Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
CONCERNING THE GAME FRONT-PAGE DOWNLOAD UPDATES
Posts
narcodis
View playlists
Closeauthor=LockeZauthor=kentonaThere is an extremely simple method, which is to ask the game developer to pick one or the other each time he uploads a new version. All you need is a checkbox that says "This is a minor edit and should not bump the game" that we can tick.
The problem is the process for both are identical. There is no simple way of determining what kind of update a game download is.
Edit: derp, F-G suggested the same thing I guess. I think it's a good idea. How is it more abusable, Darken? The way we have it right now, every update bumps your game, no matter what. I don't see how giving people a way to choose to not bump their own game is in any way more abusable than always automatically bumping their game...
it leaves room to be abused still, and if it leaves room for it to be abused, it WILL be abused. the idea is to design a system that eliminates this altogether. the idea suggested by you and FG creates more mundane tasks for the staff to keep an eye on, which in turn can also create some possible political/drama bullshit, and still doesn't address the problem that "new" doesn't deserve the only front page real estate. the honor system simply isn't practical.
I dunno I still think the Newgrounds-esque idea is worth modeling ourselves after in a degree. It works fantastically for them and many other sites with the same idea; why not us? If nothing else we can always improve and tweak it to our needs later, but it's definitely something solid and simple to start with.
author=Feldschlacht IV
I dunno I still think the Newgrounds-esque idea is worth modeling ourselves after in a degree. It works fantastically for them and many other sites with the same idea; why not us? If nothing else we can always improve and tweak it to our needs later, but it's definitely something solid and simple to start with.
I agree! What steps does RMN need to take to get to a system that operates in this fashion?
I kinda like what F-G and LockeZ suggested.
But we'd need kentona to tell us if it'd be hard to implement!
Of course for RMN4 a paradigm change would be nicer, but I think the "significant update" check-box is a step in the right direction. Of course it would only be useful if it was implemented to work automatically without adding "mundane tasks" for the mods.
But we'd need kentona to tell us if it'd be hard to implement!
Of course for RMN4 a paradigm change would be nicer, but I think the "significant update" check-box is a step in the right direction. Of course it would only be useful if it was implemented to work automatically without adding "mundane tasks" for the mods.
Darken
3952
Yeah lets have honest people get kicked off the frontpage while abusers stay on the front page even more. Even with the current system people who aren't trying to gain the system are sharing the space with people who are.
author=narcodisauthor=Feldschlacht IVI agree! What steps does RMN need to take to get to a system that operates in this fashion?
I dunno I still think the Newgrounds-esque idea is worth modeling ourselves after in a degree. It works fantastically for them and many other sites with the same idea; why not us? If nothing else we can always improve and tweak it to our needs later, but it's definitely something solid and simple to start with.
Yeah I mean, let's get this started. Not right now, obviously, but I really like this system and I think it's fair to everyone, developers and consumers.
author=Darken
Yeah lets have honest people get kicked off the frontpage while abusers stay on the front page even more. Even with the current system people who aren't trying to gain the system are sharing the space with people who are.
Sorry, guess I just did not think it would actually make it worse, but I trust you more to know our userbase. You have been here longer than me, after all. :/
Darken
3952
Regarding newgrounds, they pretty much give everyone one chance to be on the "new submissions" sidebar. You upload your first download, bam that's it, a new demo or missing sound effect patch does not bump it up again. Fresh games stay on there longer and it's impossible to abuse.
I just want to put one word for the good sometimes excellent games, that are particular or original and thus may not be overpopular, but that it would be a pity to let disappear from view for that reason. Oniromancie has a list of "original games", all excellent or very good that could be an interesting idea for these games.
Illustrious
520
We let the fresh games disappear from view when we tolerate people gaming the front page. It's a disservice to someone wanting their game to be exposed for the first time to just allow a wave of 4 repeat games take them off the front page in a heartbeat. For this reason, no game should reappear except under a strict timer. IMO this should be some months. Yes, bugfixing is a legitimate thing and I do not call that gaming the system. But this should not bump someone who is getting their initial (and maybe only) exposure off the page. This situation makes it as if that game got some kind of penalty because another game had bugs.
On newgrounds (I don't actually browsed the site and only go there when someone links directly to a game in irc, and I've only looked at the frontpage there when you guys talk about it), how does it all work? (or how do you think it works?)
I see many many many "Featured (thing)" sections. THAT would be a lot of work to maintain(!) - we simply don't have the resources/staff/(and arguably content) to do that. ....unless there is some other mechanic that determines featuredness...?
got some Latest Submissions, some Latest News, then a couple of "Staff Blurb" sections, then Movies of the Week, Games of the Week, Today's Best in the footer.
...but I don't know what drives it (the algorithms/metrics/etc..). Some insight from people who say its the best would be appreciated.
I see many many many "Featured (thing)" sections. THAT would be a lot of work to maintain(!) - we simply don't have the resources/staff/(and arguably content) to do that. ....unless there is some other mechanic that determines featuredness...?
got some Latest Submissions, some Latest News, then a couple of "Staff Blurb" sections, then Movies of the Week, Games of the Week, Today's Best in the footer.
...but I don't know what drives it (the algorithms/metrics/etc..). Some insight from people who say its the best would be appreciated.
prexus
309
As we can't advertise our projects on the forum, and there are no signatures to speak of; when we upload a new project it very quickly gets shoveled under the rug by people uploading daily screenshots of their work.
However, you can do that too. That isn't something that is limited to old games. If you are posting a project, I'd like to think you are far enough along that you can keep a steady stream of updates coming. At least once, maybe twice a week a screenshot or two, or a blog post. You shouldn't have any problem keeping your work in view.
That being said, I don't know, but is there a search for Newest Added Games? I have never really felt the need to search beyond the main page, since the most interesting and non-stagnant games are posted about there (and any that aren't, I subscribe to, like Necropolis.) As long as that search is there, nobody really has anything to complain about. If it isn't, perhaps a hyperlink/button on the main page for "Recently Added Game Pages" as well as "Top Downloaded/Viewed" and "Un-rated Games w/Downloads"
However, you can do that too. That isn't something that is limited to old games. If you are posting a project, I'd like to think you are far enough along that you can keep a steady stream of updates coming. At least once, maybe twice a week a screenshot or two, or a blog post. You shouldn't have any problem keeping your work in view.
That being said, I don't know, but is there a search for Newest Added Games? I have never really felt the need to search beyond the main page, since the most interesting and non-stagnant games are posted about there (and any that aren't, I subscribe to, like Necropolis.) As long as that search is there, nobody really has anything to complain about. If it isn't, perhaps a hyperlink/button on the main page for "Recently Added Game Pages" as well as "Top Downloaded/Viewed" and "Un-rated Games w/Downloads"
author=Darken
Yeah lets have honest people get kicked off the frontpage while abusers stay on the front page even more. Even with the current system people who aren't trying to gain the system are sharing the space with people who are.
I think the 'checkbox' system is a good enough idea. Even if the 'honest' people get kicked off the frontpage, those who are really 'gaming' the system would only become easier to identify and in turn they'd get punished or become tamer. Once things get running nice and smoothly the 'Newest games' section would be a fairer place, and we shouldn't see the same handful of games in there every week.
author=Narcodis
it leaves room to be abused still, and if it leaves room for it to be abused, it WILL be abused. the idea is to design a system that eliminates this altogether. the idea suggested by you and FG creates more mundane tasks for the staff to keep an eye on, which in turn can also create some possible political/drama bullshit, and still doesn't address the problem that "new" doesn't deserve the only front page real estate. the honor system simply isn't practical.
There's no such a thing like a system that leaves no room for abuse, specially not one that is 'automatic'. People will always find a way to win the system and will do it no matter how hard it may be. Like it or not what this place truly needs is more, stricter and firmer moderation... I cannot think of any episode of drama in this year that couldn't have been avoided if this site had higher standards.
author=Fallen-Griever
New stuff does deserve to be on the front-page, just not in place of popular stuff. Two seperate boxes to make it obvious...
This. Let's also have three featured games, and all the other things 'those' guys used to suggest when they cared enough not to be crass. =P
Sagitar
1926
author=Fallen-Griever
New stuff does deserve to be on the front-page, just not in place of popular stuff. Two seperate boxes to make it obvious...
I agree with this also. There could be one section for new content, and one for "Most Popular Games This Week" or something similar, determined by a set requirement of pageviews/downloads. That way everyone gets a fair chance to make an impression with any new content, whether it's a new game or just a patch, and it would be up to the people to decide if it was significant enough to feature in the popular section (which would be more prominently displayed).
This seems to be a pretty similar layout to Newgrounds. They have a list of "Latest Submissions" on the side, but all of the "Featured" content (which I am assuming is determined by comments/pageviews/downloads) commands more space and attention.
maybe I should describe what we have at the moment in RMN4...
Feature Section:
- 4 feature spots (one is reserved for the featured game, with the other 3...whatever's cool I guess!)
- 1 development spot (for featuring a cool game in development)
- 1 community spot (for featuring cool things going on in the forums)
What's Buzzing section:
- 4 staff controlled buzzspots, wherein we do a short 3-line write up on something going on on RMN and then have a link
Sub-Feature section:
- 4 links to games: RECENTLY ADDED GAMES, RECENTLY COMPLETED GAMES, RANDOM GAMES, FEATURED GAME ARCHIVE
- 2 "game spots": their purpose isn't entirely certain yet, but I was thinking something along the lines of what I did with the SNEWS. So rotate in games to highlight for reasons like "Wavemaker", "Hidden Gem", "Classic", "Event Winner", etc... (thoughts on this?)
What's Happening section:
- 4 slots for latest game downloads
- 6 random images
- "writing" sub section:
-- Latest Tutorials, Media, Scripts, Reviews, Articles, Blogs
---------------------
So anyway, I was toying with the idea of implementing a Buzzing Games section before this thread popped up. Given the way things are set up on the back end, I was just going to come up with an algorithm that would calculate a game's "buzz score" from the previous day, based on pageviews, downloads, comments, reviews added, new subscribers (...and anything else?). We don't track history on game activity though, so its not an easy thing to, say, track the number of downloads in the past week or something. Also, I don't even know if the above stuff can be tracked with relative ease.
I haven't actually done any implementation or real design though, so my interested perked up when this thread popped up.
Feature Section:
- 4 feature spots (one is reserved for the featured game, with the other 3...whatever's cool I guess!)
- 1 development spot (for featuring a cool game in development)
- 1 community spot (for featuring cool things going on in the forums)
What's Buzzing section:
- 4 staff controlled buzzspots, wherein we do a short 3-line write up on something going on on RMN and then have a link
Sub-Feature section:
- 4 links to games: RECENTLY ADDED GAMES, RECENTLY COMPLETED GAMES, RANDOM GAMES, FEATURED GAME ARCHIVE
- 2 "game spots": their purpose isn't entirely certain yet, but I was thinking something along the lines of what I did with the SNEWS. So rotate in games to highlight for reasons like "Wavemaker", "Hidden Gem", "Classic", "Event Winner", etc... (thoughts on this?)
What's Happening section:
- 4 slots for latest game downloads
- 6 random images
- "writing" sub section:
-- Latest Tutorials, Media, Scripts, Reviews, Articles, Blogs
---------------------
So anyway, I was toying with the idea of implementing a Buzzing Games section before this thread popped up. Given the way things are set up on the back end, I was just going to come up with an algorithm that would calculate a game's "buzz score" from the previous day, based on pageviews, downloads, comments, reviews added, new subscribers (...and anything else?). We don't track history on game activity though, so its not an easy thing to, say, track the number of downloads in the past week or something. Also, I don't even know if the above stuff can be tracked with relative ease.
I haven't actually done any implementation or real design though, so my interested perked up when this thread popped up.
It's good to know things like this are in the works!
Do we have an ETA for RMN4, or is it just a "it'll happen when it happens" sort of deal?
Do we have an ETA for RMN4, or is it just a "it'll happen when it happens" sort of deal?
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=narcodisauthor=LockeZit leaves room to be abused still, and if it leaves room for it to be abused, it WILL be abused. the idea is to design a system that eliminates this altogether. the idea suggested by you and FG creates more mundane tasks for the staff to keep an eye on, which in turn can also create some possible political/drama bullshit, and still doesn't address the problem that "new" doesn't deserve the only front page real estate. the honor system simply isn't practical.author=kentonaThere is an extremely simple method, which is to ask the game developer to pick one or the other each time he uploads a new version. All you need is a checkbox that says "This is a minor edit and should not bump the game" that we can tick.
The problem is the process for both are identical. There is no simple way of determining what kind of update a game download is.
Edit: derp, F-G suggested the same thing I guess. I think it's a good idea. How is it more abusable, Darken? The way we have it right now, every update bumps your game, no matter what. I don't see how giving people a way to choose to not bump their own game is in any way more abusable than always automatically bumping their game...
It's still an improvement over the current method, since the current method is already that the staff has to watch every download. I realize it's not a perfect solution, but it's better than the current method and doesn't add or exacerbate any problems. And no one has suggested a better idea. How does it create more mundane tasks for the staff? Or more tasks for the staff at all? They already have to look over every single front-page bump. This would simply make there be fewer bumps for them to look over.
Darken
3952
I realize it's not a perfect solution, but it's better than the current method and doesn't add or exacerbate any problems. And no one has suggested a better idea.
author=alterego
There's no such a thing like a system that leaves no room for abuse, specially not one that is 'automatic'. People will always find a way to win the system and will do it no matter how hard it may be.
read:
author=darken
Regarding newgrounds, they pretty much give everyone one chance to be on the "new submissions" sidebar. You upload your first download, bam that's it, a new demo or missing sound effect patch does not bump it up again. Fresh games stay on there longer and it's impossible to abuse.
