Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortavia
Datschge: Sometimes I can easily say "I like X soundtrack more than Y", and then that would work. But sometimes the soundtracks are too different, and I like them "equally" for different things (and I quote "equally" like that because it's too hard even to say that since they're so different, they can't really be compared). If X and Y are really different from each other, but both deserving of a 3.5, I wouldn't want to have to rank them against each other, but instead I'd want to give them a rating based on what they deserve for what they do (in my opinion of course).
|
Right, but in my experience cases of "I like both the same" are much less frequent than having ever so slight preferences. Put another way, with the current rating system you essentially have only 10 fixed levels/groups of "I like them the same" connected to a very specific value to choose from, so the more works you rate the fussier the differentiation gets (and this is already neglecting the psychological force that comes with the rating values themselves, one is likely to put similarly valued works in the same group as a whole 0.5* step is often felt too big a value difference in such cases, so the value variety actually used is reduced even further by this). With a simple ordered list the opposite is the case, the more works are included the more detailed is its informative value (conversely the smaller the list the more misleading can it be, this is were fixed values are indeed better). And naturally works that are same or similarly valued are placed close together. I'd like to rate everything. With ratings I feel it's both too much work and futile so I don't even start using it.