strange voting?
Well, as far as I understood, the spirit of this splendid website/game shouldn't it be that of voting only taking into account the "awesomeness" of the shot and NOT the movie itself?
In fact, every time we cast a vote, this is what we read: "Do not rate the movie. Rate the awesomeness of the snapshot"
I think you misunderstand the guideline.
Rating the movie is one thing. For instance, to me, Alien is worth 9/10. But I'm not gonna rate each shot from Alien 9/10. That's what the guideline means.
The awesomeness of the shot, it's not only about how it looks. It's not "what the postcard", or even "what the photo".
It's "what the movie". The shots are from movies. As a matter of fact, the FAQ used to contain some piece of advice about what kind of shots user should upload:
"Try to focus on a distinct "feature" which describes the film.
For example: crucial point in the film, funny moment, the story, the visual aspect."
It's also been discussed on the forum (much) earlier: http://forum.whatthemovie.com/comments.php?DiscussionID=334
Unfortunately, since the SotD feature was implemented, it kind of shifted the balance on the visual aspect only...
This unfamous multiplication factor, and some remarks above, raise a few questions.
Since you multiply when you solve, blockbusters are necessarily boosted more than less famous film. (The best players automatically get a disproportioned influence on the ratings and the players are no longer on equal footing). But the beauty of the site is certainly to discover new movies, not only to see the umpteenth shot of Star Wars.
Then I also don't see why a shot should be relevant of a movie. Another interesting thing about this game is on the contrary to try and find the FORGOTTEN shot of some famous films.
Finally, even if this information was discussed before, not every player spends his life on the forum or the FAQ. The basic principle of any game is to be fair. Therefore, all the players have to know the rules and such an important rule as the multiplication factor should certainly be given more publicity.
And there certainly is something really weird about the SOtD but I think this has already benn discussed.
No, snapshots everyone solve don't necessarily get a boost. Imagine everyone vote 10 on a snapshot: no matter how many solves, it will get a rating of 10. Same goes for a low rating. The only difference is that often people seem to vote higher the shots they solve (but even this is only partially problematic) or solve a lot and vote low on everything but a few shots (because some people are actually mean and unfair players).
Anyway, IMHO the multiplication factor makes sense, at least if we assume everyone vote fair to their best ability (which is probably not completely true, but well).
I think I already gave this example before, but imagine snapshot http://whatthemovie.com/shot/248478 . Well, at first it may look boring: it's a bit tilted, there don't seem to be a particular subject, the colors aren't particularly great… that's probably worth a quite low rating, maybe 3-6. However, once you solved it, you may realize this is actually a great shot, with important details and appropriate ambiance -- I'd give it around 8-9.
So yes, I believe someone who solved the shot is more able to give it an appropriate rating. Because again, if you didn't solve, you can pretty much only vote based on the look of the shot, which is basically a matter of taste -- and worse, of how good the overall movie looks [1]. If you however solved it, you can take into account whether it's relevant to the movie (if you think it's a criteria), or whether there are nice non-obvious hints for solving hints, or maybe find it way too obvious (not challenging), etc.
This could also partly explain higher voting on solved shots. Not to help the shot get to FF and then get a higher HoF ranking, no, but just because the player may be better able to appreciate why it was a good shot.
As of whether this multiplication factor should be advertized, I don't think it's any kind of necessary. How is it relevant? It should not affect in any way how someone votes, votes should always simply be fair rating. You think the snapshot is worth 8? Vote 8. You think it's worth 2? Vote 2. The fact your vote may have a higher weight than another one should not change anything.
Also, if someone really cares, it IS possible to know it exist, it's not a secret. I for example knew it for a long time.
[1] and here arguably blockbuster gets an unfair advantage because a higher budget may allow for better photography, VFX or whatever may impact the basic look of a frame.
@lezard about SotD, you also need to take 3 things into account:
1) people have different taste;
2) favorites are taken into account;
3) votes can change after the SotD is chosen.
Apart that, I agree that many SotD were not the Right One™, but maybe it falls into my point n°1. Or maybe some people vote in an unfair way, but what to do apart rely on our moderator's work to find and bust the guilty?
But all this is probably another topic.
= Asmodai edit: fixed a dead link =
I really don't mean to start a controversy. I do know that people have different tastes, which is what the game is also about, by the way.
About the multiplication factor not making a difference, I must admit I don't get it. 10+6 gives an average of 8. 3times 10 and 6 give an average of 9, and 3times 6+10 give an average of 7. Now if this doesn't make a difference what does? Ban admits in his message that "some may have a higher rate than another" which is quite contadictory with shots not getting any boost. Why not admit it once and for all?
Now that I know it, things are ok with me. My only concern is that the game should be clear and fair. Cause if it isn't it spoils the fun. And yes I do have fun and do enjoy the game. If I didn't I wouldn't even bother to read and write all this!
"About the multiplication factor not making a difference, I must admit I don't get it. 10+6 gives an average of 8. 3times 10 and 6 give an average of 9, and 3times 6+10 give an average of 7. Now if this doesn't make a difference what does?"
My point is that the multiplication factor is tied to the solver, not a high vote. Yes, 10 from a solver plus 6 from someone who didn't solve will give 9. But in the same way, 6 from a solver and 10 from someone who didn't solve will give 7.
The only thing the multiplication factor does is give more credit to the vote of a solver, that vote being high or low.
So, this is only a "boost" if the average voting of solver is higher than the average voting of others. And again, even if solvers did vote higher, it's not necessarily for unfair reasons.
Also, note that even though an uploader can vote on her own shots, this vote is not multiplied -- it just counts as the vote of any one else who didn't solve the shot.
So, correct me if I'm off base...
A below-average easy shot from a popular movie gets an average rating of 4, but because it was solved 200 times while in New Submissions, its "multiplied" average pushes it into Feature Films over a hard-to-solve (except for Winterwolf!), but overall, much better shot? If this can happen, then maybe the multiplier is just a bit too high?
No. Ban already explained it.
If the shot is easy to guess (let's say every voter solves it), the multiplication factor will apply the same way to each vote, whether it be 1, 2, 3, ... , 9 or 10. In the end, the average rating will be just the same as if there was no multiplication factor at all. Therefore, if the shot is below average, it will stay below average, it won't be accepted just because it has more solves.
The more solves the shot has, the less effect multiplication factor will have.
On the other hand, on hard-to-solve shots, its effect will be more perceivable.
sorry if I use this topic to cry a little but haven three snaps in 10 days having from 7.35 to 7.5 and not getting the snapshot of the day made me just sad, especially when you know that some sotd had much lower ratings... and today I had even higher rating that the sotd (I know it's because of the favorites)... cries.like.a.baby
pls. don't get this post too seriously (just a little bit :P)