[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Single Comment Chess Variant Pages Rating System. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Michael Lubin wrote on 2007-12-23 UTCAverage ★★★This idea is good in general, but your category system strikes me as weak. Your four categories other than 'Overall' do not, between them, get at what is most important about a game. How well the variant achieves its stated goals? Whether that's even a good thing depends on the goals. The number and quality of novel concepts introduced in the variant? I don't think I'm alone in believing that a large number of good chess variants -- probably easily a majority -- rank relatively low in this category, while many bad ones rank very high. It seems to me that the main thing is PLAYABILITY. 'Aesthetic appeal' has something to do with playability, but doesn't really cover it. And then 'Presentation' is just the web page. I can easily imagine disliking a chess variant and yet ranking it equal or higher in each of these categories to a game I really liked.