Organization Why should a level be given a 1-star rating?

Additionally, I don't like unsolvable bug report levels, but if they mention that it's a bug report, I'll usually ignore it. I don't think I've ever given a 1 star rating; I've given at least 2 star ratings, at least (I think). If there's something wrong with a level (it automatically solves itself, there are loose Draggables, etc.), I usually just tell the creator. I wouldn't ever give a low rating to a level because of choices 2 or 3 in the poll. It's unfair to give a level a low rating just because you couldn't solve it. And disliking a type of level is just your opinion. If you don't like that type of level, just leave it alone. I picked choices 1, 4 and 5 in the poll.

EDIT:

Spoiler: Of Ricko's Floating Grass and meko's Ruins

@nGord reminded me of hidden Draggables. I really hate completely hidden Draggables that have no hint of being where it is. If there is a hint of where it is, like in the @Ricko 's Floating Grass, where the tree is made of metal, I usually leave it alone. Slightly hidden Draggables like in @meko 's Ruins are fine; I actually like them.

 

Ok... I didn't know that I shouldn't do it. I play other games and a lot of their forumers have goals; almost all of them. My "bug levels" are all solvable. I was referring to the bug report levels that are literally just bug report levels. Some of them were even already discovered. They just put something that looks weird, or functions weirdly and post it. It can range to almost anything, and are the type that should just be posted in the Bugs & Future Requests subforum. I like solvable ones, as you can see when I rated Running Ghost and Squeeze. I made a mistake when I typed in the voting numbers. Sorry, we all make mistakes. Thanks for telling me about it; I fixed it now.

EDIT: The signature disappeared when I took it off in my signature settings. Please tell me if this is only in my screen and I'll edit it. If it's not, then at least it's gone now.

 

@cpw - I'm with you: "I've never actually given any 1-star rating, but I'd say I'm really not a big fan of precision / luck." I am OK, though, with hidden or difficult to find elements because of "terrible viewing angles," just not a fan when they affect the ability to actually figure out the puzzle and its solution.

 

@Sunny Sunset - I agree with you that your list (on 2 July) is fairly comprehensive of many annoying and poor design aspects. Despite the unlikelihood of me ever giving a 1-star rating (as the time for me to explain the rating would not be worth it), I would not outright assign a poor score because of any one of the aspects you mentioned. Rather, I would mention my displeasure alongside anything I did appreciate about the level and award an overall score accordingly.

Excellent and important comments in the remainder of your post. Thank you.

 

My overall stance on this vote is perfectly aligned with @Frenzies quoted comment. I'm not a fan of #1 (not solvable), #4 (rip-off), and #5 (too easy) the most. And #2 (I can't solve it) and #3 (not my cup of tea) are not reasons for basing a rating on in my opinion.

 

Great point! I didn't notice there was a report button. I see it now. Thanks!

 

@Sunny Sunset - In regards to your post quoted here, I would have to agree with your comment regarding "enjoyment factor" if it is in regards to style of game. If someone finds a level that is of a style that they don't enjoy - they should move on.

In regards to level of difficulty though, in many cases you would be right: that subjectivity should play less of a part, particularly when it has to do with one's ability to complete a level. The same could be said of a level being too difficult. In fact, I disapprove of ratings of levels by those who don't complete them or can't fully comprehend them. My reservation, though, is that the star rating SHOULD be a subjective evaluation - just a holistic one that incorporates a player's OVERALL ENJOYMENT of the level and respect for the design process. This could include game flow, artwork, trickiness, complexity, creativity, storytelling, effort by the author, puzzle factor (for puzzles), agility requirement (for agility levels), etc.

If I find a level too easy, that is my opinion that the designer has made a good effort, but it is lacking in comparison to all the other great levels out there. It then plays a factor in my overall assessment of a level. And it is thus an indication to other players on whether the particular level is worth downloading. And is that not the point of the star rating system?

I would hope that people do, however, explain their rating with a bit more than "nice" or "too easy" and use a more multi-dimensional approach (more than say just "difficulty level"). Unless, of course, there is not much more that could be said about a level either because it is "ridiculously easy" (as listed in the basis of this poll/thread), or if the design was really lacking.

 

I mentioned that I side with Frenzies in the vote. I need to mention that the same goes with @Astral_Mage in his comments:
- "Agreed that this [difficulty level] condition is pretty subjective, but it is a way I gauge a level"
- "I usually look for a certain balance in entertainment factors"
- "I'd give a 1 star rating in an ultra rare situation, which is a combination of.. factors"

More examples of poor factors:
- "obstructed views [that] impair functionality"
- "Unsolvable levels by any means, unless they're intended that way"
- "Non-challenging + low enjoyment factor(if it is not that enjoyable it should at least be challenging or vice versa, am I right?)"

You are right (IMHO)!

 

@Astral_Mage P.S. I read you well. "Balance, impaired functionality, ..." = all good!