SPACE_MONKEY'S PROFILE

author=narcodis
You're missing the point entirely. I'm not sure explain this to you. I understand what buzz is. You're not understanding why it's being put into place.

The Buzz system isn't designed to just tell us where people are posting... we have the "latest posts" for that. It is being set into place in order to help sift through all the games and bring out the best projects to the spotlight. It's quality control. If we just let the games who got the most comments on the front page, it would be a constant uphill battle for games to get noticed.

Final Tear 3 got enough attention. It was on the front page for a long time, had a few reviews. But have you ever fucking played that game? It's god-awful. I mean, seriously. This is what we want to -prevent-.

I'm not retarded or missing anything. You keep acting like it in your posts, but I don't need help to comprehend. I'm perfectly capable of understanding (and disagreeing with) your idea of what "buzz" should be.

You have your idea of how it should be used or "why it's being put into place" - as an automated quality spotlight and I have mine - as a feed of what's fresh and happening in the community. Where the action is.

It is my opinion that quality be featured in other ways. For example, with good review scores, or for all you younger facebook generation thumbs ups or likes or w/e.

In my opinion tools that measure quantity are not the best way to measure and feature quality or "good" games but it is a great way to show where the action is. I have no problem with featuring good stuff, but I feel this system would be better used for spotlighting activity and conversation stirring content.

So, I'm afraid you are the one that doesn't understand. I know what you mean and want and I don't give a fuck. I'm expressing my opinion that I want it to be used differently than the way you do and that does not warrant a condescending assumption that I am unable to comprehend you :)

btw, while I am posting I should try to contribute instead of just going around in another circle with narcodis.

I think a good way of preventing hype from simply measuring "cool pic man" posts on screens or "subbed" posts on old profiles is to only count the comments that occur on content submitted THAT WEEK.

In other words, even if that Ill Will or Legionwood or Americana Dawn screen looks totally awesome, if the content on it is not new, comments on that content shouldn't count towards buzz.

ex If we are calculating buzz for August 9th - 15th, then only comments on blog posts, images, etc. posted between 8/9 and 8/15 should count (content and comments must occur in that week, not just comments that week on old content). That way, buzz isn't falsely elevated by all the content that has a huge ongoing stream of people showing up at their profile anyway.

author=narcodis
I'd say make low-scoring reviews carry far less weight, possibly even negative weight. The idea and hope for this system is not to float all content back up to the surface, it's to sift through the content to bring forward the games that really shine. Maybe some formula like review = 1000 * (Score - 4) (are scores based on a 1-10 scale??). That means anything with less than two stars will actually lose "buzz".

And I don't know if it would be possible to make it so comments on reviews specifically carry no weight at all, but that might be a good idea for similar reasons. Reviews generate lots of discussion, regardless of the game entirely.

I totally DISAGREE with this post. If we are talking about "buzz", then we should be looking at how much talk a project is generating not some attempt to quantify the "quality" with "buzz".

Taking buzz away from a game for a bad review is a HORRIBLE idea. A review is someone talking about a game, so the buzz-o-meter or "how much this gam is being talked about" should not go down.

This reminds me of when that one game was reviewed by someone's friend who called it inception-like (lol) and everyone went batshit crazy. Even though a lot of people thought the game sucked, it still generated conversation and that is a good thing.

Buzz should be a measure of how much a game is generating discussion. If someone makes a game that has sex in it, poorly written vulgarity, a long intro, or whatever else your pet peeve is and that game creates a huge discussion about the merit of having sex in rpgs, whether rpgs should have swear words, starts a movement against long intros etc. then it has created a buzz!

notoriety is buzz too.

When it comes to measuring buzz the meter's motto should be there's "no such thing as bad publicity." If you got 50 people on one side praising the game and 50 on the other side hating on it, those 100 people fighting over the game should = a massive buzz score not a wash where the two sides cancel each other out.

pageview: 1
download: 25
comment: 225
subscriber: 1300
review: 2000 * score

There's just a couple things about this system: just because a review happens less often doesn't mean it should weigh so much. This system also favors completed games. Buzz should focus on games that are in production or freshly released completed games.

Once the game has been completed and released, it should only be promoted by buzz for another month or two at most. After that, you're not measuring buzz, you're measuring their fanbase or something. Leaving a game up after that would be like if gamefaqs kept pictures of final fantasy 7 on their main page just because they've been in top 20 wanted faqs for over 10 years. I'm looking at you Hero's Realm.

Another thing that should be taken care to prevent is that a few projects get some perma-spot being featured as the buzz-iest game. I mean, I don't know what gets the most attention here but despite looking totally rad a game shouldn't have some permanent position on the front page. Once a game has been featured as the buzz game of the week, it should be knocked off by something else...even if that something else has a lower score from pageviews, downloads, comments, subscribers, etc.

I don't know how that should be calculated but something tells me that a game's buzz should have a lifespan that looks like a bell curve with a build-up of hype, climax at release, and then fall or dénouement.

Maybe to prevent being buried by high-profile games, a game could be measured against itself. In other words, how did this person's game profile activity increase compared to the normal level of activity. That way a game that has a steady 50 x "cool gam" posts won't eclipse the guy who jumps from 1 msg a week to 10 when he releases his game.

lol

ps. I'm going to give ferd/lockez some more time to post an action then I'll give results tomorrow.

author=Kp
Don't translate your bad games please.

His game > your shitty attitude.

it can take a few days. but if you've been waiting for a week+ then ...