I really want to play the entries before I vote on them. I'm hoping to complete my reviews before the end of voting, which you've graciously extended to the 19th. That's going to help a lot. If I think I'm getting behind, I might rush the RPGish reviews, but as of now my intention is to vote.
I don't think you should rush the reviews. Authors can learn a lot from your reviews, and I don't think you should undercut them for a contest (this one or the other one). I'd rather you give scores to a few than half-assed reviews to all.
Pepsi, I have nothing against giving games 1's. I know people will take it the wrong way because the turnout's low enough where 1's will be decisive. I don't know if that makes me an opponent of it to you, but it's really me being nice by staying away.
No, that doesn't make you an opponent. It says you don't like the games you give 1's to. The opponents are the ones who think I should stop bringing the contest back. I don't think that's you. I don't recall you saying anything to the contrary.
Regarding the 1's, if you really think a game deserves a 1, and you're not being harsh for the sake of harshness, then give the deserving ones a 1. I don't care if one person's score skews the average for that game, as long as that score is fair and representative of much, if not all, of the game.
If you don't think you can offer a fair score, then I respect your decision to refrain from voting.
My personal opinion is that no game is so bad that it deserves a 1 unless it fails at everything and I hate the experience (one game this year is begging a 1 out of me, but I may still give it a 2 because I liked the music it offered), and no game deserves a 10 unless it can't possibly do anything better. But that's how I handle evaluations.
Additionally, I'm not quite sure I understand the purpose of the contest. If it's meant to encourage people to make RPGs, but the method is to score them based on enjoyment, then it's a bit conflicting, isn't it? Scoring isn't encouraging, and the real enjoyment of the ohr is in making your own games, definitely not playing other people's.
Curious what you think.
Curious what you think.
The original purpose was to encourage people to start making RPGs again, and not just concept or joke games, which dominated the years leading up to the first Heart of the OHR. RPGs, after all, are what brought us all here in the first place. I thought a contest was a good way to light a fire under our butts in getting something finished. That's still, more or less, the point. The scoring system is there because it's a contest.
I agree that we're all here mainly to make our own games, but playing each other's games is sort of the point of the community. Otherwise, we'd all live in a bubble and never interact with each other. Sometimes, we actually want to know what other people think of our work, and sometimes we'd like to see that opinion expressed in a letter grade or a score (and definitely in a detailed review, hence the reason I like this year in review contest so much). Sure, we don't want to score low, but as long as the reviewer or scorer gives his score a reason, we can at least evaluate whether the thing that brought the player's opinion down is worth addressing--sometimes a player just doesn't get the point and will evaluate accordingly while others do get the point and will also evaluate accordingly.
Honestly, in the seasons when we have no contest, I don't think a score is necessary when the review says plenty. But scores do help the game's author catch a glimpse of the reviewer's opinion in a snapshot, so he can at least prepare for the reviewer's opinion once he begins to read about it. In seasons when we do have a contest, then a score is important, because how else can we figure out who wins and who loses the contest?
In regard to encouragement, scoring actually can be an encouragement if the author wants to improve and a score or grade gives him a fair idea on how much he needs to improve (thorough reviews handle this much better though--in the hands of a good reviewer, at least). It's only detrimental if the author is releasing a game for his own vanity and has no plans to finish or revise. But I contend that not even a review will help that author.
That's what I think.
Place Obligatory Signature Here