How does it suck? Would you have written a different game? I doubt it.
I never said that, also i said evertying i had to say.
Is this a joke? April 1 is well over…
If this is the case then i must say that i am disappointed. I personally do not care at all about the final placings of the entries… what i am interested in in the remarks of the judges.
By making the “juding” public, the little remarks which may be written will be from random people and therefore less informative. Espeically for the games ranking in the middle where the public will not have much feeling about the game one way or the other and will probably not comment at all. It is these games which most need the comments to understand what would have made the game better so that next year they can attempt to better themselves.
I am all for a separate “public choice” award which is in addition to the expert judged panel.
Having a public choice award would be cool.
Expert judging also has the benefit that no games will go completely unlooked. It’s more likely that a game would be better analyzed by a judge who has to systematically score every game. So a game that might not draw alot of attention to itself otherwise could do very well in the judging. Then people looking at the results could be surprised, “Hey, I never thought to check it out but this is cool!” Call it the dark horse or underdog factor.
well, I’m semi-sorry to dissapoint. I think it is worth a try, though, and you might be surprised at how it works out.
either way, I’m going to get flamed, and this looks like it will result in less flaming.
so keep an open mind, and I encourage you to place your vote when the time arrives
When the public voting is in, you can (by default) sort the games by how much it is voted for (put the least voted game at the top).
That way the votes per game will ‘naturately’ balance.
So it seems it’s not a joke 
Then I have to agree with userek. Sorry woogley, but this sucks. Big time.
It is a sign of disrespect towards participants, saying it now - one full month after the contest is over. All the things you say were equally true before the contest was even started. Either this is a completely random change of mind, or you are not telling the whole story. I might even think that someone didn’t like the results or comments that judges turned. I never speak for others, so I won’t be using “we”, but I will say that I personally have a job too, and yet I submitted some games (good or bad, I don’t know) in good faith that the contest was going to be properly handled.
And I feel that trust has been betrayed. Yes there is a change of rules : you said many times there were going to be judges, asked for volunteers, and as of March 08 you were still saying “judging results will be available in the coming weeks”. Now you suddenly change your mind, and introduce a completely different system, with an arbitrarily chosen voting collective. Just like moogie, I’d rather get five reasoned opinions on my work (no matter how biased) - and even if I finish last - rather than an aseptic “12 votes” which can be due to many many non-game related issues, and from which I will never be able to learn anything.
Would I have written a different game? Maybe not, but then maybe I wouldn’t have bothered at all. And maybe I’d just written one game and not six. I wrote the games for fun, of course, not for the prize, but then again, I have fun writing many other kinds of software, too, and there are other contests, too. But whatifs and maybes are irrelevant. What we have is what we have.
If you don’t have the time, delegate, ask for help, pass the responsability to someone else, whatever… But saying -after one month - “I’ll put a PHP script whenever I have the time 'cos I have a job and go to school” :
is downplaying the effort put into this contest and shows a childish lack of responsibility.
And about flaming (AKA “criticism”)… I’ll let Harry Truman answer that one : “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”. I entered the contest fully aware that I might receive opinions like “this game has too many problems” (no further explanation given). How disappointing, then, that the decision and constant theme throughout this seems to be minimizing the criticism you will endure rather than what is benefitial for the contest and its participants.
I’m all for doing it both ways, especially since that is the original plan. I think the confusion here is mainly due to CaptainJester organizing the contest and woogley handling the results (CaptainJester said there would be judges while woogley haven’t been equally clear on this). I can’t really blame anyone for it, and it seems to me that this is just another example of what happens when things aren’t decided in advance.
I say you should do the public vote thing, but also consider having judges (since you already have the volunteers and all!).
In my opinion judges would be more useful and would be more fair. We were all waiting for the judges’ results and commentaries and with that new system we only will have some numbers (maybe only one number? please, don’t use the YouTube system!!). Besides, when the public vote always happen that the most voted are the most played, so the last entries will have less opportunities. And I’m not going to play every game to vote…
if many people vote and you allow comments and several numbers in each game (graphics, enjoyable, game life, for instance) it may be interesting. ;D
I really agree with ahristov, very well put.
This really sucks!!! 
>:( And one month after the compo is over and NOW we get this… It is a kick in the face to everyone participating
It is a complete turnaround. Is there something else behind this? it smells…
1, Why would you get flamed if the competition was proceed as planned??? As far as I remember there were amazingly little flaming last year, mostly congrats and friendly chatting. Not all agreed 100% with all opinions, but not even Jbanes (I think it was) complained, who got a hard hit by one of the judges. If you wanted to avoid flaming, then this is in my opinion the worst way to go.
2, How will judging criteria be different with public voting than with a panel? I agree that judging criteria should be nailed down in advance, but it worked out quite fine before. There were some active talks before the competition about the voting, but all very friendly afterwards. With public voting you also run a big risk of having people vote without having played all games.
3, Yep, I have always been pushing for more judges (that would rate all games). Still, getting someone judging and commenting on all games is better than none.
Also agree with Morre, that public voting is great. I am disappointed that it wasn’t implemented last year as we were told it would be… BUT that shouldn’t stop the judging panel!
I really like to try to understand what makes a game good or bad to someone, and “42” won’t tell me that. A great part of last years compo was the read from the judges, checking the scores and the chat afterwards. If this stands that you steal that away, then this is most likely my last year taking part in the 4K competition.
@see my PM box
every year, regardless of what happens, that thing gets absolutely flooded with nasty messages, and I don’t have to put up with it.
Since when does voting != opinions?!
You can always post back your opinion on JGO and why you voted like that. And im sure when you submitted your game, alot of people gave you an opinion on your game…
This voting scheme is used in alot of places (www.cgarena.com for example) with prizes worth alot more than they are being given here, so its safe to say it works anad works quite well.
My 2 pence
If you can’t (or don’t want to) deal with it: delegate, get somebody else, or make a new JGO account and ignore all PMs… just to keep your promise.
Well, there you have your answer. Voting != opinions since the time when can became different from must.
Really? Why don’t you actually look at game submissions to see if “a lot” of people gave an opinion. In one of my games, I received 0 (zero) comments, in another - 1 comment. And I’m not the only one.
The question is not whether it is working or not somewhere else. The question is that for this specific contest, the rules have changed after the closing date. Prizes are irrelevant, if you read the complaints carefully. I personally never did it for any sort of prize.
again, the rules of not changed. if anything, you now have better odds.
the “judging panel” is a group of 5 or so VOLUNTEERS with no special profession in judging or critiquing. you basically would’ve gotten a public vote from 5 people. and if I had let that happen, again, people will cry “no fair!” and bla bla bla.
and Riven, I think people already know which user to PM, so that’s not really a solution. and I already attemtped to delegate this year.
and by the way, what promise? I made no promise. and there was no indication in the rules of how the results would be decided. I got a huge wave of “no fair!” cries in my PM last year, so I’m going with an alternate solution. it will work better in your favor, anyway. what do you really think is better… a 5-people vote, or a community vote?
This (previously mentioned) promise:
But oh well… let’s drop it here
You can spin it any way you like it, but your very own messages in this forum say otherwise. The fact that you try to spin your way out only adds insult to injury, and shows why the legalese language everyone hates exists.
The time to ask such questions is certainly not now.
Keep going and there will be no 4K contest anymore. The complaints have been lodged and now everyone keeps beating a dead horse. Whether you like it or not this is all volunteer work. Don’t try to compare how busy your life is to someone else’s. You just simply don’t know. So let the issue drop. After all Woogley has done for the contest, you need to show more respect.
the only people spinning words is you.
did I plan on a judging board? yes. did I guarantee it? no
in fact, you’ve never been given control of how the results were decided, yet a public vote would give you some control… yet you speak against it.
it changes no rules. it does not change the way you would’ve made your game. it gives you better odds. that’s why it’s being done this way.
you sir, are annoying. people like you blow things entirely out of proportion. I don’t “spin words” into anything, I’m trying to give the community a better result this year, because last year certainly wasn’t the cleanest.
I’m doing all of this in the VERY little spare time I have left, and I don’t appreciate people who shoot things down entirely just because it wasn’t going to happen the way they thought it would. AND you have to be an asshole, too? you can state your opinion, but do not accuse me of lying. my decision is not negatively affecting fairness in any way.
edit: topic locked. thank you for spoiling an otherwise enjoyable thread. PM me if you have further input, do not create a new topic.