Movie sets use max rating over average rating #7756
Conversation
|
I don't think a user would expect it to be the max rating. I think they would think it's the average of the group, so I'm not really seeing your point. |
|
i'd agree that a collection should show the average of the movies and not the maximum. |
|
I'd raise the same issue about why using latest year vs oldest year, is it not a movie set exists because the first one exists? Why use the latest year and not the first movie's year as preference? So, here I assuming public prefer latest over oldest in a movie set settings. I've no argument about the year setting because a good movie, is a, good movie no matter which year it's released. When comes to sort by rating, a good one should always be shown first then only allow the users to select which one they want to watch. |
|
To take another example. Let's say I'd like to watch the top 10 from www.imdb.com/chart/top list.
if we set "Group by movie set", we'll observe that: The Godfather, The Dark Knight and The Lord of the Rings are no longer shown due to averaging. Thus, reduced ranking to lower page/view. This also means 'average' rating removes 4 movies from this top 10 list. This of course doesn't happen if we disable "Group by movie set". I hope you can see why averaging might not be the best way if ('sort by rating' && 'group by set') is concerned. Think i'll stop my ranting for now. Thanks for this great piece of software anyway. Greatly appreciate it. |
|
IMO, the benefit of "Group by movie set" and sort by max-rating:- Following above example, if kodi is able to let me know there's a Godfather Part III from this top 10 even it's rated 7.6? Would I watch it? Yes, I would. Would I watch the part I, 'fellowship of the ring' first or jump into part II when i click into the collection and kodi says, 'Hey there, here's the collection, although part I is slightly lower rating, I didn't want you to miss out part I. Anyway, pick whichever you want". I'd watch part I first, then only go into part II 'return of the kings'. Cheers. Think I'll stop explaining any further. Thanks again. :) |
|
Well I still think it's totally correct what happens. If you group the results, they should be averaged. Why should bad movies be pushed to the front? And on max vs min year, I think that should be added and configurable via the advancedsettings. There is no right or wrong there, it's down to preference. |
|
this goes to what's the purpose of having sort by descending rating. It is to show the best rated movie first. In this case the collection has the best rated movie, so it should be shown first. The bad ones were just happens to be the bad ones. it's not pushing bad movies to front, it's pushing good movies to front. Because averaging is dragging good movies to backwards, it kind of defeat the purpose of ranking the best first. Maybe no one understands my example with the top 10 list and the problem i'm facing. Maybe someone could introduce a new variable for listitem so that when others wish to use max-rating for movie set. it could be set up if needed. |
|
Averaging have two side effects, it brings good movie's rating down, and bad movie's rating up (this is also asked by @razzeee, "Why should bad movies be pushed to the front?" average pushes bad movies to front and dragging down good ones. Max rating has one side effect, bad/good movies collected together with the best rated movie. Serves the purpose of showing the best in front. I doubt public would prefer to show the worst one in first page.if they choose to sort by ascending rating. |
|
yeah and next guy comes along that wants minimum. Sorry but i see this going nowhere and not being merged |
|
I highly doubt that someone would want a minimum. Anyway thanks for considering. |
|
I agree that moviesets information and meta is lacking and I would like to see more done towards this end, rating is any good place to start as any. Question, I have 1 movie only, this is part of a set of 4 movies (Kodi doesnt care if I have 1 or 4 movies part of the set, its still grouped as a set, what rating will I see then? what if then I have 2 out of 4 movies? In case I have only 1 movie in this set, I would expect and consider reasonable to see only the rating for that movie, then if I have more than 1 movie in that set then the average of the 2 and so on and so forth. Also What happens if I remove a movie from a set using the builtin manager, will the setting update to reflect the change? |
|
Could you please discuss this on the forums? On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:28 AM, uNiversaI notifications@github.com
|
Sure if thers a thread for this PR please link it and Ill discuss it there. |
|
Hi @UniversaI, I'd started a feature request thread at http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=234841 |
|
I don't think this will be merged, as the forum discussion also lead nowhere. |
Issue arise during skinning, there's no option to set the max rating for movie collections/sets. It's averaged by default.
Average rating for a movie sets reduces the page ranking during sort by descending rating view. Most obvious if the library is over hundreds. if movies grouped by set setting is enabled, a good movie that should be displayed on the first page suddenly sorted to later page,
Like the logic behind why using max year instead of min year on line:112 of GroupUtils.cpp. I suppose public tends to prefer new over old, thus the decision to show max year instead of min year?
Anyway, a typical skinning approach is always show a new view for a movie-set. In that view individual movie's rating will be displayed (or not), but always sortable by rating. I believe a collection/set's rating should be set at the max. When users enter the movie-set view, they can decide for themselves which to select in that view.