Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
GOTM just doesn't feel right. :\ There was nothing really wrong with carrying GOTW over when there weren't enough entries. Now there are too many! I know that's hardly an argument but if I retyped all my thoughts I'd just look like an annoying nerd who cares too much about piddly things that don't really matter.
If GOTM's the way we're going, I'll be content and will support it, but I won't be participating in it often.
You still have a lot of "fanbois" hanging around here who just vote because they like the author. Unlucky though that we have a lot of great games to vote this month. May the best win.
It would be great if you could just "recommend" a download and not rate it at all. And you should be able to rate it 1-5 stars if you wrote a review and reviews should be reviewed by admins to avoid 1 liners or just 3 lines review to push for a vote. So no more I just rate to downrate or similiar stuff and 1-5 star rates depend on an actual review so at least the author has to justify his rating. This would also stop the wave of fanbois as I'm sure not all of them like to write reviews just to push a vote for a friend and this way they also have to step up from being anonymous.
Originally Posted by OldManClayton"Not really, because the people who are being discouraged from voting are the ones who take care to actually play all the games and vote properly. The people whose votes shouldn't count will still vote without playing all the games."
I liken the GOTM voting as very similar to presidential primaries (here in the United States). You have some candidates that will never be taken seriously; you have some well-meaning entries that may or may not do well based on their particulars; you'll have some very hot contenders because they have a solid PR/reputation/quality aspect to them. Eventually one of them wins out, though certainly not everyone agrees with the outcome.
As it stands, I see the games that are deserving of the GOTM awards receiving the attention they are due. A substandard game released after a week or two not receiving the same attention as some of the games that took months or even years to develop is not a bad phenomenon. Rather, by drawing attention to the well-made games, noobs like me have an idea of what it takes to make a well-received game (and hence win the monthly poll). I think that's the point of having feedback and comments available for each of the downloads: hearing what works, what doesn't work, and what's preferred or recommended by the folks who frequent this site.
For what it's worth, I side with Rikus and his perspective on this issue anyway (at the risk of putting words in his mouth): too many polls is too much maintenance for too little of a return. People who make games and post them here shouldn't take this as a personal affront; it's just that there's not enough time in the day to run recreational efforts like this as diligently as real-world (and real-paying) commitments.
If we must have polls, voting, and participation, then make it easy for the administrators to administer. The current system seems about right for the level of involvement of the admins, so why pile on more work? It becomes less fun and more of a hassle once you pass "the point of diminishing returns." I think anything beyond that level of maintenance causes burnout; revisit this issue once it becomes easier to administer/automate.
And for the record, I'm not fond of the polls anyway (I personally prefer group consensus as opposed to "majority-rules" voting), but at least in this case the voting is fun and harmless, not to mention quicker.
The point of it being too much work is moot since we haven't been given a chance to help. I don't quite see why you quoted me since what you wrote doesn't have anything to do with what I said...
If it was because of fanbois, I'd bet that Edge The Game would win
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
@ OMC: "Not being given a chance to help" isn't something the general user base (like me) has anything to do with; that's an admin issue. I really can't respond to that and do it justice.
And the reason I quoted you was for a couple reasons:
--I take issue with the notion that one must 'take care to play all the games';
--I take issue with the notion that one must 'vote properly';
--My response dealt directly with those two issues (so yes, it actually did have something to do with your response); and finally
--Your comment inspired me to respond, in context with the larger discussion taking place.
It's unfortunate if you take offense to my quoting you (and that's what it seems like); I wasn't doing it to insult you or derail the discussion. But to be honest, I can quote whomever I please, whenever I like, regardless of how the original poster feels about it. That's the wonder of the Internet, isn't it?
O_o I was not offended and I don't understand why you would think I was. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Were you expecting me to disagree so automatically thought I was mad? Because I don't. There's nothing contradictory between what you said and what I said. It's a generally accepted rule that you play all the games in the poll before you vote and I don't understand why you'd have a problem with 'voting properly'... Seems better than voting improperly.
You seem to think I was commenting on something different than I was... because my post was merely a logical deduction based off of Muz's statement. O_o It wasn't even necessarily a view of what's going on, I was just saying why what he said didn't make sense. I don't understand why there'd be an issue with it especially when your post didn't say anything particularly relevant to what you quoted me saying...
Originally Posted by OldManClayton
Originally Posted by Muz It's sort of nice that it's discouraging votes. You only get votes that count now
Not really, because the people who are being discouraged from voting are the ones who take care to actually play all the games and vote properly. The people whose votes shouldn't count will still vote without playing all the games.
When I say "People whose votes shouldn't count", I'm talking about the ones who vote without giving fair consideration to all entries... I think you're thinking I was thinking on an entirely different track.
And by your reference to 'voting properly' I was thinking that you meant only those who would 'take care to play all the games' would be the ones to 'vote properly.' My bad.
I think we should scrap GOTW and have GOTM instead.... oh wait, i'm behind the times!
I miss GOTW, however i can understand why we don't have it anymore and i think GOTM is the better way to go. How can a GOTW be much of a reward when there are only 2 entries?! Then the next week there are 2-3 5-star games in the same week? That's nuts!
Yea, you know I had some time today to mull over it while eating some shoestring french fries and a steakburger, and I realized that it doesn't really matter which way we go, since good games are still recognized. Who knows, someday down the line we may have so many submissions that we have to go back to GOTW.
Whatever the case, as long as we all use common sense it should work out.
GOTM is fine how it is, but I think the reason everyone suddenly felt that it wasn't is due to the long list of games that they haven't played at all (it was the reason for me at least).
I'd just like to see an EOTM (engine of the month) OR maybe an EOTY (engine of the year) Yearly shouldn't be too taxing on admins, nor would it clutter up the site too much. Every 3 months maybe? could call it QEAward (QE = quarterly engine) .. then we'd have the nickname for it, QE (sounds like cue-E). ... Not too many people get to win a QE! .. Good Job! .. lol.
Hmmmm .... actually, couldn't I just make a poll in the VIP members area every last week of the 3rd month for a QE award?
Or can only admins make polls?
It'd be nice to see that VIP section actually used for something.
Blood of the Ancient One, Seen only as Shadow, Faster than Lightning, Fierce as the Greatest Dragon, Nearly Invisible, Floating in a Dream, Entered through the Demon Door, Destroyer of Evil in a Realm with a Red Sky Scarred, Who could I be ?
Advertisement
Post Reply
I don't quite see why you quoted me since what you wrote doesn't have anything to do with what I said...
Were you expecting me to disagree so automatically thought I was mad? Because I don't. There's nothing contradictory between what you said and what I said. It's a generally accepted rule that you play all the games in the poll before you vote and I don't understand why you'd have a problem with 'voting properly'... Seems better than voting improperly. 
Edited by OMC
Not at all! I'm not so terse. 
