A simple research done on last 10 pages of new saves (counted them ~07/08/2023 (August 7th)).
science
Comments
-
the reason they are NOT sorting some "bad saves" out of "good saves", is because what some people consider "bad" differs from what is ACTUALLY bad and low quality. this is exactly why this "system" of expectations would cause some problems. Let alone, did you even get there consent to be posting there saves and calling them worst to best? Also, should you really be calling other peoples saves bad or low effort? bad or not you shouldent be posting about others saves and calling them bad.
-
good to hear, another thing, i understand why you're showing examples for the poor/worst saves but i feel like that shouldn't be the case, what if instead you made a recreation of sorts (based on the points)?
-
@R4WLYX, in next "research" i will add more simple(actually more complicated lol) system of rating saves which basically is 1-5 rating system based on how accurately done the stuff in save and few exceptions that may add or reduce "points" (like some people do tiny computers in tpt, this may add a point because it works and is useful at some point)
-
All in all, good luck on your resesrch but remember to be objective
-
another thing is the categories seem very arbitrary, why have poor, worst, good then art, bomb, text. It just doesn't make much sense in my opinion
-
I feel like this research is fine, except for the fact that it's kinda subjective? unless you have some sort of scoring metric
-
How would you rate this, z4dg9ssw135? id:3018938
-
z4 ur right, its sad that they dont get anyhow sorted so that good newbie builds dont get mixed with random brush lines and builds like "nuclear bomb" (plut and neut in a metal box)
-
well anyways demotion isnt a problem if the save is still here lol. anyways nothing will change fact that many(~20 is pretty much) saves are composition of big brush lines and stuff spread across the screen
-
nice but uh the moderator is right so I'm going to down vote the save :(