OCC Recomends Almost Everything

[Silverfox]

No decent jobs around the place I live in, too many Turks taking them (Not being racist, it's true!)

 

All the poles take the jobs here ...

[Vasto]

Wow, I need to check OCC more often. I didn't realize that my thread would start a heated debate. I read all the pages and I see some validity to both points. I think a rating (whether it be 5 fans or a number or something) in conjunction with awards would be great. For example, like someone brought up, if you review Product A and it is great, then it should get a great score. However if you still recomend Product B to your friends, then OCC shouldn't reccomend it.

[NotForNothing]

Why not do like GameSpot, GameSpy, etc.... they'll publish a review and have a rating that's given by the reviewer, and then they'll allow members to give their own rating for the product.

 

e.g.

Editor's Say: 4/5

Member's Say: 2.5/5

You Said: 3/5 (edit)

 

This would give readers a better idea of the product. Not to mention help out the reviewers by allowing them to see how the mass views the product.

[UkJenT]

I second that idea.

[ClayMeow]

Why not do like GameSpot, GameSpy, etc.... they'll publish a review and have a rating that's given by the reviewer, and then they'll allow members to give their own rating for the product.

 

e.g.

Editor's Say: 4/5

Member's Say: 2.5/5

You Said: 3/5 (edit)

 

This would give readers a better idea of the product. Not to mention help out the reviewers by allowing them to see how the mass views the product.

I don't know if IPB allows something like this, but it's an interesting idea. A long time ago, the reviews were posted in the forums with a poll, but people would often wind up voting based on how they thought the review was conducted, rather on the product itself.

[Silverfox]

I don't know if IPB allows something like this, but it's an interesting idea. A long time ago, the reviews were posted in the forums with a poll, but people would often wind up voting based on how they thought the review was conducted, rather on the product itself.

 

Which is why it wont happen here. Too much potential for abuse, especially from external sources.

[NotForNothing]

I don't know if IPB allows something like this, but it's an interesting idea. A long time ago, the reviews were posted in the forums with a poll, but people would often wind up voting based on how they thought the review was conducted, rather on the product itself.

Reviews don't look like they are done in IPB. Surely between all the staff and members, someone could come up with a way to add a couple more tables to the DB and work it into the review format.

 

Which is why it wont happen here. Too much potential for abuse, especially from external sources.

Does no one think outside of the box here? Simply set it up so you have to be a member for 1 year before you can add your own rating for a product. Besides, if you've got enough people voting, it's hard for a few people to abuse it.

[Guest Raven65]

think outside the box. hummm. 5 reviews a week, contests every month, unique articles.

if that's not outside the box I don't know what is.

Constructive suggestions and comments are always considered.

But think before making them, we are innovators not followers.

[airman]

i do feel that the gold, silver, and bronze ratings are a decent idea. however it can imply that every product that gets a review is a good product...in a sense that gold, silver, and bronze happen to be the top three competitors and there are many others which didn't get an award.

 

reinstating a point - most of the things we get are donated by the manufacturer. they know we are a credible source as far as review content goes, and they also know that we are a credible source in the sense that many people see this site and will see the review, and in turn buy their product. every manufacturer [i hope] will know if a certain product is crap, and such they probably won't send it to us to review since they know we'll review it honestly. whether we recommend it or not, is up the individual reviewers.

 

with that being said, i do agree that there should be certain levels of a recommendation. we should still keep the editor's choice award, but there still are several 'middle of the road' ratings that should be established. possibly on a scale of one to five AS WELL AS a recommendation "stamp", or whatever we'll call it. say for example, a product that gets reviewed with NO cons, has a decent price [for what it does...i think there was a thermaltake heatsink last month that got no cons] should get a five star. editor's choice is obviously up to the reviewer and the editor on top of that. a product with say 5 pros, and 2 cons should recieve a 3 or a 4. probably a 4, considering most of the reviews always have at least 2 or 3 cons in them.

 

so - i do agree with both sides. with raven/other staff i will say that most of the stuff we are getting is high end. considering it's a high-end product, we hope it does what it's supposed to do. whatever it is, it should be taken from the point of view of whomever is going to get the most out of it. say for example a firegl or a quadro fx workstation card. it shouldn't be reviewed from a gamer's point of view, but get in the mind [if you aren't one] of a developer. what do YOU want it to do, and what do you expect it to do for a hefty pricetag of over a thousand bucks? that's for the reviewer to decide. but whoever's going to get the most out of it should be pointed out in the review.

 

the other side, being the ones saying too many recommendations, i also agree with. it does seem that close to three out of four reviews get some sort of stamp of approval, and i have noticed that. with most of our review subjects being high end, it should be harder to get a stamp of complete approval.

 

either/or, i do think that a new rating system should be suggested...instead of, well, really two main ratings - approved, or not...plus the occasional editor's choice. the only downside of doing such a thing would be the fact that the past reviews may have to be re-evaluated with the new rating system. again, solely a suggestion. i'm a recent addition to the staff and i do realize for the past [almost four years] i haven't been, but i am trying to support both sides.

 

hope this makes things a little clearer or re-inforces other's opinions. i gave it a shot.

[nan0click]

Didn't Maximum PC explain their system as a 1-10 scale, and if a product got a 10, it was an automatic editor's choice, and if it got a 9 it was reviewer's descresion? Other than that it was simply numerical rating scale. Keep it simple, perhaps cut back on the number of badges used at the end of a review. Just my .02