Preliminaries (tentative)

Just over one month till the big day.

Been doing little bit of planning in regards of rules and judging arrangement.

I am considering having only 3 judges and also community vote. We will be dropping presentation and technical score, and only have one score. Each game will therefor receive one score and one review from each of the judge.

The judging panel will represent 50% of the final score and the community voting the other 50%.

Judging panel:

  • Arni Arent (appel)
  • Kevin Glass (kevglass)
  • Eli Delventhal (Demonpants)

Applets only (required), webstart optional (applets can be launched as Webstart).
All files will be hosted on and a system will be in place for that to happen.

sounds good to me, no objections here.

[quote]We will be dropping presentation and technical score
I think that’s a very good move. This will give more importance on game play.

I think I’m in this time.

Cool, but just to clarify: if only 1 judge votes on a game does that judge’s score count as the full 50% or only 16.6%? Also, will the community vote be weighted in some way? Would 1 vote of 10/10 worth more than (say) 1000 votes of 9/10?

No blanks will be allowed.

Just do us a favor and don’t submit 200 games this time. :smiley:

I’ll make sure to play and review everyone’s game, no matter what. I imagine Appel will increase the deadline if any of the judges need it in order to get all their reviews in. But if there are indeed tons of games and we can’t extend the deadline, I’ll just end up putting shorter reviews for all of them so that I can review all of them. Don’t want anyone to be left out.

[quote]I’ll just end up putting shorter reviews
But that would be potentially unfair right?

Lol! Ok, maybe just 100 this year! ;D

Reviews can be written any time over the submission period, and that’s where the main workload is. I’m not too worried about it now, since we already have a judging system in place.

Scoring is a different beast, that needs to be done after the contest closes, because we need to have all the games in before we can start comparing them in a relative fashion (this one is better than that one, etc.).

Not sure that’s a great idea. Webstart support for applets is still immature. In particular, it sizes incorrectly, and so stuff on the bottom isn’t shown. This makes e.g. Keggle from 2009 not really work properly.

I don’t see the need for optional webstart. Other than that, the rules sound fine.

I’m planning on doing two games. :smiley:

I don’t see a problem really. Applets will be required, if devs really want webstart it’s up to them to make it work properly, but that doesn’t exclude them from doing Applet :slight_smile: (Kafkish approach here).

I do like Markus’s idea of just skipping webstart altogether. But I know there there are some devs resistant to the idea, so the optional-webstart is made available to them.

If people agree that we don’t really need the Webstart-option, then we don’t need it.

So basically we’re hoping that someone from Sun enters? No-one is going to want to waste their precious 4k on finding their parent window, getting its insets, and setting its size to WIDTH+horizontal insets, HEIGHT+vertical insets.

Webstart is off the table :-*

What happens if one judge can’t run a game? Will they give 0/10, or will their score be skipped?

I think the changes sound good. I mean, I’ll definitely miss presentation and technical, but they add a lot of reviewing work and I can see why we’re skipping them. Applets only is a good move, if you ask me.

[quote]No-one is going to want to waste their precious 4k on finding their parent window, getting its insets, and setting its size to WIDTH+horizontal insets, HEIGHT+vertical insets.
Maybe someone can find the optimal solution to this annoying aspect.

I also think Applets only is a good idea, especially since the applet experience is slightly better than jws now.

Thanks for this. I’ll define a solution for this.

I meant that every single review would be shorter, not just the ones I got to last.