EA certainly isn't making it easy to give Dungeon Keeper a low rating on Android
pocketgamer.co.uk
pocketgamer.co.uk
I want to see usage statistics:
- How many users are continually coming back to the app?
- How many times a day/week/month, on average, is the app opened?
- How long is the average "session"?
- How many days is the app used after it's initial use?
- How long does an app stay on the device before it's deleted?
These stats are more objective and less manipulable -- and therefore, more valuable -- than user reviews/ratings.
And I realize that the value of these will vary app to app -- i.e. the stats of a productivity app can't be compared to the stats of a casual game -- but it gives me a much better idea of how an app is being used, and therefore how I might use it vs. reviews/ratings.
The app that shows me when my bus is coming is pretty crappy, but I use it multiple times a day.
The deleting part is interesting, but I'm not sure how many people bother deleting apps they don't use.
Would prospective purchasers realize this, though, by the nature of the app? In other words, would I also realize that I would rarely use it (on a daily basis), but see that you do continue to come back to the app and haven't deleted it over a long period of time?
> The app that shows me when my bus is coming is pretty crappy, but I use it multiple times a day.
If you use it multiple times a day, then you apparently are finding it useful enough to continue coming back to it. And in my mind, that's all I care about.
I know this isn't perfect, but again compared to user reviews, this would be way better in a large majority of the cases.
Especially in a genre where it's getting abused, like games.
I shudder when I think of the ways you could game a system like this. If longer time-in-app is a positive signal, I could easily make my app slower.
Right now, they're pretty meaningless, because often, the majority those that take time to review them are counterfeit. 90% of the people that use an app never take time to review it. So I never know what most people think.
> I shudder when I think of the ways you could game a system like this.
As it stands, I can't think of how there would be more gameability to a system like this vs. ratings. Ratings are so easy to game, anybody can do it, and it doesn't cost them anything.
To game something like this, I would have to "game" it over long periods of time. Not to mention, I would have to purchase a separate device, or sacrifice my own time with my device.
It's a much more painful process to game something like this.
> If longer time-in-app is a positive signal, I could easily make my app slower.
If you make your app slower, you are sacrificing user experience, which will eventually hurt your usage. How could you game your own app without it hurting the usability of it?
So what you're saying is, we should burden the users with a ton of metrics, then let them figure out which of those metrics are useful for each particular app, and whether you want a higher or lower score on each of those metrics on a case-by-case basis?
Or anywhere in between.
People who use lots of apps will delete apps they do not use. That stat would also confound "rent-a-user" schemes to pump up usage stats.
If going by usage statistics, every user -- and more importantly, real users -- opt in to "rating" the app. Now, you're depending on people actually taking time and being willing to review the app, which is mostly only done by false users.
As someone deciding between the two, I will see that you keep coming back to the app, even if you don't use it for a very long time.
Versus the other app that you averaged a longer session, but stopped using after a shorter period.
I don't know enough about the guts of Android to be sure you could do this, but it seems likely.
But I would assume that if you have a widget docked, then you are likely getting some use of it, and if not, you will undock it (and maybe also delete it).
So there is still a level of usage you could measure from widgets, though maybe not quite as meaningful as that you get from regular apps.
- Pushover
- CN Air Quality
That said there is no easy answer for widgets.
Of course some people leave their apps installed even if they don't use them, but my guess would be it's not that many (any data on this?).
True, but this should still average out in the end. That is, those that leave bad apps installed are also leaving good apps installed. But those that like to keep their devices tidy will give real meaning behind the numbers.
In other words, don't look at the numbers absolutely, but relatively.
First, how much harder is it to spoof actual devices, and take the time to spoof usage on these apps, vs. what it takes to spoof a single review?
Second, add to that the fact that spoofing 2000 app usages compared to the several thousand (or hundred thousand?) actual real users where real usage is being collected from. If you spoof 2000 reviews -- which are super easy to do, can be done in a matter of minutes with no long-term overhead -- you are aggregated with a much smaller number of real reviews actually being submitted.
http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2012/05/21/manipulating...
Also, it's incredibly frustrating for app developers to get support requests via poor app store reviews. It's a real problem.
[I love it] |
[I ran into a problem] | [Review on Play Store]
[I have an idea] |
Alternatively, offer this UI up front:
[Send feedback directly to Mozilla]
[Review on Play Store]
"Developers must not attempt to change the placement of any Product in the Store, or manipulate any product ratings or reviews by unauthorized means such as fraudulent installs, paid or fake reviews or ratings, or by offering incentives to rate products." [1]
[1] http://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html
This manipulates the product ratings by only letting 5 star ratings go through.
It's dishonest manipulation to ask happy users to rate you and unhappy users to email you?
This is a dishonest filtering mechanism that is deliberately set up to manipulate people. To refer to this as merely asking for feedback is highly disingenuous. You are missing the point.
Asking for feedback is ok. It might be annoying for users to be disturbed by a dialog, but morally there is nothing wrong with it. I don’t think anyone was arguing that.
But this dialog is not merely asking for feedback. It does manipulative filtering.
With the Dungeon Keeper example we have one button leading directly to the play store rating system, and another button that adds several steps to that process.
Which button do you think results in more ratings at the play store?
It is a deliberately chosen ploy to manipulate the ratings. It is scummy. Email feedback from uses can be achieved in some different way.
"We'd love it if you would rate this game [go to playstore]
And we really want to hear from you if you're having problems or have ideas for improvement[send us email]"
Possibly the iOS app store has (better worded / better enforced) guidelines.
With that said, it's obviously not in the end user's best interest in terms of seeing a true rating prior to download an app. It merely helps the developer to achieve higher ratings, more users as a result, and if they actually care about the feedback, then improving their product as well.
I would definitely not encourage other devs to do the same, rather I think Google should crack down on those behaviours for the good of the users.
I assume at this point you don't need to pay anything to progress correctly in the game, so they want you to rate it before you get to see the pay2win aspects.
I think what EA is doing is different from us because they're using stars, which are linked to App Store ratings for users, because it's 5 stars or nothing, and it looks more likely that they truly are trying to avoid sending detractors to rate the app.
But if you squint a little, they are basically the same thing. And it isn't a pattern I want to see takeoff. So, I'm conflicted.
For example ask how do you like our app (without even a hint that it's a Google Play rating) and then either ask user to rate the app or provide feedback, depending on whether they liked the app or not.
People keep saying "this isn't preventing anyone from rating," but that's total nonsense. If one user can get to a rating in one click while the other has to exit your app and go hunt it down in the store, you are filtering the latter out even if your filter is not 100% effective.
That's short-sighted thinking. This kind of manipulation will only condition people not to trust you and destroy your brand and reputation.
It's cases like these that make me think there should be an ethics code for software developers.
Nice, lead with a statement designed to belittle the opposition akin to killing an argument with the term 'fanboy'. Only slightly subtler.
This is a UX antipattern. If I want to leave feedback, then I'll leave feedback. If I want to rate the app, then I'll rate the app. What this is doing is facilitating 5 star reviews and taxing 1-4 star reviews with extra clicks and potential user confusion. It's anti-consumer, as negative reviews are likely filtered out. EA's repeated anti-consumer choices are why I hate EA. I couldn't care less if it was 'cool' to do.
I’m quite shocked at the warm embrace this sort of immoral behaviour seems to be getting on HN. Google has to explicitly ban such behavior, remove this app from the store and EA needs to be publicly shamed. How could anything else be acceptable?
As a consumer, I want ratings to reflect what people actually think about the product, because that's a valuable aid for my own purchasing decisions. As a developer, I _also_ want ratings to reflect what people actually think about the product, because that means I'll be competing on the actual merits of my app, rather than how good I am at deception.
What we're seeing here is good for neither consumers nor (other) developers, it's only about manipulating ratings for EA. I really can't understand how anyone would portray this as a positive thing.
Hating on EA for this sort of shenanigan isn't "cool", it's having a modicum of sense.
> With that said, it's obviously not in the end user's best interest
I think you mean, "a great idea for developers who don't mind abusing their users"
If you _are_ actually listening to feedback and iterating on the game, the new version will bury the old reviews anyway.
When you are finished with your tech support call, or car rental, or whatever they will ask you something like 'were you completely satisfied with my service today'? Completely satisfied is then the label for the highest rating on the follow up survey. The benefit to the company is that it gives you an opportunity to express any unhappiness and get it fixed, and the benefit to the employee is that you are more likely to put down completely satisfied if you've already said you were (because of priming).
However, this case is a bit more shady because the probability of the follow up survey is being effected by how you respond.
I haven't yet added "a please rate this app" pop up to my app [0] but the rate of organic reviews has fallen, none in the last few months so I think I need to actively drive reviews.
[0] Fast Lists - https://itunes.apple.com/app/fast-lists-checklists-for/id481...
Otherwise, this is actually a pretty good idea, speaking as a developer who has received low ratings for things I could have easily explained to the user if they had used the 'feedback' feature. Something like this would be a good way to remind the user they can actually interact with me and I will respond, at a point where they might need it.
I don't think I have a problem with it, though, at least while the current App Store review process is as it is (unable to reply to reviews, etc.).
Although this is certainly not without some moral issues I do think we need a better rating system for raters too.
I.e. it would be great if reviewers themselves were rated across their ratings so you can see how critical in general they are.
I.e just like you see what how a product have been rated on average it would be nice to see how the specific reviewer rates on average.
The net result is your reviews will be negatively biased...unless you do something about it like this.
Oh of course I'm joking. If the mobile app doesn't live up to the original PC game, then fuck it.