[IDEA] Coverage for little-known Mods

[topsecret]

I'd playing LoR.
This Mod is awesome
(PS - That's what I did while the site was not working!)
So I may write a little and see whatcha think
@Stratgeyonly: Cool list, I wish it was up to-date

 

[The_J]

A tourists guide for CIV4 mods ?

In general this is a good idea .

Not quite...
I'd like to do one on LoR (Legends of Revolutions)

I'd write some.

Then do them . They'll get on the front page with the next file announcements (unlike I do the next this weekend, then the next time afterwards).

He isn't really affiliated with K-Mod. He has just chosen to integrate K-Mod with his own mod. It's similar to integrating any other mod component.
[...]

I'd also be opposed against any review of a component if a person uses it him/herself (no matter if BUG, RevDCM, or similar).
It's just like "and if you liked this review, go here and take a look at my mod, it's also in there".
Then we could just let the mod creators review their own mods.

I understand that someone who e.g. uses BUG in his own mod does like BUG and is qualified to say something about it, but still, the bias is too big there.

Here is what i used to do: and updated everyday.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=179356

Don't see a problem here .

 

[karadoc]

I'd also be opposed against any review of a component if a person uses it him/herself (no matter if BUG, RevDCM, or similar).
It's just like "and if you liked this review, go here and take a look at my mod, it's also in there".
Then we could just let the mod creators review their own mods.

I understand that someone who e.g. uses BUG in his own mod does like BUG and is qualified to say something about it, but still, the bias is too big there.

It's tricky though, because if say that people can only review components that they have not used themselves, then that will introduce a bias against the components being reviewed. If a modder likes a particular mod component, then they will be likely to try to include that component in their own work. If people who use the component in their own work are included from writing reviews, then the pool of potential reviewers is limited to those who do not want to include the mod component in their own work...

On the other hand, there is a natural tendency for freely-written reviews to be generally positive, because people usually don't feel motivated to write proper reviews of products that they think are a complete waste of time...

It's a fraught topic. I would lean in favour of letting anyone review anything, so that the pool of reviewers can expand.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Well if you could find someone who is not a modder and just likes playing mods then perhaps that would work as a reviewer.

 

[topsecret]

Well if you could find someone who is not a modder and just likes playing mods then perhaps that would work as a reviewer.

I don't use BUG, LoR, Revolutions, K-Mod or most of the mods like those, so I could write some reviews...

 

[mourndraken]

I don't use BUG, LoR, Revolutions, K-Mod or most of the mods like those, so I could write some reviews...

BIASED !!

Spoiler :

 

[Asaf]

I don't see why it would matter if the review is biased.

First, it's not like the opinions stated in the review actually matter. What's the worst that could happen - someone will read the review, download and play the mod because the reviewer liked it and will dislike it himself? It's not like anyone makes any money out of it.

Second, and this might be the more important point - a review is not about the reviewer's opinion, or whether it is a good mod or a bad mod, and definitely not about any scoring. It's about describing the mod to the readers. It's about what this mod contains, what it doesn't contain, and what a typical (and sometimes a non-typical) game looks like in this mod. It's about its pro's and con's in the eyes of the reviewer (which each reader can agree or disagree with). It's about showing the readers things they did not know about this mod - even if they have already played it.

Each review can also be in a thread of its own, which then people can respond to with their (polite!) opinions of the mod, or with their interesting experience from playing the mod. Who cares if the original review was biased, or even written by the mod creator herself?

 

[The_J]

Who cares if the original review was biased, or even written by the mod creator herself?

The forum rules care, because this would count as advertising ^^.

This advertising policy extends to posting in or starting a thread in one forum, so as to entice people to visit a thread in another forum. If you want to do this, then place the advertisement in your signature.

 

[mourndraken]

Call it a Summary and as such provides information that should be written by people who are very familiar with the mod. Or make it open source like wikipedia has done.

 

[Asaf]

The forum rules care, because this would count as advertising ^^.

I'm sorry for being nit-picky, and if this is not the place to discuss this I'll stop, but I think that in the context of mod reviews this is considered to be "External links related to the thread topic". Anyone going to this thread (or sub-forum) expects to be linked to the mod's thread, and expects to get more information about existing mods, even if it's from the modder himself.

As I see it, the point of the non-advertising rule is to prevent posters from posting links to stuff they have an interest in, when it might disturb other users. This is definitely not the case here.

 

[topsecret]

I'm sorry for being nit-picky, and if this is not the place to discuss this I'll stop, but I think that in the context of mod reviews this is considered to be "External links related to the thread topic". Anyone going to this thread (or sub-forum) expects to be linked to the mod's thread, and expects to get more information about existing mods, even if it's from the modder himself.

As I see it, the point of the non-advertising rule is to prevent posters from posting links to stuff they have an interest in, when it might disturb other users. This is definitely not the case here.

Good point

 

[The_J]

Also non-disturbing advertisement is advertisement, so the policy still applies .

 

[mourndraken]

I'd not be opposed against putting a review into the monthly announcements...but the problem: Someone has to write one.

under what conditions would this occur? Is this not advertising?

 

[The_J]

Would what occur?

And the whole main site is more or less advertisement, but that's all relevant enough for everyone here.

 

[mourndraken]

summary reviews to appear as part of monthly anouncements. What has to happen for this to happen ?

 

[The_J]

I'd say
a) someone not affiliated with the mod writes one
b) the modder itself is okay with the review

Don't see what else would be needed (besides some guidelines for pretty formatting).

 

[Voyhkah]

Maybe there should be a sticky thread with all the guidelines and stuff written out in one place.

 

[The_J]

I'll care about that if enough people are actually interested in writing something .

 

[topsecret]

I'll care about that if enough people are actually interested in writing something .

The problem with this mod is I'm too busy playing to stop and write something

 

[The_J]

Real problems ...
But I guess that's the same for most other people here.