I think this is a pretty self-explanatory idea. When users comments on a place, their hours played could be listed along the top.
Idea source:
Idea concept:
Or something like that idk this was made fast
[size=1]I really am a photoshop wizard k[/size]
I’m also thinking that little green square could be like the yellow “verified” checkmark when someone owns an item
I like it. I would like to see what actually “comments” are. When people say “THE GAME SUCKS” and they have like no time on the game, it would be awesome.
I like this.
Total agreement, supports my belief of “can’t judge a game you haven’t actually played”. Would be an awesome addition this year, I imagine it can’t be so hard since playtime is already tracked for games.
Where did you get this idea?
If someone thinks a game is terrible, why would that person play for a long time?
They wouldn’t, that’s actually a good point to consider when validating a comment, though ultimately if you haven’t played a game for, not a long time, “enough” time, then it tells me your comment is likely unreliable, I’d rather trust a comment with high playtime, they actually gave the game a chance than someone who played 5 minutes. For ROBLOX’s case, the case of where many miniscule games exists, I’d say 30 minutes is enough time. But, they could be exploiting their playtime, which is why you also consider how intelligent, respectful, and mature the comment is.
I’d just love to see how long players have spent in my games overall. Period.
They wouldn’t, that’s actually a good point to consider when validating a comment, though ultimately if you haven’t played a game for, not a long time, “enough” time, then it tells me your comment is likely unreliable, I’d rather trust a comment with high playtime, they actually gave the game a chance than someone who played 5 minutes. For ROBLOX’s case, the case of where many miniscule games exists, I’d say 30 minutes is enough time. But, they could be exploiting their playtime, which is why you also consider how intelligent, respectful, and mature the comment is.[/quote]
Woah woah, five minutes for most games is plenty of time. I’m not going to continually give a game a chance if it doesn’t continually prove that it’s worth giving a chance. That starts with the thumbnail, and persists with every moment in the game.
If this would be a thing, hours would not be the unit to measure it in. If a game is bad, you can tell without giving it an hour.
I also want a “Reviews” section, high character posts where people with high playtime can post in. To regulate it, if people post spam then it should count as a ban to take a more serious step in game development. Spam like
“Bad.”
“Good”
“10/10 IGN”
Basically anything that is useless, abusing the Review feature, and/or not taking advantage of the high character posts. Comments are barely ok when judging a game, I’d rather read a review.
They wouldn’t, that’s actually a good point to consider when validating a comment, though ultimately if you haven’t played a game for, not a long time, “enough” time, then it tells me your comment is likely unreliable, I’d rather trust a comment with high playtime, they actually gave the game a chance than someone who played 5 minutes. For ROBLOX’s case, the case of where many miniscule games exists, I’d say 30 minutes is enough time. But, they could be exploiting their playtime, which is why you also consider how intelligent, respectful, and mature the comment is.[/quote]
Woah woah, five minutes for most games is plenty of time. I’m not going to continually give a game a chance if it doesn’t continually prove that it’s worth giving a chance. That starts with the thumbnail, and persists with every moment in the game.
If this would be a thing, hours would not be the unit to measure it in. If a game is bad, you can tell without giving it an hour.[/quote]
I think any game that is bad enough like you described doesn’t even require comments to judge it, so I wouldn’t worry about having to continually give the game a chance to give it a fair comment, no worrying about giving it “enough” time. When I say 30 minutes I mean that’s enough for an entire “fair review”, I think you could do 10 minutes for a “fair comment”, unless again the game is so bad it doesn’t need comments, but these times depend on the size of the game. And yes games tend to be miniscule on ROBLOX so I wouldn’t go with just hours either, include hours and minutes.
They wouldn’t, that’s actually a good point to consider when validating a comment, though ultimately if you haven’t played a game for, not a long time, “enough” time, then it tells me your comment is likely unreliable, I’d rather trust a comment with high playtime, they actually gave the game a chance than someone who played 5 minutes. For ROBLOX’s case, the case of where many miniscule games exists, I’d say 30 minutes is enough time. But, they could be exploiting their playtime, which is why you also consider how intelligent, respectful, and mature the comment is.[/quote]
Woah woah, five minutes for most games is plenty of time. I’m not going to continually give a game a chance if it doesn’t continually prove that it’s worth giving a chance. That starts with the thumbnail, and persists with every moment in the game.
If this would be a thing, hours would not be the unit to measure it in. If a game is bad, you can tell without giving it an hour.[/quote]
I think any game that is bad enough like you described doesn’t even require comments to judge it, so I wouldn’t worry about having to continually give the game a chance to give it a fair comment, no worrying about giving it “enough” time. When I say 30 minutes I mean that’s enough for an entire “fair review”, I think you could do 10 minutes for a “fair comment”, unless again the game is so bad it doesn’t need comments, but these times depend on the size of the game. And yes games tend to be miniscule on ROBLOX so I wouldn’t go with just hours either, include hours and minutes.[/quote]
There has been times when 30 seconds on a “really well done game” was enough to get a good picture.
I’m of course talking about the “hey, here’s like 5 sountracks layered on top of each other and 5 dozen GUI’s (mostly pertaining to perks, shops, upgrades, leveling systems) thrown right at you from the get go” type games
[quote]
There has been times when 30 seconds on a “really well done game” was enough to get a good picture.
I’m of course talking about the "hey, here’s like 5 sountracks layered on top of each other and 5 dozen GUI’s (mostly pertaining to perks, shops, upgrades, leveling systems) thrown right at you from the get go. [/quote]
So judging from first impressions? There’v been games that have great/bad intros with opposite outcomes, like Halo Reach’s first exciting (to me) mission but ended up being a pretty flatline-action campaign, and the other way around for COD: MW2
If you were to do this feature, you MUST have a filter on it allowing you to find comments above the minute play timer you decide.
This way you can find comments that have, for instance, 30 minutes played to find more reasonable comments.
[quote]
Woah woah, five minutes for most games is plenty of time. I’m not going to continually give a game a chance if it doesn’t continually prove that it’s worth giving a chance. That starts with the thumbnail, and persists with every moment in the game.
If this would be a thing, hours would not be the unit to measure it in. If a game is bad, you can tell without giving it an hour. [/quote]
I actually agree with this. I think the thing to do may have it say “Time played” and read in hh:mm format - so if you played for 5 minutes, it’d be 00:05; if you played for 18 hours and 29 minutes: 18:29; anything more than a day stays as hours (i.e. 1,204:29).
Or perhaps after the first 24 hours it switches to hours alone. IDK. Throw ideas out. Glad for any suggestions and improvements.
