1831 replies to this topic

[Dangerous_Dave]

I agree with Nocturne here, saying "bad games might get votes" isn't really a valid argument against the SSE system, it's an argument against lazy people who won't take their time to at least try one or two games before voting, changing the system won't change people's voting habits.

It's not about trying one or two games, is that you *have* to vote them as your favourites, even if you have only played a few of the games and have no idea if there are better ones. Many people download the pack of games, ordered with foldered games first. Most people start at the top, and not everybody plays them all, therefore the games in folders are more likely to get SSE votes, making them more likely to win.

Edit:
Under your new system DD, I could very easily give a game above me a very low score to lower it's average and give myself an advantage over it. SSE cancels out this possibility for tactical voting.

It's an issue, I accept that. There are ways to weight voting so to limit this (such as giving higher weight to votes that are similar to the average), but that's a reasonably complicated system to set up so it probably wont be an option. I'm happy to discuss other options, I just think we should use a system where games are voted independently of each other.

Think about it like this: 1000 games are made, 100 people vote, but they only have time to play one game each. They choose at random, each choosing a different game. The games are ok, and since they have to either vote for them or not vote, they all choose to just vote for the game they played. We end up with 100 people coming 1st equal, and 900 people coming 2nd/last equal. Rating systems generally lead to very few joint placements.

Edited by Dangerous_Dave, 19 May 2012 - 12:52 PM.

[Rusty]

I'm in favour of Dave's system. If you guys are worried about people voting down other games that are a spot above there's, then why not keep the votes private? Maybe have them PMed to Mark or something?

Should we also keep our reviews private? I'm sorry but I don't think spamming Mark's inbox is the solution we're looking for here.

Edit:

It's not about trying one or two games, is that you *have* to vote them as your favourites, even if you have only played a few of the games and have no idea if there are better ones. Many people download the pack of games, ordered with foldered games first. Most people start at the top, and not everybody plays them all, therefore the games in folders are more likely to get SSE votes, making them more likely to win.

Yes but you face this problem with any voting system, even using your proposed system, I can still score games as my favourites because I haven't played the other games and have nothing to compare them too.

Think about it like this: 1000 games are made, 100 people vote, but they only have time to play one game each. They choose at random, each choosing a different game. The games are ok, and since they have to either vote for them or not vote, they all choose to just vote for the game they played. We end up with 100 people coming 1st equal, and 900 people coming 2nd/last equal. Rating systems generally lead to very few joint placements.

I don't really see a system that can resolve this without taking too much information into account. We need a system that can both give a fair result and not drive Mark to a murderous, stress related rampage. Maybe if we have a 100 points system? Choosing the top 3 or so games, you could give them a score out of 100 to add to their total score which is then ranked?

SSE still seems the fairest way to me though.

Edited by Rusty, 19 May 2012 - 01:00 PM.

[Dangerous_Dave]

Keeping votes private is also not really going to help stop down voters. Haters still gonna hate.

[Nocturne]

We could go the same way as Davve suggests but this time use a % system... So, ist gets 1 point, second gets 0.5, third gets 0.33, etc.... It is a bit more difficult to spam and it is also weighted in such a way that getting a first place vote actually counts for something, but not too much. It seems quite fair system and is easier on me for counting up votes!!!!

[Snail_Man]

We could go the same way as Davve suggests but this time use a % system... So, ist gets 1 point, second gets 0.5, third gets 0.33, etc.... It is a bit more difficult to spam and it is also weighted in such a way that getting a first place vote actually counts for something, but not too much. It seems quite fair system and is easier on me for counting up votes!!!!

*cough* 1/vote score system *cough*

[Nocturne]

Missed that...

[Rusty]

We could go the same way as Davve suggests but this time use a % system... So, ist gets 1 point, second gets 0.5, third gets 0.33, etc.... It is a bit more difficult to spam and it is also weighted in such a way that getting a first place vote actually counts for something, but not too much. It seems quite fair system and is easier on me for counting up votes!!!!

My concern is that it may be too easy for others to sum up before the results are meant to be released, Davve himself being one of the main offenders of my concern this quarter.

[Nocturne]

My concern is that it may be too easy for others to sum up before the results are meant to be released, Davve himself being one of the main offenders of my concern this quarter.

I must admit that that annoys me too... I would much prefer that the results be kept a secret until the end!

[Davve]

Pros with the 1/vote score system:

• Easy to calculate the winners, especially for a computer (1 for 1st place vote, 0.5 for 2nd, 0.33 for 3rd, 0.25 for 4th etc.)
  Effortlessly done in GML:
  

  var voted_game,r,v;for (r=0; r<number_of_reviews; r+=1) {    for (v=1; v<=number_of_votes_given_by_reviewer; v+=1) {        voted_game=The vth game this reviewer have voted for         game_score[voted_game]+=1/v    }}

• Easy to understand, not unnecessarily complex.
• Other votes than a 1st place one actually mean something (two 2nd place equals one 1st place vote for example.)
• Friendly and fair, perfect for a competition like this.
• Quick and fast to sort the games, since they all have an unique score. Ties are extremely rare.

Cons with the 1/vote score system:

• Sometimes there may only be a 0.001 difference between two games, which may upset some people, but that only occurs a bit down in the list.

My concern is that it may be too easy for others to sum up before the results are meant to be released, Davve himself being one of the main offenders of my concern this quarter.

This is just a GMC Jam, not some world championship in Game Making. The results are not the main thing about this event, but to make games and have fun.
Edit: Also, I can refrain from posting my table in the future if some of you don't like it, no problem at all.

Edited by Davve, 19 May 2012 - 01:49 PM.

[Snail_Man]

Still, I like it to be a surprise until it is officially announced.

Wait...

I know...

Spoiler

You can LIE about what voting method were using!!

EDIT: If the mods agree, hide this post and start dissing Davve's voting method. Then start claiming were using SSE again...

Edited by Snail_Man, 19 May 2012 - 01:39 PM.

[Rusty]

This is just a GMC Jam, not some world championship in Game Making.

LIES!

The results are not the main thing about this event, but to make games and have fun.
Edit: Also, I can refrain from posting my table in the future if some of you don't like it, no problem at all.

It's not so much your table, I actually used your table to weigh my own options when casting my final vote. It's more so the fact it makes it easier to calculate who is the winner beforehand and what it might take to put your game in a winner's position, especially now that we have random place prizes.

[TerraFriedSheep]

My concern is that it may be too easy for others to sum up before the results are meant to be released, Davve himself being one of the main offenders of my concern this quarter.

I must admit that that annoys me too... I would much prefer that the results be kept a secret until the end!

Maybe we should PM our votes to a trusted member (i.e. a moderator willing to compile the votes) and just post our reviews in the games topic. Then when the winner is announced, the votes can be revealed in the first (or second) post of the games topic, and the winner is a surprise, peoples votes arn't based off what others have already votes and everyone has a good time

[Blake]

I'm in favour of Dave's system. If you guys are worried about people voting down other games that are a spot above there's, then why not keep the votes private? Maybe have them PMed to Mark or something?

Should we also keep our reviews private? I'm sorry but I don't think spamming Mark's inbox is the solution we're looking for here.

The reviews should obviously still be public and that would give hints at which games are likely to be at the top without giving too much away. Mark already counts up the votes himself and whether he gets the information from a voting topic or his inbox makes no difference.

Edited by Blake, 19 May 2012 - 03:23 PM.

[CaptainLepidus]

I think we should have some system (website, program, whatever) that would spit out random games to the user. It would store what games it's already shown so that games aren't repeated. That way players will play the games in a random order and thus, those who can't play all the games won't just vote for the first games in the .zip. Also, it helps to balance out the issue of people becoming more and more burned out and bored by the time they reach the last games, because the "last games" will be different for everyone.

[Davve]

I think we should have some system (website, program, whatever) that would spit out random games to the user. It would store what games it's already shown so that games aren't repeated. That way players will play the games in a random order and thus, those who can't play all the games won't just vote for the first games in the .zip. Also, it helps to balance out the issue of people becoming more and more burned out and bored by the time they reach the last games, because the "last games" will be different for everyone.

Like Ludum Dare then?

If so, it should be sorted in least popular->most popular (judged by the amount of downloads), not random.

[Nocturne]

I think we should have some system (website, program, whatever) that would spit out random games to the user. It would store what games it's already shown so that games aren't repeated. That way players will play the games in a random order and thus, those who can't play all the games won't just vote for the first games in the .zip. Also, it helps to balance out the issue of people becoming more and more burned out and bored by the time they reach the last games, because the "last games" will be different for everyone.

Great idea! Going to make it yourself are you? Oh, and it can't be off the GMC as then it would cease to be the GMC Jam...

[Blake]

I've had nothing to do, so I decided to start making a program where people can choose from a list of all entries, enter scores out of ten for the game in a range of categories, as well as overall, and submit them.

Progress Screenshot:

Spoiler

It's good coding practice for me regardless of whether it's used or not

Edited by Blake, 19 May 2012 - 04:09 PM.

[Nocturne]

That's an interesting idea, and I would be very happy to adopt it, but it will have to be secure and have some way to verify that each person can vote only once for each game! Don't want people spam voting their own game now...

[TerraFriedSheep]

I've had nothing to do, so I decided to start making a program where people can choose from a list of all entries, enter scores out of ten for the game in a range of categories, as well as overall, and submit them.

Progress Screenshot:

Spoiler

It's good learning for me regardless of whether it's used or not :tongue:

Looks good, if you make it such that it can import a list of all the game names and game titles, and then select a game at random to play it could well be a nice useful tool not only for reviewing and scoring games, but also randomising the order you play them in

It could even be run from the folder containing all the jam games, and run the games from within this program.

[Snail_Man]

That's looking great so far... Would you somehow hook it up to a server that would record all the votes, or just have the usual "Post in the voting topic" way? Both ways are okay by me, I'm just wondering.