|
Been a crazy week, ending in a great weekend of
Icehouse games at NonCon.
I'll get feedback to all game designers in the next
week or so, but I do want to respond briefly to Jorge.
Discussion of what to do going forward to
legitimate. However, changing the rules mid-game (or in this case after
the game is over!) is not. This IGDC was run using the CRP method,
resulting in rankings of first through eighth. If that's not how we want
to proceed in future, fine, but let's leave this finished contest
alone.
More coherent thoughts at a late date - 35 games
played (including 3 tournaments) and one tournament run over the past 72
hours, means I haven't slept much . . .
a
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:53
PM
Subject: Re: [Icehouse] Publishing only a
winner and a runner up
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 7:01 PM, David Artman < david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry
so long to reply....
> say we officially get only a winner and a runner up
from those
ballots,
> unless in a future competition, we really get
many more voters.
This suggestion is merely a weak
obfuscation--it's trivially easy to
check the ranks and glean the same
information you'd "hide" by modifying
the InfoBox.
To say we've used the voter data to get just a winner and two runner
ups is not to hide data. It's just using the data in a way that is more
useful, given that there are too few voters.
> I wouldn't be proud of a 4th place that I know
could have easily been
a 7th
> or a 2nd. There's too much power
placed on any single voter with the
number
> voters we got this
time.
Then the answer is to acquire more voters.
That's a good answer for next contest. What about this
one?
> In a competition, people will assume the rankings
go from best game to
> worst, and that is clearly not the case in this
competition.
Wow. I'd smile when I say that (though I'd never
say that). You presume
much, if you'd (a) cast dispersions upon the
rankings made by our judges
or (b) ask a winner to step off the podium
position which he has earned.
I only say that one voter has too much power to change the final
ratings (from first to last). I'm not asking the winner to step off. Never
said that. In fact, if one thing is totally clear from the votings is that M12
is the winner and MG is the looser. As it has been stated before (not by me)
the rest was very close. I just say we cannot make a reliable order from first
to last because a small difference in one or two votes would change it
dramatically. (as proven).
> there. In the contest page you can put all the
info, but then explain
how
> the results are not
reliable.
It doesn't strike me as effective promotion of the
IGDC or encouragement
for judging, to have a statement that the rank
tallying method is not
reliable. It's also generally not true. The CRP
method is reliable if we
have enough votes. Ergo, gaining votes--not
tearing down the comp--is
the correct angle of attack.
To say we need more voters to get reliable results is not tearing
down the competition. We just admit we didn't get enough data to be able to
reliably rank the games from first to last.
> My perception is that as long as we get few
voters in the contest, the
> results will be mostly random. I'm not
going to throw my designs into
a
> lottery draw to see if I'm lucky
enough to get a nice rating. Sorry.
If
It's not mandatory.
No one is required to participate. Stop doing so, if
it brings you
pain.
Not exaclt pain, but disappointment. yes.
I
think you've kinda lost sight of the point of the comp: to
get
playtesters, refine rules and presentation, and make more good
games
which "fill out" IHG.org. "Winning" is incidental, as is "losing."
In
fact, if you really thought about it, you'd see that a lower-ranked
game
is going to draw more feedback and refinement than a
higher-ranked
(presumably "finished") game. Rejoice!
Ok, I'll tell how happyI'm with results once we've got all the
feedback in. It's too soon to judge the results as not many people have given
feedback yet. Right now, all I know is we've got a ranking from 1st to 8th
that is not totally reliable. I'm not happy about that. It's not that I'm not
happy about winning, but I don't think VF deserves a 7th place (that's
ofcourse my subjective opinion).
> we're going to continue getting an unjustified
hall of fame/shame each
> contest, count me out. There are other ways
to promote and get people
to
> play your games, and I'd rather find
those other ways. Even just
uploading
> the games to the wiki seems
a better idea right now...
I repeat what I posted in the other
thread: look at how many IGDC games
are refined, versus how many "tossed
up" games are half-baked, confused,
or not even really started (I am
guilty of having all three of those
levels of incompletion at this very
moment).
Again, leave if you want to do so; but don't expect those of
us enjoying
IGDC participation to pack up when you've gone.
Each person will do whatever they want. Don't assume I'm expecting
people to leave, or that I'm leaving the icehouse community. For now I'll just
think of other ways to get feedback for games. Look at the piecepack
competition I just started ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/294818
). It's about writting reviews. If that works out fine, then maybe we could do
something similar for the icehouse system.
-----
As
for the IGDC InfoBox: make your own "Top Three" box, or remove
the
existing one from your game's page. Do not presume to change
the
existing one--a thing of tradition which I, for one am glad to
display
on my 6th- and 4th-place games. Why would I be happy about such
a
"disparagement" as 6th? Well, that box shows that I hung it out
there
and tried, when scores of others sat and watched. I don't want to
be
listed as some kind of "also ran," hiding the fact that I happened
to
get 4th or 6th for any one of a bajillion reasons (number of
ballots,
common preferences of the types of gamers drawn to Icehouse,
game type,
difficulty to master, whatever).
If you change the
{{IGDCsssYYYY}} templates, I'll change them back; so
just drop that
crusade, please, for both of our sakes. You just can't
tell others what
to display on their pages....
Wow!!!!! what a divisive attitude. I'm trying to get the community to
agree on something and look at you with your "I'll do what I want and change
them back" attitude. You must really hate this thing called
democracy...
If the community decides to change the infobox, it will be
changed. If you want to display a different infobox on your game no one will
force you not to, but then it's you that are going against the wishes of the
community.
-Jorge
Thanks;
_______________________________________________
Icehouse mailing
list
Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse
|