Suggestion to AGS games page

[Makeout Patrol]

You know, I agree that I would like some more sorting options in the Games DB, but I disagree with just about everything else that's been suggested. I think sorting by blue cups rather than user ratings is a good idea for all the reasons described, although if we came up with a formula in which user ratings were transformed into a score which was balanced by the number of votes and how many of those votes were by people who had completed the game I would be more open to it. Discriminating between high- and low-resolution games is a bad idea because there are fantastic and terrible examples of both and because if we only rewarded high-resolution games we just wouldn't have any games to reward. Additionally, I like the function of the pick of the month as a nod to good games that might have been missed.

The improvement that I would like to see is the ability to order my search results according to differing criteria - right now results are always returned in alphabetical order, and I would like to be able to return them in order of things like release date, blue cup rating, maybe the principal author's name.

[LimpingFish]

User votes and comments allow a broad range of opinions to be expressed about the quality of a certain game. In this way, they can be a helpful resource. As a way to "officially" rate games or as a method of cataloging the database in any meaningful way, they are almost useless. The same goes for basing a games popularity on the number of times it has been downloaded; a function which has also been grossly abused in the past.

As for "Pick of the Month" games, these are games that SSH either particularly likes or those that he feels deserve a greater level of exposure. As far as I know, he doesn't base them on any predetermined criteria; resolution certainly wouldn't be an issue.

I agree that a few extra sorting criteria for the database wouldn't hurt. 

[TwinMoon]

I honestly don't know if I ever played a 800x600 resolution game, since I don't care about that.
But since the game's resolution is already recorded in the database, why not allow people to search for a specific resolution?

Also, I think it's good that the pick of the month it just one person's choice, and SSH seems more than qualified, having the #1 AGS blog.
Yes, you could make a shortlist and let people vote on them, but who'll compile that shortlist?

[auriond]

Look at it this way: a "pick of the month" is usually done by an editor or a panel of editors. SSH just happens to be our editor-in-charge of this section of the site. His only criteria is to pick what he thinks are good games that may have been overlooked by players. So your favourite 800x600 games didn't get in there - that's probably because they don't already need the extra exposure. There's no need to have a separate section based on resolution - might as well have a separate section for games with voiceovers and game with no voiceovers, too, because everybody prefers games with voiceovers, yes?

I agree that SSH is as good a person as any to pick the game of the month. He is dedicated to the community (as you'll see if you follow his blog) and he tries to remain as impartial as one person can be. His observations about games tend to be spot on. I'm not in favour of votes or anything of the kind as they're far too easily rigged.

[Ryan Timothy B]

I don't like the general public voting on games because a large hand full of the votes, are no doubt, done by people who vote 10 if they loved the game or 1 if it wasn't the best game.  I've scrolled down the new ratings list several times and haven't disagreed with a single vote yet.  But when it came to the old 'user' ratings, it was chaos and sporadic.

In respect to the pick of the month: SSH, keep up the good work buddy.


As for Stan feeling there is bias towards 800x600 games being omitted from the pick of the month, Only because the community finds lower resolution more appealing, he's wrong.  Stan, have you even looked at the pick of the month page?  Each game in there is simply there because it's Good.

[Smumm]

Wow SSH, nice page, I didn't know about that. This really answers to my prayers!

I understand the worry about the public rating being vulnerable to corruption, but the few scumbags that are gonna cheat will do it nevertheless if or if it's not possible to sort by the rating and only thing that can be done is to hinder them with technical limitations (ie. limiting one vote per IP, one vote per user account.) The less people there are voting, the more influence the cheaters have. Even if the sorting would have an effect to cheating, I think it's a self-repairing process. More people will notice the game at the top with high ratings, try it out and will disappoint in the game's low quality and in great disappointment probably give even lower ratings then they would have given otherwise.

But it's not like the AGS panel rating is free from being biased to one way either. We can trust that that they try to do their best, but sometimes their own personal preference differs too much from an average opinion. In the end it's a good thing to have both public and critics rating.

The "best" games are supposed to be reflected in the AGS Awards. The Pick of the Month is supposed to be to bring attention to good games that many people might have missed. Therefore you shouldn't expect every good AGS game to get a Pick of the Month, because they should be rewarded by the AGS Awards instead.

This is a good point that I didn't take in account. In that purpose it really serves well. Speaking of AGS Awards, seems like this AGS Awards page is not updated anymore, is there a replacement for this?

[auriond]

More people will notice the game at the top with high ratings, try it out and will disappoint in the game's low quality and in great disappointment probably give even lower ratings then they would have given otherwise.

This is just my experience, so don't take it as the gospel truth, but I've found that if people don't find a game noteworthy, they simply don't vote. Only if the game is really terrible, will they take the trouble to give it low ratings, and most of the time the games aren't really that terrible. Hence Chris's point about games with few votes.

Again, the discussion about the AGS panel being biased has already been done. The conclusion was that we'd rather have the possibility of a biased panel than a messy voting system.

That said, if something like SSH's page could be done for the games database, that'd be great.

[Makeout Patrol]

More people will notice the game at the top with high ratings, try it out and will disappoint in the game's low quality and in great disappointment probably give even lower ratings then they would have given otherwise.

This is just my experience, so don't take it as the gospel truth, but I've found that if people don't find a game noteworthy, they simply don't vote. Only if the game is really terrible, will they take the trouble to give it low ratings, and most of the time the games aren't really that terrible. Hence Chris's point about games with few votes.

I can back this up. Because I want other people to leave critical but constructive reviews of my work, I make sure that I leave a review on every game that I finish (aside from a couple of games that I've skipped over because they already had a mile-long list of comments). The flaw with this is that if I don't particularly care for a game, I don't tend to finish it, and therefore don't feel qualified to vote on it.

[Andail]

Smumm; you're simply wrong.

I understand the worry about the public rating being vulnerable to corruption, but the few scumbags that are gonna cheat will do it nevertheless

They can't cheat the cups rating, since it's done by a panel. Game authors cheat through user rating and over-downloading.

only thing that can be done is to hinder them with technical limitations (ie. limiting one vote per IP, one vote per user account.)

Such limitations are already in effect, but cheaters go to great lengths to circumvent them.

But it's not like the AGS panel rating is free from being biased to one way either. We can trust that that they try to do their best, but sometimes their own personal preference differs too much from an average opinion.

The rating panel works transparently and their decisions can be discussed, appealed and reversed. Their job is monitored by moderators.
There can never be perfect neutrality or objectivity, but we have reached a functional compromise.

In the end it's a good thing to have both public and critics rating.

We do have both. We've just chosen not to sort the games by public rating. Which is a good thing for a number of reasons listed already in this thread.

[Bai Karl]

You think more about the website and its navigation. Think about what will happend with this website if after years the game authors are the same as now and produce the same low res games.

I still think that we need to stimulate more the modern tehniques. Now we say - "There are not good enough hi res games". And thats all. But if this website have a future, it is in the more modern games.

But it's only my opinion.

[cat]

I just don't get it Stan. What exactly is your problem? That there are only a few hi-res games? Obviously people here do not care about the resolution but if a game is good and fun/interesting to play. And this doesn't has anything to do with pick of the month (which I think does a very good job in promoting less noticed games) but with the preferences of people making the games.
You want more hi-res games? Great, so make some, and stop complaining.

[Smumm]

This is just my experience, so don't take it as the gospel truth, but I've found that if people don't find a game noteworthy, they simply don't vote. Only if the game is really terrible, will they take the trouble to give it low ratings, and most of the time the games aren't really that terrible. Hence Chris's point about games with few votes.

I can back this up. Because I want other people to leave critical but constructive reviews of my work, I make sure that I leave a review on every game that I finish (aside from a couple of games that I've skipped over because they already had a mile-long list of comments). The flaw with this is that if I don't particularly care for a game, I don't tend to finish it, and therefore don't feel qualified to vote on it.

Admitted, I'm bit of a idealist here in believing that cheated votes would be ran down by masses of honest ones. At least my own sense of justice screams when the rating is too high for a game I dislike.

Smumm; you're simply wrong.

(Blah blah..)

Andail, what you said was in no way disagreement in what I said, seems like you are also wrong or you didn't understand my message. If you want I can clear up my points, otherwise I'd rather not quibble over semantics. Only part that really differed was my opinion that ,"people are going to cheat without caring if it's possible to sort the games by their rating or not".

Since the matter is quite insignificant (and since SSH is providing external interface to DB), I'm not going to go in any greater details, I'll take the author's word if he has seen current way the best.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

You think more about the website and its navigation. Think about what will happend with this website if after years the game authors are the same as now and produce the same low res games.

I still think that we need to stimulate more the modern tehniques. Now we say - "There are not good enough hi res games". And thats all. But if this website have a future, it is in the more modern games.

Stan, I can now say with assurance that you're just in the wrong place.  AGS isn't about trying to keep up with modern gaming trends, and quite frankly, the engine can't compete on the visual level of games you seem to be championing.  AGS has always been about keeping the classics alive in the minds of fans by allowing us to make fan games, remakes, or new games influenced by our nostalgia. 

That doesn't mean there aren't fancy games like Diamonds in the Rough, but overall AGSers are more interested in classic gaming and traditional adventure games.  Your persistence with this hi-res argument is therefore pointless and more than a little condescending. 

Don't come to a community and tell them they have to adapt to your standards or else.

limiting one vote per IP, one vote per user account.

This is actually how it is set up now, but people have (and continue) to find ways around it, tarnishing the credibility of player votes. 

[SSH]

This is a good point that I didn't take in account. In that purpose it really serves well. Speaking of AGS Awards, seems like this AGS Awards page is not updated anymore, is there a replacement for this?

Try The AGS Awards Wiki page

[Ubel]

I still think that we need to stimulate more the modern tehniques. Now we say - "There are not good enough hi res games". And thats all. But if this website have a future, it is in the more modern games.

Who the heck do you mean by "we"? We're not all just one big lump that collaborate with each other. We're all individuals here and do whatever the hell we please. You should realise that whatever you say will not affect any part of this community in anyway, not after all the silly comments you've posted.

This website is just a place where people share the things they make with each other. It's not a corporation. Nothing, NOTHING, is gonna change if everyone suddenly started making high-resolution games. Just because all these AGS games have been posted in the same place it doesn't mean that they affect each other and the website as a whole.

Think about what will happend with this website if after years the game authors are the same as now and produce the same low res games.

This has always been what AGS is about. Always. Sure, people have started making more commercial quality games that fit today's standards recently, but still the retro spirit is around. It's worked for this place for many many years and it's still working. The website and the community isn't gonna be destroyed if we stop making the kind of games most people here like. That'd be just illogical.

As ProgZmax said, you can't come to a community and expect the people there to change their habits to suit you more just because you want.

[Dualnames]

Ah, how time flies.

http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=24766.msg340965#msg340965

Stan you just got owned..Anyway, as someone very brave once said "It's not the pixels, baby.. it's how you USE them."

[Bai Karl]

Dualnames,

Yes, everybody like old Sierra quest, even me! Few hours ago I post in "Best adventure game of all times"! Check my favorite games there! But these games are in the past!

[Ubel]

Yes, everybody like old Sierra quest, even me! Few hours ago I post in "Best adventure game of all times"! Check my favorite games there! But these games are in the past!

Yes, unfortunately they are. And that is exactly why things like AGS exist. I think I speak for most of the people around here when I say we liked the past and we want to bring back if only the nostalgic retro feeling of those games. This is why your arguments about making this all modern are a bit useless.

[Bai Karl]

Ok. So there is no place for a progress here on AGS website? So here is like an old pub with old men who are talking about the old times?

[Ubel]

What you're talking about has nothing to do with the website. You're talking about the games, and you can't affect on how people want to make their games. Some people like progress, some don't. Whatever it is, it doesn't have an impact on the website! Things will be the same around here whether or not people make hi-res games. As I said, this is just a place to share work.