Messages

Ahh...Christmas. A time to paint little Santa hats on our forum pics.

You're absolutely right!

You can burn things...

Spoiler

Talk to Jarukhai in the warshop and he'll tell you about the HRDL. Outside there's a flyer on the wall about the same organization. Take the flyer (after talking to Jarukhai) to the basement and burn it.

[close]

Actually, wasn't the Shivah based on

Spoiler

the word "God" instead

[close]

?

Nope, it was the fact that Jewish people Rabbi

Spoiler

always say things as questions.

[close]

Press all buttons in sequence. Look carefully at the name.
Swap two buttons and look at who answers next. This should help you to figure out what 'number' to dial.

Great one! Once again! Much better font! Well done on the puzzles!
Also well done to the rest of the team! Only one thing to nag about!
Don't let the text go so fast! Maybe let the reader go at his own pace!
That was actually a question!

I had the most trouble with the girl in the park. I looked all over the game, trying to get the logic.

Spoiler

Maybe next time make it impossible to leave the location to get more focus on the puzzle! Or let the DJ tell you you don't have to leave the location!

[close]

That were also questions!

By the way... (maybe by design)..

Spoiler

When the witness is apathetic, he says he's cheered up!

[close]

Cheers!

It reminded me of the Shivah!

Spoiler

It had the same technique.. but with another punctuation mark... ?!

[close]

What can I say?

!

Thanks for the notification. Getting them now...

You must separate yourself from the rest....

Spoiler

Just lock the basement door with the key, then use the spell on Succubus.

[close]

Downloading from the mirrorsite is much faster and without any troubles...

Just saying, cause you come across as a tad demanding right now.  

That has never been my intention.

I know the system as it is works but that doesn't mean you have to agree with everything. Maybe I understand more than anyone else what it is to play hundreds of games. And I respect the fact that people like to stay anonymous. But since the rating isn't explained anywhere (other than in discussions like these) I just wondered why the game got the rating it did with the comments that didn't match and seen the reactions, I wasn't alone.

I know too well that things won't change. That's not my intention nor my perception. Respect to the panel (whoever they are)...

But that's just the point. If your work is being criticized through a checklist that everyone can see and follow, I don't mind if it's done anonymously. If it's a matter of interpretation and personal taste, I'd like to know who's interpretation or taste it was.

Bottom line: it should be open and clear. That prevents discussions like these which surfaces from time to time.

What's also guaranteed is when he/she's working on some important documents to pull the power cord from his monitor saying it's from his computer.

Seriously though, the panel cycles, and you never know - you may be on it one day. And then you'll come to realise why it's best to just be anonymous about it.

I fail to see the point. I'm not on the panel but can't really see what the problem could be. What's to hide or protect?

I do understand that it's an honour to even be on the AGS games page and to have its accompanying audience.

You, as game maker add your own game to the db, so what's the honor? Even I, if I'd make something crappy (which would be very much the case regarding my abilities) I can add it and am being rated.

But you're right Mods, being on the panel is a scary thought if you're the one coming under fire. It's a good thing that you discussed the rating with other panel members though. I think that's the kind of reassurance we were looking for. We just weren't sure if that was the case with McCarthy.

I don't agree. Why would it be a problem to come under fire? Scared of doing your job right? If the rules are clear (as you mention) and the game is discussed within the panel, you have nothing to worry about.

Since I don't know how many people are in the panel, why not let more people from the panel play (minimum of 3?) and take the average as a score? With every 'judged' event, you always see individual scores that makes up your end total. And I fail to see the reason why it should be anonymous? Afraid to make the wrong decisions? If I give my opinion about a game, my name should be there. It's my opinion.

If there's a rating by a group, you shouldn't have to put a name under it but I'd still like to know who that group is. And what it was that made them decide the way they did.  Why for instance not show the initials of the person from the panel who rated it, if it's only one person.

I understand that not everyone can play the game, that it's voluntary and takes time. I also see the purpose of the rating and it being done by a 'fixed group of people'. But I fail to see why it all has to be done anonymously.

Why should it be anonymous? If you're rated by a group, maybe. In this case you're rated by an individual... who's hiding in a group (that's how I see it). So why not mention your name? Afraid people disagree?

@abstauber:

Your friends would certainly miss out on the McCarthy Chronicles, amongst other great games.

Like I said, the individuals in the panel are right most of the time. But if they're not, who to address? Why the anonimity, the secrecy around it? It feels to me like an elite group (although they don't see themselves as such). Why not discuss the games more openly and then decide the number of cups.

If you only want to play the 'good' games, wait for the awards. Then you'll know what was liked by the public and play those.

I thought it had more to do with organization, although it can be adventurous... 

Rating discussion continued in this thread.

Just opened a thread here....     :-
 

To prevent other topics becoming 'off-topic' I separated this from the other thread into this one to continue the discussion here.

I didn't expect to see a 2 cup rating. 
After seeing this I actually looked at all the screenshots of every 2 cup games, and out of the few 2 cup games I actually played, I think there were only 2 games I didn't expect to see in there.  This game, and another one.

And to reply to Leon's suggestion.  I have to disagree.  I believe the ratings panel does an exceptional job doing what they do.  I may not agree with this particular rating, but the majority of the ratings, I do agree with.
One reason why I prefer the rating panel over the 'public' rating, is mostly because it's consistent and reliable.  I also like reading the rating panel reviews as well.
I think the rating system should remain as is, with the rating panel deciding the big rating.  You can always appeal if you don't believe your game deserves the rating--perhaps it'll change, or it may actually remain.  No harm in trying.

I know that this has raised questions before and there's a valid point in all opinions. I agree with Ryan that the current rating would result in the most consistent rating if you can see a person, not a group, but the problem is that you don't know who rated your game. It's a panel but different members, different opinions. Is there a list somewhere where you can see who's on board? Why not display who rated your game instead of "a panel". Looks like they want to be protected from their opinion.

My problem with the current system is that it looks like an elite group that judges your game. You can't see who, your game is just being judged. You can't discuss the rating or comment on it. The comments on the games page are for the game, not the judgment.

No big mystery, really.

Some games, short ones in particular, might get rated faster simply because a panel member can play and rate them fairly quickly. Or, since we also play these games for fun, a panel member might choose something that especially appeals to them, even though other unrated games may have been in the database for a longer period of time.

To be frank, if we happen to be playing a full-length game that's proving to be a bit of a slog, it may take us longer to get around to forming a complete and fair opinion of that game.

Regardless, we have a finite amount of free time to devote to rating these games, but we try to maintain a fair balance.

When a game is rated, its correct categories, as determined by the panel member, will be set if needed.

Plus, you always have the user ratings to keep you going.

But we're always happy to hear people's opinions about the database, and we're always open to new ideas.

That all sounds very informal to me. It's just whoever feels like it and whenever he feels like it. When using a rating system like this every game should be judged, no matter how long the game is or if it's attractive or not. And it should be judged as soon as possible after release.