Can we trust the integrity of the in game review processes?
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
04-13-2011, 10:13 AM
If someone is running accolade zerg fests for an easy accolade, why would they go through the trouble of stalking you to give you low ratings, which would require them to play real missions? :-)
Seriously, though, if you think there's a problem emerging or retaliatory feedback, the best thing to do would be to file a ticket for harassment.
My general attitude is that people may judge me by the reviews I post. So I try to be constructive, helpful, and positive. If I give a two star, it's because I think it needs work and I'll let them know why. (Haven't had any yet.)
If I suspected someone is cheating the system somehow, I wouldn't leave a public review. Instead, I'd report it for a EULA violation and not leave any public review.
IMHO, a one or two star rating means the mission needs improvement. If the mission flat out shouldn't exist for some compelling reason, it doesn't matter what the review of it says. I would rather deal with it privately by submitting a ticket to a Cryptic employee who can decide if it's somehow abusive.
IMHO, stars are all about quality, about making something improve. If I give a mission one or two stars, I'd love nothing more than for it to get revised into a five star mission. If it's, fundamentally, not a mission, I'd report it. Or by all means, leave your one or two star but note that you'd like for it to have a story behind it as constructive feedback.