Rules

[appel]

@Demonpants

What about a combination?
10 randomly assigned games, and 10 chosen games. I just want to be sure that all games get at least a little bit of community vote. This way, the best looking games will still be chosen the most, but, on average, every game will be voted on at least a little bit. One thing I didn’t like about JGO Comp 2009 was that the voting spread between popular and unpopular games (in terms of look and the user who created them) was pretty massive. Even though I think the better ones clearly won, users who were unable to create pretty art or who were relatively unknown in the forums would have very very few reviews, which I don’t feel is very helpful for people who are just starting out.

Isn’t that like forcing votes upon undeserving games?

@CaptainJester

Make that most people. The year they did a community vote I went and played all 68 games before choosing my top 5. That was the same year that most people went through alphabetically and stop halfway before evaluating most games. My best game to that point started with “T” (Tank War) so was never even looked at by the community at large. That is why I hate community votes. But as long as there are regular judges along with the community vote then I have no problem.

PS I didn’t expect to win that year, but thought I was at least top 20.

We can solve this by randomizing the game list where the users vote.

[pjt33]

@appel

Perhaps giving each user 100 points, which he can use to assign to his favorite games. The maximum amount of points any one game can receive from the same user is 10 points. This ensures that the user votes on at least 10 games, but can vote on up to 100 unique games if he wishes.

That has a certain elegance.

[Abuse]

Signing

If there is a need for the game to be signed and the signed game package exceeds 4096 bytes, then an unsigned game package, that is below or equal to 4096 bytes, must be provided.

Presumably it’ll be the unsigned<=4096 that will be judged, not the signed>4096? (otherwise, I could provide a do-nothing stub app. for the unsigned version, and a game of unlimited size for my signed submission)

[Markus_Persson]

This might be a bit late, but… Shouldn’t we force all applets to be unsigned?
Users shouldn’t be forced to give away control of their entire computers just to play a 4k game.

[appel]

@Markus_Persson

This might be a bit late, but… Shouldn’t we force all applets to be unsigned?
Users shouldn’t be forced to give away control of their entire computers just to play a 4k game.

Most of these games do not require any signing. But there is always some one idiot that wants to be able to submit a multiplayer game, and that requires signing the app. In the past, signing hasn’t been considered an issue, but hm, I don’t know. Do we want a rule banning signed games?

[woogley]

Markus makes a good point (users really shouldn’t have to dive through scary dialogs), but I don’t think it’s something that should be ruled out. If a developer wants to waste space by signing while simultaneously stabbing their game’s overall experience … I say… let them.

But, I guess you should take that opinion with a pinch of salt, as I don’t even agree that applets should be enforced. I rather liked some of the fullscreen 4K games back in the day…

[Demonpants]

I was indeed trying to think of a way to have an incredibly simple 4k MMO.

I still want to try it. For the challenge, not to make a good game.

[appel]

@Demonpants

I was indeed trying to think of a way to have an incredibly simple 4k MMO.

I still want to try it. For the challenge, not to make a good game.

FYI: I’ve added the following text to the Rules page. Not really a rule, just a text for clarification on the status of judges.

[quote]Due to the fact there is community voting, judges are free to submit a game into the contest.

• Note: These games will only be voted on in the community vote. They will not be considered by the judging panel, and therefore will receive no score from the judging panel. Community voting is separate and independent from the judging panel, and cannot affect or influence each other. This allows judges to submit games for community voting without worrying about any conflict of interest.
  [/quote]
  If anyone has a rational objection to this, please say so.

I’ve thought about this issue over and over, and can’t think of any conflict of interest. Let me explain: Community voting is by itself a judging panel, and all voters are judges, and consider the fact there is nothing prohibiting voters to judge their own games or games by others. If anything, there is more conflict of interest in the community voting as voters can influence the order of their own game. But I guess the mass should keep things in balance.

[Alan_W]

@Markus_Persson

This might be a bit late, but… Shouldn’t we force all applets to be unsigned?
Users shouldn’t be forced to give away control of their entire computers just to play a 4k game.

I’ve got a sheep herding game in development. It needs signing as it uses the microphone for voice (whistle) control. It’s 2D plan view. You control the shepherd with the keyword and control the sheepdog by whistling. The whistle controller is working!

[pjt33]

I’m not entirely clear on how the community voting will be handled. Will the judges’ score be used to create one leaderboard and the community score for another? Or will they be combined in some way?

[appel]

@pjt33

I’m not entirely clear on how the community voting will be handled. Will the judges’ score be used to create one leaderboard and the community score for another? Or will they be combined in some way?

Perhaps three leaderboards are in order:

• Combined leaderboard (50/50) (games by judges are not listed)
• Judging panel leaderboard
• Community vote leaderboard

[Demonpants]

That seems reasonable as long as it’s not too easy to “cheat” the community vote (making multiple accounts or multiple votes).

[appel]

@Demonpants

That seems reasonable as long as it’s not too easy to “cheat” the community vote (making multiple accounts or multiple votes).

Well, it’ll be restricted to user account, and you can only create one user account per email address.

[Demonpants]

@appel

Well, it’ll be restricted to user account, and you can only create one user account per email address.

So then if someone wants to they can cheat fairly easily (I myself have 3 email addresses that I actually use, plus countless others that I could probably remember the password for eventually), although it’s probably unlikely anybody would really bother. Either way, can you do a same IP checker or something? That’s slightly harder to bypass.

[SimonH]

[quote=“Demonpants,post:34,topic:34610”]
wicked laugh My game is a signed applet which opens an account at Java4K and then votes for itself! Cunning, no?

[Markus_Persson]

It doesn’t have to be signed if it’s loaded from that domain.

[Demonpants]

@SimonH

wicked laugh My game is a signed applet which opens an account at Java4K and then votes for itself! Cunning, no?

Brilliant! ;D

We can make a game where it cunningly discovers the user’s Java4k username and password, and then makes them give it a 5!

[Riven]

@Demonpants

We can make a game where it cunningly discovers the user’s Java4k username and password, and then makes them give it a 5!

Why would you need the password? Hijack the sessionid in the cookie, login, change the password, vote, no way to restore the password, but heck… who cares.

[appel]

Well, if I hadn’t mentioned, you have to print out a form, and post in via snail-mail to me personally. :

[Demonpants]

@appel

Well, if I hadn’t mentioned, you have to print out a form, and post in via snail-mail to me personally. :

I can write a program that can do that.