How to make a good review

[The_Witcher]

Tutorial: How to make a good review

Hey guys!
I saw many reviews of maps, spells, models,... here and many of them are just useless and not helpful!!

So I hope this tutorial will help users to make good and helpful reviews.

Please remember this when you read this tutorial:
All the examples I use in this tutorial are for a spell or system review!!! They are explained long enough so you can change them to the kind of review you need!

The Preparations

Just make sure you tested whatever you want to review very well.
You shouldn't even start writing a review if you don't understand anything of that kind!!
A GUI user can't review a vJASS spell...
Make sure you are able to re-review the ressource after the crator asks you to!!

The Form

I recommend using a good and readable form to review submissions.
It should contain all the sections you reviewed and something like a "result".
The form I use is the following:

My Form

Review of version U.VW: [the version of the Spell/System this review is about]

[my comment about the idea]
a/5 [my rating only for this section]

[my comment about the code]
b/5 [my rating only for this section]

[my comment about the documentation]
c/5 [my rating only for this section]

[a summary of my comments and suggestions]

Overall: (a+b+c)/3 = x,y ==> x [here is my rating, calculated of all the section ratings]
Vote for Approval: Yes/No [whether I vote for approval or not]
+rep: Yes/No [whether I give +rep or not]

PM me when you want me to look over your ressource again

Well this form is easy to read out, cause the sections are structured and rated seperately!

If you write a review always remember

• not to use offending language
• to write in English (I am German and I can do this, too!! It's not that hard)
• to help the user and not only write what he did wrong
• Don't use 1337 speak (leatspeak)
• --- Just write as if you would write a class test ---

The Comments/Critism

I have a checklist I go through before I write my comment for each section.
I suggest making your own one but this can be a little help:

Section: Idea

• Is this original or do we have this here already many times?
• Is it new or just a variation of something existing?
• Is the submission needed? Something blizzard already implemented shouldn't be here and steal free space...

Section: Coding

• Is the coding efficient? (leakfree,MUI/MPI,bugfree)
• Is the best possible implementation made? (a jump which knocks units back at the end should use an existing jump and an existing knockback system)
• Were some workarounds used which can be coded easier/more efficient?

Section: Documentation

• Is there a documentation??? (many don't have one)
• Is the documentation understandable and not too long?
• Is a "How To Import" included?
• Is the "How To Import" useful, even for new users without experience?

After you went thorugh this checklists you have something to write...
But that isn't enough!!!! If you realized that there are some bad things you have to tell the creator which things are bad and (if you know that) how to fix them!!

I usually write this directly in the same section...
If this help is going to be too long use HIDDEN tags!!

The Ratings

If you rate each section it is much easier to find an overall rating!
I suggest using the hiveworkshop rating scheme:

1/5: unacceptable
2/5: lacking
3/5: useful
4/5: recommended
5/5: highly recommended

Here comes the difficult part: you have to decide which rating the creator deserves in each section...
Well, don't be too hard and don't be too friendly!!
Just stay neutral and don't let anything affect your rating except your results!!

The Final Result

Now the last part which is in fact just a summary of the sections with some last tips...

Calculate your final rating with this formula:
(1.rating + 2.rating+3.rating + ... + last rating) / Number of rated sections

If you get a decimal number then round it.
Example:

(5+4+5)/3 = 4.6 ==> 5

A completed result can for example look like this:

A very good spell with nice eyecandy, perfect documentation and a nice short code.
Just one suggestion: replace the 10000HP footman with the normal blizzard version so testers can see the power of this spell at once...

Overall: (5+4+5)/3 = 4.6 ==> 5
Vote for Approval: Yes
+rep: Yes

If you vote for approval, give +rep or rate a ressource in your review then do this on hiveworkshop too!!
Just writing 5/5 doesn't help the creator!!! Rate the ressource!!!
and give +rep whenever you would think "Wow!!!! Thats really good!!"

Example: A full review

This is a review i wrote some time ago for Axarions Portal Impact Version

Review of version 1.00:

Well the idea is not very new, but still useful
3/5

The coding is not bad but there are some things to improve

1.

private function Conditions takes nothing returns boolean
    local spell dat = spell.create()
    local timer t = NewTimer()
    set dat.Target = GetSpellTargetUnit()
    set dat.Caster = GetTriggerUnit()
    set dat.SpellLevel = GetUnitAbilityLevel(dat.Caster, AbiId )
    if GetSpellAbilityId() == AbiId and dat.Caster != dat.Target then
        call SetTimerData(t, dat)
        call TimerStart(t, 0.3, false, function Timeout)
    endif
    return false
endfunction

should be

private function Conditions takes nothing returns boolean
    local spell dat
    local timer t
    if GetSpellAbilityId() == AbiId and GetSpellTargetUnit() != GetTriggerUnit() then
        set t = NewTimer()
        set dat = spell.create()
        set dat.Target = GetSpellTargetUnit()
        set dat.Caster = GetTriggerUnit()
        set dat.SpellLevel = GetUnitAbilityLevel(dat.Caster, AbiId )
        call SetTimerData(t, dat)
        call TimerStart(t, 0.3, false, function Timeout)
    endif
    return false
endfunction

2.

instead of

set dat.Target = GroupPickRandomUnit(dat.g)

replace the struct group with a global group and use

set dat.Target = FirstOfGroup(g)

4/5

enough documentation but a "how to import" would be nice
4/5

A nice spell and good for beginners to learn from!
Just fix the mentioned things and it will be a great spell!!

Overall: (3+4+4)/3 = 3.7 ==> 4
Vote for Approval: Yes
+rep: Yes

PM me when you want me to look over your ressource again

And what does the review bring me???

Two days after the above review example I got a PM by Axarion thanking me for that review and promising an update!

Another review of mine for Ap0calypse ended in a +rep with more than 1 rep!!

You see giving a good review can help users and yourself to become better

I hope to see many nice reviews here in future

gl & hf
Your
The_Witcher

 

[Kwah]

Immediate problem with this tutorial is that that isn't a good review. I don't want someone to be giving me a random rating of their own devising.

Feedback, suggestions C&C are all that I want in a review. Sure this may work for some people, but it's far too specific, and I don't think very good.

EDIT: Also use the formatting reccomend by the site [Here].

 

[Lag_Reviews]

Not very good

Hey I just read through your How to right a review Tutorial and found it very very disappointing.

First off it is not very good and doesn't really explain a clear way of telling/teaching people of how to do a review.

So here is what I use and will always use to review a map:

I use 2 different review system for any map to try and review the map to the fullest.

I use a color just to make it stand out more than anything.

Each raiting is out of 5 and depending how many categories in each rating depends on the total you will get.

First review with a guide to what goes in each category that I use

First method of rating:

First off I usually talk about the Terrain. You give this a raiting out of 5 depending on how good it is (do this for all the categories you have in review one).

1) Terrain - okay (2/5)
You basically tell them what you thought of the terrain, what was good and what was bad and also how they could improve it.

2) Fun factor/gameplay - Good (3/5)
You basically tell them what the game-play ish for example you start of with a hero and have to kill another hero. Then you tell them the good things and the bad things. Finally leave a note like The gamplay is average and gets boring quick etc.

3) Single player - Bad (1/5)
This is where you tell them if single player was good or bad and why.

4) AI support - Horrible (0/5)
This is where you rate there AI support, leave the good things and bad things the AI do and why.

5) Originality - Average (2.5/5)
This is where you tell them what the game type is and tell them if you think it is original and tell them the good and bad points but be brief.

6) File Size - Reasonable (3/5)
This is where you tell them if the file-size is good the lower the file-size the lower the rating you give them. 3/5 gets them reasonable and leave a comment like (as the file size is smallish there is still room for improvement)

7) Internet/LAN Friendly - Excellent (5/5)
This is where you tell them if it works over LAN or the internet and tell them if it lags or randomly drops out.

8) Balancing - Excellent (5/5)
You can tell them the good and bad things about balancing, talk about unit balancing, creep balancing etc.

9) Credits - Excellent (5)
This is where you tell them if they list the credits good or bad, it is normally bad if no credits anywhere, okay if there is credits on THW and really good if it is on THW and ingame.

10) Theme - ok (3/5)
This is where you tell them what the theme is for example (Build and destroy) and tell them if it is good or not.

11) Description/Information/Detail - Average (2/5)
This is where you rate there Hiveworkshop description of the map. Tell them how to improve it if it is bad. For example you could tell them to add some pictures/youtube video to the description to make it good and maybe a upcoming update log.

12) Hiveworkshop rules & regulation - Good (4)
This is where you rate if it Fits all Hiveworkshop Rules! If it does just tell them in a sentence that it fits the rules.

This is where you give the map and Overall rating based on the first review. Overall top rating (35.5/60) <--- to get this add up all the numbers out of 5 and that is the score out of how many categories there are each category is worth 5 if you rate it something out of 5

Second review with a guide to what goes in each category that I use

Second method of rating:

Game-play [3/5]:
You basically tell them what the game-play ish for example you start of with a hero and have to kill another hero. Then you tell them the good things and the bad things. Finally leave a note like The gamplay is average and gets boring quick etc.

Balance [4.5/5]:
You can tell them the good and bad things about balancing, talk about unit balancing, creep balancing etc.

Visuals [2/5]:
This is where you talk about the custom models, what they looked like and what items/creeps looked like. Also include what you thought of the terrain, You basically tell them what you thought of the terrain, what was good and what was bad and also how they could improve it.

Usefulness of the map [3/5]:
Basically this is where you tell them if you would share the map to anyone.

For example: Other then a couple of tweaks and fixes, I would share this game to anyone who enjoys a slow type of build and destroy map. IF you work out a few more tweaks, I am sure you will get a higher grade. This map is very useful/fun.

Other Points [3/5]:
This is where you rate any other points of the map not covered in your other categories, like bugs and glitches etc.


Stuff to add in future (-5): <--- this gets a negative rating out of 5 depending on the size of the list.

• This is where you list all the stuff you think they could change/add to the map to make it better. Be precises and nice.

This is where you give the map and Overall rating based on the second review.
15.5/25 (from above)
minus 5 for the stuff you need to add to make it better
Overall Rating (10.5/25) <--- to get this add up all the numbers out of 5 and that is the score out of how many categories there are each category is worth 5 if you rate it something out of 5 and don't forget to minus the stuff they need to add score.

Hope this is a better example of a review,
Lag_Reviews

EDIT: Damn I thought it was a map review, but I was recently told it is a spell review system. I'm sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[Mulgrim]

too big we should just get something to copy and paste, ive seen plenty of reviews like that

 

[The_Witcher]

Hey I just read through your How to right a review Tutorial and found it very very disappointing.

First off it is not very good and doesn't really explain a clear way of telling/teaching people of how to do a review.

So here is what I use and will always use to review a map:

I use 2 different review system for any map to try and review the map to the fullest.

I use a color just to make it stand out more than anything.

Each raiting is out of 5 and depending how many categories in each rating depends on the total you will get.

First review with a guide to what goes in each category that I use

First method of rating:

First off I usually talk about the Terrain. You give this a raiting out of 5 depending on how good it is (do this for all the categories you have in review one).

1) Terrain - okay (2/5)
You basically tell them what you thought of the terrain, what was good and what was bad and also how they could improve it.

2) Fun factor/gameplay - Good (3/5)
You basically tell them what the game-play ish for example you start of with a hero and have to kill another hero. Then you tell them the good things and the bad things. Finally leave a note like The gamplay is average and gets boring quick etc.

3) Single player - Bad (1/5)
This is where you tell them if single player was good or bad and why.

4) AI support - Horrible (0/5)
This is where you rate there AI support, leave the good things and bad things the AI do and why.

5) Originality - Average (2.5/5)
This is where you tell them what the game type is and tell them if you think it is original and tell them the good and bad points but be brief.

6) File Size - Reasonable (3/5)
This is where you tell them if the file-size is good the lower the file-size the lower the rating you give them. 3/5 gets them reasonable and leave a comment like (as the file size is smallish there is still room for improvement)

7) Internet/LAN Friendly - Excellent (5/5)
This is where you tell them if it works over LAN or the internet and tell them if it lags or randomly drops out.

8) Balancing - Excellent (5/5)
You can tell them the good and bad things about balancing, talk about unit balancing, creep balancing etc.

9) Credits - Excellent (5)
This is where you tell them if they list the credits good or bad, it is normally bad if no credits anywhere, okay if there is credits on THW and really good if it is on THW and ingame.

10) Theme - ok (3/5)
This is where you tell them what the theme is for example (Build and destroy) and tell them if it is good or not.

11) Description/Information/Detail - Average (2/5)
This is where you rate there Hiveworkshop description of the map. Tell them how to improve it if it is bad. For example you could tell them to add some pictures/youtube video to the description to make it good and maybe a upcoming update log.

12) Hiveworkshop rules & regulation - Good (4)
This is where you rate if it Fits all Hiveworkshop Rules! If it does just tell them in a sentence that it fits the rules.

This is where you give the map and Overall rating based on the first review. Overall top rating (35.5/60) <--- to get this add up all the numbers out of 5 and that is the score out of how many categories there are each category is worth 5 if you rate it something out of 5

Second review with a guide to what goes in each category that I use

Second method of rating:

Game-play [3/5]:
You basically tell them what the game-play ish for example you start of with a hero and have to kill another hero. Then you tell them the good things and the bad things. Finally leave a note like The gamplay is average and gets boring quick etc.

Balance [4.5/5]:
You can tell them the good and bad things about balancing, talk about unit balancing, creep balancing etc.

Visuals [2/5]:
This is where you talk about the custom models, what they looked like and what items/creeps looked like. Also include what you thought of the terrain, You basically tell them what you thought of the terrain, what was good and what was bad and also how they could improve it.

Usefulness of the map [3/5]:
Basically this is where you tell them if you would share the map to anyone.

For example: Other then a couple of tweaks and fixes, I would share this game to anyone who enjoys a slow type of build and destroy map. IF you work out a few more tweaks, I am sure you will get a higher grade. This map is very useful/fun.

Other Points [3/5]:
This is where you rate any other points of the map not covered in your other categories, like bugs and glitches etc.


Stuff to add in future (-5): <--- this gets a negative rating out of 5 depending on the size of the list.

• This is where you list all the stuff you think they could change/add to the map to make it better. Be precises and nice.

This is where you give the map and Overall rating based on the second review.
15.5/25 (from above)
minus 5 for the stuff you need to add to make it better
Overall Rating (10.5/25) <--- to get this add up all the numbers out of 5 and that is the score out of how many categories there are each category is worth 5 if you rate it something out of 5 and don't forget to minus the stuff they need to add score.

Hope this is a better example of a review,
Lag_Reviews

who the hell wants to read a that huge review???
reviews are meant to help the creator but noone would read a review which is that long...

In addition, everything mentioned in the tutorial is more a suggestion than a "you have to do it like this" thing...

it's just for people who see a new submission and noticed bugs they know how to fix or just thought that the result is really good...

 

[Lag_Reviews]

who the hell wants to read a that huge review???
reviews are meant to help the creator but noone would read a review which is that long...

In addition, everything mentioned in the tutorial is more a suggestion than a "you have to do it like this" thing...

it's just for people who see a new submission and noticed bugs they know how to fix or just thought that the result is really good...

Hey, I meant no hard feelings by posting what I use to review a map, I know it is kinda long but eh. I use 2 different review systems they can either read 1 or both and if they reckon it is too long then it is because I have included most of my thoughts on the map to give them maximum feedback.

Because when I see a short review I think, yeah it gives them a rating and a few things that are wrong with the map/what ever your reviewing, but a short review doesn't tell them the good things or how to improve the map in great detail like my review does.

So no hard feelings,
Lag_reviews

EDIT: Damn I thought it was a map review, but I was recently told it is a spell review system. I'm sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[Kwah]

We seem to be missing the point I was trying to make: review 'systems' are terrible.

 

[ap0calypse]

Reviews are different from person to person, but they all share (or should share) a few traits.

• The color has to be readable (and preferrably the standard color)
• They should contain critiscism that tells the author what to improve (constructive ~).
• They may contain hints, tips, or even full triggers to help the author (optional).
• Reputation should not be added when a recourse gets a 3/5 or less (I only do it for maps that I give a 4.5/5-5/5 and it only happened once, live with it).

Everything else (which points the review discusses, how it is constructed, how much time the reviewer spent on it) is all trivial and it differs from person to person.
Note that reviewers may be harsh, as long as it follows all rules and is completely true.

Even the general conclusion at the end isn't necessary, if your review contains everything you want it to contain, there's no need to repeat it in short at the end.

 

[Coolty44]

We seem to be forgetting it is a spell/system review template, not a map review, which would be longer and include bigger maths at the end.

It would be nice if you had what it looks like (without the JASS tags) in a form that people could copy past into the reply box and fill in approprietly. Other then that, its pretty good.

 

[Kwah]

For reasons of being terrible concept, as well as not practically used graveyarded.

Thanks for submiting.