Just save a search with track type "trials" and sort by "new".
Printable View
Just save a search with track type "trials" and sort by "new".
rating system is fine with me.
Fusion and Evo layout for TC was perfect, the people that made Rising clearly never played either of those games. Having to search for certain new tracks is stupid and has killed TC cause most people wont do it, including me. TC is the only thing that keeps the game alive after 6 months.
Honestly. I think the idea of having the feeds show the top 5 or 7 tracks along a horizontal strip is unnecessary sometimes as I will 99% of the time expand the feed to view more in that category. I liked the square buttons for each feed in Evo and Fusion. That way would allow more feeds to fit onto the screen and save up space for custom feeds later on. Suffice to say, I saw no issue with Fusion's TC by the time awesome level max came out.
Taking what you had and making it better is what you guys probably should have went for, rather than trying a completely different approach.
Come on, Scottie, your soulless corporate rep "talk about your feelings" prompt didn't even pick any of the people saying they were unhappy with the rating system. Quit phoning it in. We're your customers here trying to help you get more customers and make them happier.
The rating system has no granularity. It doesn't allow us to distinguish between a decent, good, or great track, just a good/bad divide. That has no utility for a variety of reasons. First, it simply takes away our voice. Second, it forces people to vote down good tracks because when they are only allowed one distinction, some will allow anything and some need to set a higher bar for their thumb up. Consequently, builders get down votes even on good tracks. Lots of down votes. Up votes are pretty meaningless, since up-voting pretty much means "sure, whatever", and everyone knows it, but those down votes are not meaningless. Each and every one of those say "I don't want this in the game." I've looked, and even fantastic tracks just tick those "you suck" votes up over time. You're channeling vague, uninterpretable negativity at builders, which is destructive.
Next, you look at the system overall. Counting upvotes is useless and communicates nothing to us, yet that's exactly what you do. Up-voted tracks continue to get up-votes in typical rich-get-richer fashion, devaluing their down-votes and devaluing newer content. Down-votes don't seem to actually matter anywhere, they are just there to hurt builders.
Then, there's the effect on voters. Up/down leads users not to make any real distinction, except that down is bad. Thus down is avoided more than it should be since we all appreciate effort to some degree, while no one thinks up particularly matters. Studies have been done on getting good useful feedback from people. Know how many gradations it takes? Ten. Not two. Ten. Five doesn't even do a great job, it's just less atrocious than something completely useless like two.
We ought to be rating tracks on a five-star scale with half stars, using a radial selection where all choices take equal effort and the default is not voting, with labels on at least the base groups of 1-3, 4-7, and 8-10. The sub group labels really help to normalize ratings and produce more meaningful results. Again, this has been studied. There is a right answer. This doesn't even take more storage in your database to manage.
Basically, since a thumb up/down system allows no one to distinguish between decent, good, and great, the entire system is utterly useless for distinguishing decent, good, and great, which is pretty much its purpose. On top of that, it's useless for distinguishing bad and barely even helps on awful--the only other value it might have. Your rating system doesn't do anything. It's like you in this thread: It says some things, but there's no attempt to correlate to the content or to actually improve the user experience. It just wastes the time of the people actually thinking about ratings.
In short, there is not a single thing to like about the rating system. Not one single thing. That's what I don't like about it. It's lazy, destructive, valueless, and doing better is unbelievably easy.
I belabored feedback I already gave you, and I don't need prompting to push the game towards being better since that's the main thing I am here to do. If wasting my time saying it again got you to actually do something to improve the game, that's good, but I wouldn't really brag about not your bothering previous times nor about the fact that asking something specifically from the only person who was NOT complaining still got answers from the people you should have cared enough to have been talking/listening to in the first place.
I bough Trials at launch for two things: Track Central and to push RL to do a better job while it might actually matter. Since you have gone out of your way to sabotage TC, I have to focus more on the latter.
Fusion had the same voting system, i dont see the big deal. People build to have fun, its not a contest, has nothing to do with the actual BEST tracks anyway.
Yes, yes, we get that you don't care and have nothing to add. You can stop reminding us.
Track rating has little to do with rewarding builders and nothing to do with being a contest: it's about bringing riders most quickly to good experiences and helping us manage our experience and past. For example, thump up doesn't tell me anything about a track I ran, but four stars tells me I specifically felt it was between a decent and a great track. That's genuinely helpful and informs choices I might be making (eg, I'm looking for something different to spend time on amongst tracks I played but didn't quite feel worth saving), which is one reason we need to be able to see our votes and have more vote granularity.