zlacker

>>tortil+(OP)
Honestly, all review aggregates are kind of trash. It's crazy that we have stuck with either binary or 5 star ratings this whole time across the internet.

I had a product idea I have yet to make where you replace ratings with rankings. Instead of giving something a 1-5 review, you just answer a few quick questions whether something is better or worse than a listed alternative. You aggregate enough rankings and you can give everything a percentile score. The number is actually meaningful - a 70% means people on average think that it's 70% better than all ranked alternatives.

And you can't lie or influence a ranking as easily. "You think Rings of Power is a good show? Okay, but are you are actually going to rank it above The Sopranos?"

>>legits+D53
> Honestly, all review aggregates are kind of trash. It's crazy that we have stuck with either binary or 5 star ratings this whole time across the internet.

Are you aware of metacritic? They take all kinds of ratings, scales, stars, grades, etc, from all kinds of critics and reviewers and turn them into nice 1-100 percent ratings to average.

>>termin+b83
Yes. But this is just a weighted aggregate of subjective reviews.

A 7/10 from Gamespot is useless data because they give 7/10 to everything.

>>legits+Ea3
Sure, I agree with you on that. But that's a different argument than "It's crazy that we have stuck with either binary or 5 star ratings this whole time across the internet." We haven't.