Since i'm kinda responsible for the Gotw poll deciding on implemention on the new feature, i guess i'll be the first to propose some rules for it. The idea is that if one game of the week severely out gains the others, in the case of this week, then 1 or two other games that didn't make it should get a mention or commemoration of their own. While this wasn't my original intent, this is what we got. So, I therefore propose some rules for deciding which games to be given the 2nd, and 3rd place designations.
1. The games must be close running with the gotw. A good example would be between Iffermoon and Rabbit Stew if they had been released on the same week. Say Iffermoon had 20+ votes, and Rabbit Stew had 18+. These would then be the 1st, and 2nd games. 3rd place would be determined by whatever was close to Rabbit Stew.
2. No 2nd, or 3rd place should be given to a game if it isn't even close running to the Gotw. Even though it is close running with the other games. Lets take Rabbit Stew as an example this week. Because there are four games that are close running with one another, but no where near Rabbit Stew, these do not get a designation. Unless one of those happen to pull marginally ahead from the others.
3.Gotw 2nd or 3rd designations should be decided on the download amounts of the games. Lets use two fictional games for this one. Say Rabbit Stew was again first place. Then Duke Nukem 11 and Teh Evil Kitty 2 were tied for second. Even though they would have even votes (5), but because Duke Nukem 11 had 112 more votes then Teh Evil Kitty 2. Duke Nukem 11 would when 2nd and Teh Evil Kitty 2 would win 3rd.
Since this is a kinda touchy subject, i figured it would be good to have stringent rules for this kind of thing. Does anybody else have any ideas on what the rules structure should look like? I just thought i'd be first to post since, well, i kinda started it.
All platforming problems can be mostly solved here:
Frankly, I am very doubtful about this whole project. If we were to rename it "Games of the Week", then that name would no longer apply to all GOTW nominees. Still the only real reason I can think of keeping the current system would be if a person didn't think the title of GOTW should be shared; which, when you think about it, would be kind of justified as it is in fact the Game of the Week. A game is supposed to be an artwork, the fruit of months even years of labour, the product of the purest forms of creativity and logic. Why are we even comparing them to games just cause they were released on the same week? Still, I think it is an honour if even a single person consider my game the highlight of the week, and I know any indie developer needs some form of recognition once in a while, but will the title of GOTW actually have any meaning at all if we it even further?
In any case, I'm afraid I can't condone your suggestion. Why should people be robbed of this so called honour just because they suffered a humiliating defeat? Wouldn't that be like pouring hot tabasco into someone's eye after removing his eyelid with a teaspoon?
Someone rigged this poll, I cannot see how people would want 1,2,3rd places for game of the WEEEEEEEEK. Maybe game of the YEAR. Besides this is just so people don't feel bad about losing, and I think they should. It makes you try harder next time.
You can log off any time you like, but you can't ever leave.
Originally Posted by -Codemonkey- Someone rigged this poll, I cannot see how people would want 1,2,3rd places for game of the WEEEEEEEEK. Maybe game of the YEAR. Besides this is just so people don't feel bad about losing, and I think they should. It makes you try harder next time.
Because sometimes your game is also really good, and deserves an award, but it released the same week as a HUGE anticipated title. That's why I think there should just be 2nd and 3rd (Or maybe just more standard GOTW awards) only in certain cases-- decided by admin's discretion.
Originally Posted by -Codemonkey- Someone rigged this poll, I cannot see how people would want 1,2,3rd places for game of the WEEEEEEEEK. Maybe game of the YEAR. Besides this is just so people don't feel bad about losing, and I think they should. It makes you try harder next time.
Because sometimes your game is also really good, and deserves an award, but it released the same week as a HUGE anticipated title. That's why I think there should just be 2nd and 3rd (Or maybe just more standard GOTW awards) only in certain cases-- decided by admin's discretion.
I don't think it's anything to worry about. If the game is good then it will be recognised. Even if it doesn't win the GOTW, there will always be front page, reviews and the new spotlight function. But if the developer wants his game to be recognised through an award that badly, then he should really first check for killer competition, or try his luck on the annual contests.
But most importantly, people need to realise that no matter how good your game is, there is no guarantee it will win.
Remember when BoneSaw was released it well over shadowed everything released & i seem to remember a few crackers that week too. Maybe in that sort of situation with an admins approval some games should be carried over to next week sort of getting a second chance! This would make GOTW more competitive and stop the odd screwball from winning a dry week!
Originally Posted by Va1entine Remember when BoneSaw was released it well over shadowed everything released & i seem to remember a few crackers that week too. Maybe in that sort of situation with an admins approval some games should be carried over to next week sort of getting a second chance! This would make GOTW more competitive and stop the odd screwball from winning a dry week!
Yes, Admin's discretion. This is what I think as well.
@Nikodemus: I see what your saying. I'm just trying to take some responsibilty if the admins do take on this idea. I didn't want it to be a prize fest for people who don't want to work that hard on their games. I was only going for one or two other mentions. But, if this is what we're gonna have from now on, then i at least took some part in providing guidelines. That way, the other games will be held to the same high standard as the winner. And we don't get a bunch of junk games being put up where they don't belong.
I kinda agree with the other people as well.
All platforming problems can be mostly solved here:
I originally wanted a 2nd and 3rd place, but i'm changing my mind now. Maybe if there is a second placed game that has had many more votes than 3rd and below then the admins should award a 'recognition' award or something, like a silver medal maybe? Something that is seperate from GOTW altogether. It would work like the blue and red stars you started doing, yet you wouldn't have to play them in order to award the 'recognition' medal. (incidently, i think the red/blue star idea is a bit flawed since there are numerous great games not being awarded these stars, especially since the first few games that were awarded them - it's as if the admins have abandoned the idea)
I'd rather see 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th(?) places for a Game of the Month. But as it is, GOTW is an ancient tradition
I actually like all the games this week. Can't say the same for a certain other week.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Hmm there a lot of hefty posts in here and I'm really tired so I didn't read any... So please forgive me if this has already been said.
I voted YES. However, I did not like the idea of "awards" for 2nd & 3rd place. I think that is going too far... maybe. I'd just like to see the winner get their gold trophy and if there was another game which was equally as good(or better...!) then give them an honorable mention. Like have a special page for great GOTW's which lists the good games that didn't get first place... or maybe not. I can't think properly right now but some kind of system like that'd be cool I think.
Advertisement
Post Reply
It makes you try harder next time.
Edited by the Author.
This is what I think as well.
