Heart of the OHR Contest 2014

I have decided that I do not want to implement a built-in full-screen backdrop editor at all. That is a job better done by external editors.

If you would like the ability to edit backdrops using the maptile editor, I can get it done this week. If that isn't what you want, I owe you $3

I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean you'll add some option to append/replace backdrops inside of the tile editing menu? Cuz if so, that would be nice for reducing on files I have to export and reimport with a simple "move this to here" type of thing.

---

dOn'T MiNd mE! i'M jUsT CoNtAgIoUs!!!
Play Orbs CCG: http://orbsccg.com/r/4r6x

November 30th is a pretty long time. If I buckle down I can participate this time with Mr. Triangle's Adventure!

I'd like to see a SHOP option to go back to the old shop style or the new one. The new one definitely breaks all of my synth shop items. I'd rather not have to revisit them altogether.

---

Check out Red Triangle Games!

The new shop is supposed to be exactly the same as the old shop. The only difference I am aware of is that the left panel gets smaller when there are not as many items. That could be made an option, and if there is any other difference between the old and new shops, it might be a bug.



I mean that it would be pretty easy to make it possible to edit backdrops using the exact same editor you can currently use to edit maptiles-- that means edting them in 20x20 blocks.

Can you clarify what you mean about appending/replacing backdrops? I am confused.

It might be best to start a new thread just to talk about this so we don't clutter up the contest thread any further.

I'll just PM ya.

Oh, and take your turn in the arena.

---

dOn'T MiNd mE! i'M jUsT CoNtAgIoUs!!!
Play Orbs CCG: http://orbsccg.com/r/4r6x

Even so, I'm interested in seeing what comes of this. I'd totally want this feature so I don't have to import anything from photoshop. It would also save me from having to make 20x20 grids in photoshop and adjusting my palettes to match that of the engines master palette... Please do this!

---

⊕ P E R S O N A L M U S I C: https://open.spotify.com/album/6fEo3fCm5C3XhtFRflfANr
⍠ C O L L A B M U S I C: https://dustpuppets.bandcamp.com/releases

Small maps with bees and squirrels? Fun! Well, my advice to the students I tutor is to learn from the grades they receive. I guess I can say the same here, maybe? I must admit I didn't mind the bees and squirrels. They're an identifier that helps me remember your game.



Okay, maybe I should clarify this after all (using 2010 as an example):

-Top voted game receives 12 votes.
-Least voted game receives 5 votes.
-2/3 margin means that all games need at least 8 votes to make the minimum fairness average.

So, let's say we have:

The Vicious Albino (Game 1) = 12 votes...
9,4,7,6,7,7,5,6,8,2,5,9 (avg. 6.25)

Legendary Roses (Game 2) = 9 votes...
4,5,1,4,8,6,7,9,10 (avg. 6)

Deadly Mothball Hunter (Game 3) = 7 votes...
7,4,5,6,5,8,7 (avg. 6)

My Crappy Tech Demo with Bunnies (Game 4) = 3 votes...
4,8,7 (avg. 6.33)

In the old example, two out of three dedicated (or disturbed) players thought that Game 4 was worth high marks. One voted and didn't care for it. Everyone else didn't think it was worth the vote.

In the new example, if we add enough fives to reach the minimum (we need five fives)--4,8,7,5,5,5,5,5--then we get a fairer average (avg. 5.5).

Likewise, Game 3, which is shy one vote, will now have the tie-breaking middleweight vote (needs one to make 8) to now average 5.8.

Game 1 is the curve-setter at 12 votes (the highest value in the contest), and Game 2 remains within the margin at 9 votes, so neither one needs the additional fives to meet the minimum. Both can have fair averages since they both have received votes from the majority of voters.

So, the two-thirds vote is designed partly to keep low-voted games from stealing the contest while keeping it fair for those that actually receive decent attention. It also encourages authors to play and vote on all the games, since that is the best plan for making sure no game falls below the minimum.



I would be inclined to call this a rerelease since it's a revisit to The Omega, but I can see your dilemma since you're not actually revisiting The Omega. I think if you're literally changing everything (including the demo of Ruin), then you're more or less releasing a new game. But if you've released the game previously as Ruin, then it's not so original.

Your situation is interesting and warrants an examination of the rules. Because you have 90% new/different content (I'm assuming that means only 10% of the original game remains?), then keeping track of where the new stuff begins, or can be found, could be a royal pain, and trying to tell people what's new might not be worth the effort, especially if the experience is like new. On that point alone I would be in favor of modifying the rules to allow you entry as an original release. In the past, a game could not be made public before the contest window to be considered original. Traditionally, I'd want to hold on to this rule. But no game previously entered into the Heart of the OHR has had your situation.

So, per tradition, we'll put this up for discussion and a vote. My suggestion is this: If a game has changed at least 60% of its original content (including the title) before counting the additional 30 minutes of new content, then we could classify it as an original.

Note: I'd want to mandate a change in the game's title for this rule to take effect (In this case, I'd count this rule toward your change from The Omega, not from the demo version of Ruin). I'm less inclined to count remade games with the same title to take on "original" status if they've already been released, which you say applies to Ruin. Even if the tone changes and the game starts in a different place, I'd be reluctant to call it original. However, if so little of the original game remains that I would no longer recognize it, then I'd be okay with maybe calling it an original, especially since you've changed 90% of it.

So, let's let the community decide:

1. Do we allow games with at least 60% replaced content (shall I make this percentage higher?) and a name change to count as an original since the effort to identify the changes and new material would be beyond reason?

2. Because so little of the original demo remains, should we allow Ruin to enter as an original? Keep in mind that in 2014, there is no difference between originals and rereleases except that originals don't require additional documentation for the player's benefit and are still eligible to reenter in the next Heart of the OHR as a rerelease if the author chooses to come back with it.

So, let's discuss this. The fate of Ruin and its standing with Heart of the OHR will be deferred to the community's collective opinion.

---

Place Obligatory Signature Here

Zeno's Paradox: OHR Edition

I'd say let him enter it how he wants to enter it, and let the voters decide.

---

Mega Tact v1.1
Super Penguin Chef
Wizard Blocks

OK, I see that I did misunderstand. You know what, I actually think that this rule is quite fair.

I'm in favour of classifying Ruin as a new game. I don't agree with the name change as a necessity; really that's just a proxy/test for determining whether it's a remake or not.



Well then I guess the main difference is that voters are only meant to be voting on the new content. If the new content has totally blanketed the old, then it's moot.

I'm actually in a similar boat with Legacy. After the previous HotOHR, I pretty much scrapped the entire 2012 HotOHR version of Legacy and rebuilt it from the ground up. Much of the basic plot is the same, but pacing, dialogue, and other story elements are completely different. Same goes for gameplay elements, e.g. combat (tactics combat now, no longer turn-based jrpg style), maps, character skills, etc...

---

Being from the third world, I reserve the right to speak in the third person.

Using Editor version wip 20170527 gfx_sdl+fb music_sdl

A lot has changed in these brief two years. Just look at 2012's AR-PUH-GUH! 1.3beta foe graphics and then look at the eventually coming AR-PUH-GUH! 1.0gamma foe pics.

Better yet, I'll post a few comparisons.

Drib




Floraffe




And two robit types






Not to mention I use my own smecksy palette now.
Many changes, and yet I barely remember these past two years. But that's a story for another never.

---

dOn'T MiNd mE! i'M jUsT CoNtAgIoUs!!!
Play Orbs CCG: http://orbsccg.com/r/4r6x

Okay, just to clarify, new graphics does not equal new game in the eyes of the Heart of the OHR. Nor does it count toward new content, as we ruled back in 2010 when msw188 wanted to submit Tales of the New World 1 as a rerelease, when the only changes were related to performance and presentation, not actual content.

BMR, we'll just have to see what the new Legacy looks and plays like, I guess. If we get just one more case like yours and Meatballsub's, I may have to open a new category called "Hybrid" or "Ambiguous." Just when I thought we've seen all the loopholes we can throw at this contest.... ;)

Anyone else want to weigh in on the original versus rerelease status debate? Or can I assume that we're in agreement that Ruin can enter as an original game?

---

Place Obligatory Signature Here

Those are some nice robits!

---

⊕ P E R S O N A L M U S I C: https://open.spotify.com/album/6fEo3fCm5C3XhtFRflfANr
⍠ C O L L A B M U S I C: https://dustpuppets.bandcamp.com/releases

Why thank ye

---

dOn'T MiNd mE! i'M jUsT CoNtAgIoUs!!!
Play Orbs CCG: http://orbsccg.com/r/4r6x

So, er, any chance we can keep up with tradition and sticky this thread?

---

Place Obligatory Signature Here