[quote]3 tech judges and 3 gamer judges would be a sweet balance
[/quote]
Replace the 3:s with 10:s and it would be even sweeter! 
But I guess that’s impossible.
Now, I would like to see public voting as well, and I still believe it can be done, and done well, if you do it the way I proposed, hehe. Anyway, giving the judges nothing but a 1-10 scale to work with would be the same as having public voting the way I proposed, but with less voters - I can’t see how that improves the voting. No, you’d have to give them different things to rate, but surely the scales and criterion have to be improved compared to last year.
Judges are fine, but give them either a large scale or several scales - 1 to 10 for 30 games would force the judges to put several numbers on each scale, maybe leading to two games having 10 from all judges, thus making it a draw. That won’t do 
The more judges, the more unlikely this is. The bigger the scales, and the more criterion used, the more unlikely this is. Judges - sure, but make sure it’s better coordinated than last year 
Just jumped into this thread, perhaps somebody already proposed this:
Have the best of both worlds. Keep the judges, give them guidelines, try to get as objective a judgement as possible, for example, use principles from hci, like heuristic evaluation. In addition, offer a public vote, so people can rate their favorites and play votebot games if they like. With 50+ entries this year, I see no problem with having a “favorite of the audience” in addition to the official winners. This would also invalidate the argument that changing the evaluation method late in the contest is a bad move.
Cheers
Wolfgang
–
“I’m a f****** starship, I’m allowed to cheat!”
GCU Arbitrary, Culture Craft
Great idea!
Replace the 3:s with 10:s and it would be even sweeter! But I guess that’s impossible.
[/quote]
Yep!
I just had a look at last years votes and because there were so few judges, some games got heavily penalized because one judge killed it.
Neb 4K for example (one of my favs) got 9 from one judge and 21 and 14 from other. Quite a gap! Bubble Racer got 8 to 18 points, Trek 9 to 20 and Blast got 5 from Adam 14 from Scott and 20 from Chris :o Average score from Scott and Chris is then 17 which would have given Blast a … 2nd place! Instead it ended up with average 13.5 and place 19…
Judges can be good if there only are enough of them.
hence why I’ve been pushing for a (simple) public vote
Is it really necessary that the judges aren’t competing? It could be a rule that they aren’t allowed to rate their own game (which they shouldn’t). If so I would gladly be one as well, I intend to try out every game anyway and I am a really fair guy!
[quote=“DonaldEKnuth,post:107,topic:26013”]
It’s a conflict of interest. Anyone entering the competiton is automatically going to want their entry to win. Whether they do it conciously or not, they may find themselves rating other games based a perception of how they rate in comparison to their own “Uber cool, super l33t!” title. Therefore, to maintain objectivity it has generally been required that the judge either:
A) Not have an entry
B) Remove his entry from judging
I believe the precident for B was set when Mlk offered to withdraw his entry so that he could judge. On the other hand, it was already known that his Stag Party 4K wasn’t going to take top position. (He had some trouble with his 3D rotations, and really released it as one of those “Isn’t this cool to play when you’re drunk?” type of things. :)) I’m not sure what the community would think about withdrawing a more likely contender.
I don’t think that I am very likely to win, but I would like to know what the judges think. So I guess I can’t join in and judge. There seem to be a shortage of judges though.
If you can only vote by i.e. choosing the best three entries, you can’t vote other entries down. Then, if you exlude your own entry from that list, I think it’s only ok for competitors to judge, because they then give points to other entries -> so they more or less vote their own entries down.
I’d be willing to act as a judge if there’s a shortage.
Yes, that means miners4k can’t win, but I’m not in it for the competition. =)
Yes to both. All the stuff about heuristics - pretty much what we said last time (I know I did, at least :P). Public vote in parallel - simple first-past-the-post, see-how-it-goes. Why not?
Yeah :(. Our game is too popular!
which game is yours?
[quote=“woogley,post:114,topic:26013”]
I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say “Survivor”. No, I didn’t see Blah’s sig. I have no idea what you’re talking about. STOP LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT!
Na, the game of the company he works for he means i think. Its an ARG and its outrageously popular.
Kev
Like they do in the Eurovision?
That works sooooo well
If there is a public vote it would be nice if the visitors could give grades on different aspects of the game (graphics etc) and also be able to provide a one sentence motivation for giving each grade. Those comments and grades would be really nice to have for the game authors.