5 Star Scoring system is not reliable? Do movie sites have better options?

Intermediary transaction http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/6858.html ">seo diagnose Taobao guest cloud host technology Hall

I believe many people in the Internet to find the film resources, will first look at the film score, and then choose a relatively high scoring film to watch, an important reason is that there are too many movies, and our time is limited. So good film and bad film evaluation criteria is what, this becomes a people can not avoid the hamlet-style thinking, many people are entangled, feel confused. Some people say, go to IMDB to see TOP250, some people say, go to watercress movie to see score Others say, look at the box office, see the Director, watch the actors. In short, there are divergent views, the public said the right, the woman said the woman reasonable!

Discussion to go to, or to see the audience given the film scoring more reliable, after all, the masses of the eyes are discerning, the key moment or the masses to stand on the same front, believe the strength of the masses. Even if some films are evaluated, the ultimate evaluation of extremes will occur. At present, the more common film scoring system is 5 stars, we are more familiar with the watercress, IMDb are so. But a foreign website called Goodfilms has challenged the scoring system, which argues that the 5-star scoring system is too one-sided, that the message is limited, and that it gives the scoring system that it thinks is reasonable. The following are the main contents of the article:

5 Star scoring system (average score) problems

In essence, the average score is a weighted average of all the scores in the movie and then a number. This approach may seem useful, because after all, it saves a lot of time for users to decide whether a movie is worth looking at. If you find a movie with an average IMDB (Internet Movie Database) scoring 3.5 stars or more, the movie must be good or at least worth a visit, and there are a lot of people who like the movie (whether you like it or not). If the score is less than 3 stars, you may hesitate to look. But the problem is that the only function of this method is to tell you whether a movie is worth seeing, and there is no deeper meaning.

Histograms are even worse.

If the average score is not enough, then the scores are visually displayed through the histogram. In this way, if the score presents a level two differentiation, then you may find the film not very good-looking. But in fact, the histogram display is very bad, below we use the real case to illustrate:

Above the histogram, in addition to tell you that these three movies belong to 3.5-4.5 star, I do not know what else to convey the message. (In fact, the original author's point of view is not very favourable, we can also see how many people like a film). After all, these three films appear to be very similar on the surface (all belong to science fiction movies), but the viewers who have seen these three films feel that their characters are very different from each other, and that the audience will attract them. The above histogram does not convey this information, but to let the audience feel confused.

Scatter charts can be more descriptive.

In Goodgfimls, the film is evaluated in two ways: The first is the film, which is based on our familiar 5-Star scoring system, and the second is a repeatable viewing index. We can show the score, not the histogram, by the coordinate graph. This can convey more useful information, on the one hand, it can convey the quality of the film information, the other side can also let you know if a movie is worth repeating.

Vertical coordinates indicate a repeatable viewing index, and the horizontal axis indicates the quality of the film. As can be seen from the figure, Starship Troopers (Galaxy Team) This film quality evaluation is mixed, but it is worth repeating. In other words, the quality of the film may not be the best, but it is worth repeating.

As can be seen from the figure, the upper right corner of the spread of more points, and whether the quality or can be repeated to watch the index, 3 stars below the difference is very little, that is fifth Element (the Fifth Element) the quality of the film is very high and worth watching repeatedly.

Three films, Blade Runner (Silver Wing killer) the highest quality, but can repeatedly watch the index is not as good as the "Fifth Element", which for some very classic films are often the thing (no doubt, Blade Runner is a very classic film)-they are well worth watching, But few people will see it again. (This logic is not very support, the classic film viewers are more willing to repeatedly watch, such as the domestic "Dahua West Tour")

Through the above analysis, we (GOODFILMS) scoring system is better than the 5-star scoring system, and we believe that the quality of the film and can be repeated to show the index is more suitable for the audience.

Bianhouyu language

5 points system in the app Store, Google play and other markets will also be used, then, with the Goodfilms scoring method can help users pick out the best application? Even if the scatter chart's scoring method can explain more questions, but the five-point system's score is more obvious. Of course, to discuss that kind of scoring display better, we have to consider the brush list problem, because now the application of the brush list is too serious, if this method can help us to determine which application is brush up, then I am afraid to be acceptable to a higher level.

Via Goodfilms

Original: http://www.leiphone.com/0823-danice-ratings-systems.html