[quote=“BitDragon,post:20,topic:26257”]
Say… what?
I get a lot of emails from people who actually PLAY THE GAME. I don’t mean they just test it and think it’s cute tech demo for 4kb; they actually play it as a game and like it. Most of them aren’t even programmers themselves.
I’m not entirely sure why you felt the need to pick on my game, but please stop it.
the reason i focus more on gameplay than on technical achievement because it is a game programming contest - NOT a technical demo contest. the rules page even says “no pointless animations - must be a PLAYABLE game”
besides, if you’re pulling off extreme graphics for a painfully boring game, you haven’t made a big technical achievement anyway.
we’re making games. we’re making in them in 4K. but which one is the most enjoyable? which one is the best? (yes - there IS a best, that’s why we’re judging in the first place).
Donald: I wouldn’t even worry about setting up a huge complex categorized system unless maybe we had prizes or something. even then i still probably wouldnt use a complex system. just, is it a good game or not? gameplay, replay value, etc.
(promised no more ranting, but have to apologize to marcus …)
I did not intend to pick on your game, I apologize if that is how my post came across. To illustrate my point using my own submission, shooting evil … drawRectangle aliens with hot … drawLine laser beams wouldn’t be the same, even if I still included physics and enemy ai (which I suppose fall under gameplay?) I greatly enjoy your game and I would rate your game’s replay value a lot higher than that of my own submission (and most other submissions I have seen so far).
Wolfgang
“I’m a ****ing starship, I’m allowed to cheat!”
GCU Arbitrary, Culture Craft
Aaaahh, I see.
Heh, well, I totally misunderstood that post, heh. Sorry about that.
And phew. 
To keep it simple why not let the judges give each game one score, but supply a little written comment. It would be nice I think, I’m not thinking about something complex at all. In fact any system will be nice, it seems hard to get any judges at all. 
oh yes, there will be comments just like last year. also next year i want to implement that public comments thing that has been sitting in my dark corner of things to do… 
How about having more than just one rating system and one winner? You could declare an “Overall” winner for the best game, but then also allow winners for subcategories:
-Gameplay
-AI
-Graphics/Sound
-Technical Achievement
Also instead of either just using judges or just public votes, it could be a combination of both?
An overall winner is definitly necessary, but for a lot of folks, it might be cool, to put their game in their resume? There is no prize money, but if you apply for a job and can show off a “technical achievement award” for a game contest you entered, definitly makes employers be more interested.
Note: I always show off my games that I wrote during job applications and it’s definitly getting people to listen. Even though, the job has nothing to do with gaming …
I agree,
4K games are a very useful way of demonstrating technical abilities that are applicable in J2ME development (games or otherwise)
a) Simple game design & implementation.
b) Appreciation for size optimal code.
c) Efficient exploitation of available APIs
d) Familiarity with bytecode optimizers, obfuscators, and toolkits.
how much time would it cost to judge, and within which timespan?
I’d be willing, if wanted and able.
I guess I could judge too, if it does not take too much time? I did not submit a game.
it wont take too much time, im doing it automated this year (last year people kinda just typed an email)
I volunteer to be a judge. I don’t have an entry and I’ve already played most of the games so I know how to play them and I know what features (or at least most of them) are incorporated in the games.
Seems there are enough judges. I support the multiple categories suggestion. I’d let the judges rate every game on a, say, 1-15 or 1-20 scale (the bigger the scale, the smaller the chance that game gets equal scores. On the other hand, the bigger the scale, the more work and harder decisions for the judges. 1-15 should do the trick, I think. Or, 1-10, but with the criteria that each judge can only give one game a “10”.) This scale should come with each category, and then you could simply generate a list based on the averages. Then, the judges could leave their comments where they like with the scores (and let us hope they do!).
That system would be fair, simple, and give a good idea of the results
im using the same basic system as last year
graphics… max 10 points
gameplay … max 10 points
design … max 10 points
overall quality … max 10 points
sound bonus … 5points
demerit… maximum 10 point removal
or something like that
That will only allow for one category, and the majority seems to support average or multiple categories of some sort, as far as I can tell. I beg you to reconsider, please.
[quote=“woogley,post:34,topic:26257”]
Don’t use last year’s system. Last years ended up being overly complicated and meant different things to different judges. I don’t think anyone (least of all the judges) were happy with the results. The first place came out okay, but everything beyond that was skewed toward inconsequentials. Just let them give it a scrore between 1-10 or 1-100. That way a judge can ensure that the games he approves of the most will float to the top while the games he thinks the least of will sink to the bottom.
1-100 is the best bet IMO.
You then get course grain banding :- 100-90 Outstanding, 80-90 Excellent, 80-70 Good, etc etc.
While still allowing for fine grain scoring, when wanting to compare competitors within the same ‘band’.
If you want to share the love abit, you can always add several ‘Special’ Awards, Most Playable, Best Technology, Best Graphics etc etc
These could be awarded via round based nominations.
(i.e. each judge has a vote, game with least votes is dropped from the round, judges get to revote, carrying forward just the nominated games from the previous round. Repeat until only one game remains.)
I’ve been considering the same thing. However, I think the judges should come up with an award they want to give, then come to a consensus among themselves on awarding it. Voting for the award may result in unintended effects. These sorts of awards are really just cosolation prizes of sorts that reviewers/judges tend to award when they want to recognize special achievements in a particular area. So a consensus is really better than a vote, since the ratings would already have chosen which game was “best”.
I agree that a simple 0-100 score without categories is the best way of judging the games.
Otherwise the competition goes from “I’m going to make the most fun game I can in 4k” to “Oh no, I need to cram in some sound to get a higher score”.
I’ll do it.
I am not participating in the contest.
PM me if I am chosen.