of whines up to now.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

Sir Minelli wrote:

0_o wrote:

The main thing is that the current rating system in ambiguous; people have different perceptions of the rating scale (one person would give a map they found "average" a 6, while others would give it an 8)

I highly doubt that they think an 8 is an average score.

I am one of "them" who considers an eight to be average. That's kinda because it is average.

Sir Minelli wrote:

Those are ranked beatmaps which are supposed to be good.

Since when is "good" in the ranking criteria?

Sir Minelli wrote:

That is the score that the ranked beatmaps should be getting more or less. I don't see that as wrong, at all.

Maps should get ranks anywhere from 1~10, not 7~9 as it stands now, using the current ranking scale.

strager wrote:

Sir Minelli wrote:

0_o wrote:

The main thing is that the current rating system in ambiguous; people have different perceptions of the rating scale (one person would give a map they found "average" a 6, while others would give it an 8)

I highly doubt that they think an 8 is an average score.

I am one of "them" who considers an eight to be average. That's kinda because it is average.

Sir Minelli wrote:

Those are ranked beatmaps which are supposed to be good.

Since when is "good" in the ranking criteria?

Sir Minelli wrote:

That is the score that the ranked beatmaps should be getting more or less. I don't see that as wrong, at all.

Maps should get ranks anywhere from 1~10, not 7~9 as it stands now, using the current ranking scale.

This. I also use 8 as average.

Sir Minelli, you really missed the point. This change is not meant to combat people voting too high/too low/what ever manner of voting someone dislikes, it is meant to combat the fact that each and every player has their own view on how this system works, what should be the average, etc. With fewer choices and more clearly stated meanings for those choices the system would be closer to being the same for everyone.

It works as is. We don't need to lower the choice of opinions if we have a working rating system as is. It isn't broken, it just seems so to people who focus too much on it. A massive spam of 1 ratings has never happened, and people will always rage with the new system and take "strongly dislike".
In the end, it would only give mappers the bliss feeling they're awesome since they say to themselves "oh, you'll always get dislikes with this kind of systems."
TL;DR: no

Wojjan wrote:

A massive spam of 1 ratings has never happened

Why do you guys keep bringing up this supposed problem of "people giving 1 ratings" and telling that it is not a problem when no one is even claiming this to be a problem?

People bitch about 1s. 1s are going to happen no matter what, but people will whine about them. Why? Because 1s are generally unused.

feels to me that you want to get rid of 1's if i read the OP's post.

if theres anyone to blame about the system right now its yourselves.

The problem

I did a tally of the votes on the first page of ranked maps:


Actual quantities:

This should be plain to see. The modal value of votes is 10, with a huge tendency towards upper votes. 59% of all votes are 10s. Are all these users really finding all these maps to be perfect? And 1 is the most effective way to bring down a map's rating, so that's what a user will do when they think a map is in any way overrated. Sure, people are opinionated sometimes, voters need to make greater use of the entire spread, maybe with 5 or 6 representing "this map is pretty average compared to other maps".

Fixing it
We need to establish that 8, 9 and 10 are not the votes to be given to maps ranging from average to good. A first step would be to tell users this on the rating screen. However, that requires faith in the voters, so it might be nice to implement a more complex calculation for the rating system. Weighted votes would be the best way to go about this, using mean to encourage varied votes, and perhaps even vote count to encourage more people to vote to avoid small sample size bias and non-response bias. I posted a similar formula in a previous thread that suggested thumbs up/thumbs down (which wouldn't really work, it would be like allowing users to only vote 1 or 10), but here it is adapted for any sort of numerical system (including the current "out-of-ten"):

vote_weight = abs((vote_maximum/2)-voter.vote_average) * (1+0.1 log10(voter.vote_count))

This still allows users to give out only 1s and 10s (or minimums and maximums) and end up with heavy vote weight, though a standard deviation component could be factored in.

While maps may not see the entire spectrum of scores from 1 to 10, a system such as this should allow for a larger range of scores. As for the old votes, they would be useless in the new system unless a bell curve approach or something similar were used to give current maps a more diverse score range.

I'm against weighing votes. Everyone's vote should count as much as everyone else's.

strager wrote:

I'm against weighing votes. Everyone's vote should count as much as everyone else's.

agreed. And people could vote in strange ways to game the system (artificially boost a 10 by 1'ing a bunch of other maps randomly or vice versa).

The problem with the voting system is, as mentioned before, the fact that it is public. But even if you were to remove voting capability for all but an "expert panel of judges" the problem still wouldn't be resolved in whole, because people have a problem with everything and even relatively accurate beatmap ratings (that is to say, the ratings actually reflect how "good" one beatmap is to another) will offend or anger people who have irrational biases. Which is pretty much everyone.

So get a panel of people with opposing opinions. =D The biases would cancel out, making every map a 5 (or 50% or whatever). Genius!

bump because I requested a part of this

Bumping this beast. What are the thoughts on this issue nowadays?

I'm in favour of a 5-star system myself. Another benefit that would come from this is that since the current ratings would be wiped, old maps and newer maps would be on the same playing field of ratings (9+ ratings were much rarer a year ago than they are now).

Thumbs fucking up, thumbs fucking down.

None of this weighting bollocks. You either like a map or you don't.

So we'll be like YouTube and switch out the star rating system with the thumbs up or down system?

Support~!