Looney Labs Icehouse Mailing list Archive

Re: [Icehouse] Ice Game Design Competition 2007

  • From"Carlton Noles" <carlton.noles@xxxxxxxxx>
  • DateMon, 16 Apr 2007 10:13:45 -0400
hmmm....I had thought about taking over in the past but held back largely due to the fact that I had intended to enter. I too am in agreement with much of what I read here. The prizes I could take or leave. I would love to win a crystal case set, but I would be very happy to be able to attach the tag "award winning" to my game and "award winning game designer" to my name.

I would like to point out a few things about the past competition to consider. Entry in it was restricted to only unpublished games. Publication on Slick, or the Wiki would not disqualify a game but commercial publication would (as in a commercial release of the game or perhaps publishing in a magazine like 'Games'. Previously entered games would not qualify unless significantly changed. So you can't just keep entering the same game hoping  for weaker competition. The ballot was open to all who entered which I still think is a good idea. If there are so many entries we need to pare it down then some form of primary system is called for. If a committee is choosing who or what gets on the ballot then we are right back to the issues recently discussed about the wiki. I think somewhere in the neighborhood of ten or so should be fine for the ballot (perhaps more considering the lower frequency of the competitions). The last major point I recall was for voting the previous competition used a ranking system for voting. and the ultimate decision wasn't on just wh got the most first place votes. I will see if I can dig up some emails on the previous voting system as I recall there was some discussion about it. No t that it must still be used but I think it is worth considering.

Carlton "Kermit" Noles
"Joy Multiplies when it is shared among friends but grief diminishes at every division. That is life"
-Drizzt Do'Urden
Want your own GMail Account?
Ask Me for an invite.

On 4/16/07, James Hazelton <jameshazelton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm glad that someone is able to take up this responsibility. I think it is important to have an individual by name who can head up a project and be accountable. That said, I also think it would be a good idea to have a small cabal of associates who also have access to voting records, to head off termination and even delay. Were such a cabal to be formed, I hope my name is considered.

Brian, you make a lot of good points; while I disagree on some points, it looks like we are on the same page for most things.

1. Things from the old competition should be cleared up, but if we are going to have two formats this time around (see below), it would be overkill to redo the last competition as well. Certainly it is only fair to allow the games to compete. You might go so far as to guaranteeing a spot on the ballot for those games (this is assuming that there would be a primary to see which games get to compete--after this long, there may be too many games for everyone to get on the ballot).

2. While I agree that the Wiki is an invaluable tool for the community and it would convenient to use it for the competition, I think it is important to make sure that game submission and voting can both be done without membership to the Wiki. I am assuming that we will get mentions on Looneylabs.com and Wunderland.com, so no doubt there will be a good number of potential voters who want to participate, but not enough to sign up for something. There should be an email option as well for anything that requires membership to the Wiki.
3. Once or twice a year is, in my opinion, more preferable than quarterly. I don't think every game made in the time frame should even be allowed on the ballot, necessarily. The Icehouse Null Game was in the first competition--how? Fewer competitions a year will increase the average quality of the games.

4. I strongly disagree with adding prize support to the competition. The traditional "prize" of having your game recognized on likely printed is good enough. A Crystal Caste set would be enough motivation to get someone to cheat, and even a set of ZPIPs or a fancy piecenik set add something to the game that I'm not sure is proper. If it were a Looney-supported prize--say, off-coloured pyramids or some cash--I may feel different, because then it could be more in the line of reimbursement for printing rights.

5. I very much like the idea of a dual-format. This is in line with what I was suggesting earlier about having a Treehouse-centric ballot and a separate open ballot. This time the themed format would be Treehouse, and next time it could be Volcano caps, or tarot cards, or whatever. For all the reasons you mentioned, especially fostering creativity in games, I think it is a fantastic idea.


Icehouse mailing list