AGS Games page update

[SinSin]

Well done for finishing off this huge task Peeps

[LimpingFish]

According to the database, there's only 26 games with no functional download. (edit) Wait, I can't count. Make that 152 (26 of which have a rating of 2+)

The broken links are a problem, and one the panel is looking into. In fact, a number of links for games that were rated almost a year ago, have since expired (usually those hosted on sites with 30/60/90 day inactivity clauses).

Finding missing games, outside of the the developers themselves repairing their links, will take time. As for Bicycles-for-Slugs becoming the main repository of working AGS downloads, this is still the plan.

Like other panel members have said in the past, having a fully functioning and up to date database is, and will be continue to be, an ongoing job.

And thanks for the feedback, everybody.

[Ishmael]

Great work, people. Nice to see the community in action again

adding a game without the author's knowledge would be a different issue.

I never said that. The author still has influence on it. The author will be send the password to update their page.

But it would still be adding the game to the database without thier agreement to it. And I think adding every game that pops up here and there to the DB would be both silly and painful. It works just fine as it is.

[Pumaman]

I'm curious, is the rating of Diamonds in the Rough based on the demo or the full game? I'm only asking because if it's the former, I will be happy to give you guys the full game for your review.

This does raise an interesting question about whether the panel should be rating commercial games or not.

What do people think about this? Should the panel rate commerical games, and if so should they be rated against the free games or on a different scale, comparing them with other commercial titles? Or should the panel simply not rate commercial games?

Can I search games by date?

Well, you can get a date-ordered list here:
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/games.php?action=digest&sortby=2&sortdir=1&startfrom=0
if that helps.

[Leon]

And I think adding every game that pops up here and there to the DB would be both silly and painful. It works just fine as it is.

I don't see the point. What's silly about administering games? What's so painfull about it? I think that a complete overview of games is an addition to the site. Just a bit more moderation and a bit less freedom to the author that's all. That keeps your database clear, up-to-date and userfriendly. But appearantly I'm alone in this so I'll leave it and keep my own administration.

[AGA]

I'm curious, is the rating of Diamonds in the Rough based on the demo or the full game? I'm only asking because if it's the former, I will be happy to give you guys the full game for your review.

This does raise an interesting question about whether the panel should be rating commercial games or not.

What do people think about this? Should the panel rate commerical games, and if so should they be rated against the free games or on a different scale, comparing them with other commercial titles? Or should the panel simply not rate commercial games?

Link to the relevant Adventure Gamers review

[GarageGothic]

I would say that if a game is listed anywhere else than in the demo section (where the review is obviously of the demo), the rating should definitely be for the full game. I surely expected the scores for the Blackwell games to represent the games and not just the demos since they were listed under medium length.

I don't think commercial AGS games need to be compared directly to mainstream commercial titles, but the price must be taken into consideration. I review a lot of indie games, and it's really not that difficult to evaluate the quality/price ratio. At least to me it comes quite natural to think stuff like "This is a great game, but I would never pay 30 bucks for it. At $15 it would have gotten a full score."

[Radiant]

What do people think about this? Should the panel rate commerical games, and if so should they be rated against the free games or on a different scale, comparing them with other commercial titles? Or should the panel simply not rate commercial games?

In my opinion, I see no compelling reason why the panel would avoid rating commercial games, so by all means rate them. And we've had, what, four commercial games throughout the history of AGS? So I don't see why they should be an exception.

As for on what kind of scale - I'm in favor of using one and the same scale for everything, since that is the only way to have a clear outcome. However, this depends on what the panel has been doing for other sub-selections. If, say, MAGS games have been rated on a different scale than, say, Full-length games, then commercial games also deserve a different scale (because people would have higher expectations of them).

[GarageGothic]

And we've had, what, four commercial games throughout the history of AGS?

Quite a bit more than that, actually:
Adventures of Fatman
Force Majeure 2: The Zone
Hauntings of Mystery Manor
Yahtzee special editions (5 games)
The Shivah
Al Emmo and the Lost Dutchman Mine
Intrigue at Oakhaven Plantation
Blackwell Legacy
Super Jazzman
Banana Man
Blackwell Unbound
Diamonds in the Rough

That makes 16. Did I forget any? I think they're more or less listed in order of release. And there's both Resonance and Blackwell Convergence coming up (what's next, Blackwell Synergy?). I think the amount of commercial AGS games is quite considerable. And that's also why there's an "exclude commercial games" checkbox in the games database. So, seeing as a user can choose not to see commercial games listed, it means that they should be treated like any other game in the list for those who choose to include them. But it would be good if the developer could link to any external reviews in the game desciption (or to press clippings on own website), since it's difficult to decide to buy a game based just on a cup-rating.

[alkis21]

In my opinion, I see no compelling reason why the panel would avoid rating commercial games, so by all means rate them.

I agree.

Link to the relevant Adventure Gamers review

I don't understand, are you saying that the rating of DITR is simply a copy/past of the Adventure Gamers grade? If so, what made them choose that particular review and not one of the other 14 that are currently online?

Note that I'm not complaining about the grade or anything, just trying to figure out whether the game was actually played by the people who rated it, or whether they only played the demo, or simply accepted the AG review.

[LimpingFish]

Personally, I'm against rating commercial for a number of reasons that I've already discussed with the rest of the panel. I'm of the opinion that mixing commercial and free ratings, based on the same list of rating criteria, simply won't work.

For instance, rating Blackwell Unbound 4 cups and Trilby's Notes 5 cups. Is Trilby the better game, or does it rate higher because it's free? Would Blackwell be 5 cups if it was also free? Would we have to "punish" an otherwise good game because we don't think it's value for money?

I've been of the opinion that if the entries for commercial games in the database link to demo versions, they should be classed as demos, and should therefore not be rated. Or, as a compromise, label them as Full Length/Commercial games, bypass a rating (and bypass the confusion over whether we rated the full game or the demo), and rely on the developers to link to any reviews themselves.

Note that I'm not complaining about the grade or anything, just trying to figure out whether the game was actually played by the people who rated it, or whether they only played the demo, or simply accepted the AG review.

The full game was rated. One of the panel had access to a copy.

[alkis21]

OK thanks for letting me know.

[m0ds]

2 cents? I still think the commercial games should be rated the same as any other in the database, purely because the ones that make it into the games pages are made with AGS & home-bred from these forums & the site just like all the rest. Freeware developers are being rated & at the end of the day you don't necessarily expect that they are really the ones going out there to be rated.

Yet commercial games are there to be reviewed, hit the press & go under the hammer. Why therefore would we need to exclude commercial games from getting their review simply because they've chosen to go commercial into the big-bad-world of commercial game reviews but all the free games are the focus of opinion from the panel?

The panel, of all raters & reviewers, will probably have the most balanced & honest review of the game in hand anyway....cos we're all from AGS! I think the commercial developers should strive to achieve high cup games as would any freeware developer. It all just seems a bit backwards to me to suggest the games made with AGS you pay for would have no rating. Obviously demos wouldn't be rated but thats the same all around, isn't it? Why should there be a divide in the "all complete AGS games" part? :/

[LimpingFish]

Yes, but when we're reviewing games we're putting ourselves in the shoes of the people who will potentially be downloading and playing them. We're telling them that, in our opinion, such and such a game is worth 3/4/5 cups, and that it's worth playing.

But a person who is going to get that game for free, and a person who has to pay $14.95 for the privilege, will have two very different perspectives.

It's not that the quality of commercial AGS games would be depreciated simply because they are commercial, but it does change how I would approach rating them.

Which is why I think it's a bad idea.

[Ryan Timothy B]

Shouldn't there be a sort by rating option (or have I missed it)?
When you sort by rating it would be nice to have the 5 cups at the top and the 1 cup at the bottom.

[SSH]

Shouldn't there be a sort by rating option (or have I missed it)?
When you sort by rating it would be nice to have the 5 cups at the top and the 1 cup at the bottom.

You mean, like this: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/games.php?action=digest&sortby=3&sortdir=0&startfrom=0

Although I notice that the latest games added AFTER the db update are not listed in the digest when you sort by date added...

[Pumaman]

Although I notice that the latest games added AFTER the db update are not listed in the digest when you sort by date added...

Thanks for spotting that -- it, along with the RSS feed, is now fixed.

Link to the relevant Adventure Gamers review

This is a good point, we've talked before about the Games page linking to reviews of the game on other websites. I guess one option would be to assume that commercial games will get reviewed elsewhere, and simply link to external reviews instead.

[AGA]

I think most, if not all, commercial AGS games, have been reviewed by AG. DitR and most of Dave's stuff have at least.

Edit:

Blackwell Unbound
Blackwell Legacy
The Shivah
Diamonds in the Rough
Al Emmo
Super Jazz Man
The Adventures of Fatman

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I'm pretty much with LimpingFish on this, and we have discussed this matter in some detail at least twice before without a solid resolution.  What we're looking for here is some kind of solidarity on the 'to review or not to review' commercial games on the basis that we will be tougher on them because they are being produced for profit, which creates a different set of expectations than a free game altogether.  It seems that a good number of people are for this, but just be aware that commercial games will be regarded with far more scrutiny by the judges and the ratings may seem low compared to many of the freeware games in the database.

If this is acceptable then we will certainly continue to rate them.

[LimpingFish]

Indeed. If developers are happy to have their commercial games reviewed based on an alternative criteria, as ProgZmax has said, then I guess we should do it.

All lot more would have to be considered, of course, when deciding an overall rating for a commercial game. Whereas a free AGS game might be rewarded with a 3 cup rating purely on the strength of it's gameplay, a commercial game will be judged on all aspects; from presentation to value for money. So in a sense, it will be more difficult for a commercial game to achieve a positive rating.

Developers opinions on this would be much appreciated.