I'm unsure about on what the first sentence is supposed to mean though.
Yep, but that's all part of it too, I basically try to knock out 2 quests a year, a large quest, like Link to Tortuga or The Adventures of Robinhood, and a Castle Haunt, as a quick whip together shoot-em up kill the bad guy and go home.
I knocked out both CH I and CH II in about 30 days each.
They aren't intended to be some epic adventure or masterpiece, they're meant to give a few laughs and a couple ours of enjoyment.
People that take them seriously are missing the whole point.
The type of rating system here doesn't distinguish between a quest that's taken a year to build or a quest that was knocked out in 30 days, simply because people who rate them either don't know or don't care about how much actual effort went in to making what they are rating.
Quest ratings are supposed to reflect on what the quest maker has done as a whole, not on how the person rating it would have done it, or thought it should have been done, that part of thier opinion should be put into the building of their own quest.
That goes back to the original post in this thread, that quests being submitted are of poor quality....
The way I see it, if a person thinks they are of poor quality, then the quickest way to fix that is to set down, build a better one, and then submit it.