Another contest?

[_wb_]

Are there any plans to organize another Pandora contest? I remember some discussion about this, but I cannot find the relevant thread(s) so I'm starting a new one.


The previous Rebirth contest was a big success, so why not do something like that again?


IMO, (big) prizes are not so important. I suspect that many homebrewers just need the little "push" from a contest to do the extra effort of polishing and finishing projects they would be working on anyway. If there are prizes, it is probably better to have many small prizes than to have one or two big prizes. It is nicer if there are many "winners".


Voting on the boards seems to be a good way to decide the winners. However, I think we learned some lessons from the previous contest:


1. we need enough time to test the submissions (e.g. Two Months would be good)


2. it is impossible to compare new homebrew stuff to ports or to emulators. Also games and nongames are hard to compare.


3. updates during evaluation are a good thing (esp. for bugfixes), but make judging tricky.


To solve 1) and 3), an option would be to have two deadlines: one deadline for the initial submission, which should be good enough to test it. Updates can be uploaded without restriction, although you should never expect a vote to be based on anything else than the first submission. After the second deadline (which could be perhaps 1 month after the first one), no more updates are allowed until the end of the voting period, except maybe to fix some bugs (but no new features). Voting would start only after the second deadline.


To solve 2), it would probably be best to have several submission categories, which have separate votes. It's not really a problem if some categories don't get enough submissions - perhaps some prizes should then be transferred to other categories, and if there's really few submissions (i.e. only 1 or 2), then the category can still be merged with another category. Here are some possibilities for the categories:


- new homebrew game


- new homebrew nongame (e.g. things like PNDManager or alarm clocks or whatever)


- port of existing game/application (to be judged mostly on the amount of work done to tailor it to the Pandora)


- emulator (if there's any emulator left we don't already have <_< )


- update to existing Pandora app (to be judged on the diff between old and new)


The rule that submissions should include a banner: I don't really see the use for that so I would drop that rule. However, I would add a rule that requires the submissions to be put in the repo, perhaps with a special code in their name like "[CONTEST ENTRY]" (which can be removed after the contest of course).

 

[Zip]

http://gecasoft.no.sapo.pt/ there is the new contest

 

[_wb_]

Yes, but that one is not Pandora-specific, and is only about games. Also there is no public voting in that contest, but a jury of 5 people.


There's no reason not to have a Pandora-specific contest as well. Perhaps it should start after the GECA contest, to allow people to enter a game in both contests (the GECA contest rules explicitly forbid releasing the game before the contest ends).

 

[bzar]

I think something like the first pandora contest (platformer compo) could be fun. I think tighter limits on application type and genre (especially in games) fosters new ideas better than a completely open one. Trying to differentiate from others becomes a matter of ingenuity, originality and polish instead of just happening make something in the general direction of what people want.

 

[DaMummy]

still waiting on rainy days, still waiting on a 3d tower defense game, still waiting for many other games to get the finishing touches from past compos(too many to name)

 

[sandwhich]

If there is another contest I would propose to ensure that only fully usable software is allowed to enter. Without naming titles here (their authors do work in their free time, still) there have been too many games winning high places in compos before, just for their graphics and afterwards there was little or no work applied to them.

 

[Binky]

I'd think it would be better if devs helped with the community game project, rather than their own ones for a while.


Maybe a rebirth anniversary one launching winter 2012?

 

[ShleeDragon]

We don't need another comp. We need a pledge drive for the developers fund.


Collectively build some money, create a list of challenges and just give the money to people who meet those requirements.

 

[foxblock]

To solve 1) and 3), an option would be to have two deadlines: one deadline for the initial submission, which should be good enough to test it. Updates can be uploaded without restriction, although you should never expect a vote to be based on anything else than the first submission. After the second deadline (which could be perhaps 1 month after the first one), no more updates are allowed until the end of the voting period, except maybe to fix some bugs (but no new features). Voting would start only after the second deadline.

I agree with every of your three points and would like to add another one: Jury based voting. The jury would consist of several "community veterans", maybe one or two "community newcomers" (randomly selected or by opt-in or vote), the OpenPandora team and several developers.


Reason for that is simply: You can't trust a public vote and even if you could, look how many people voted last time - that hardly is a representative number of the community (and there WAS enough time to try out all entries - I even wrote a quite lengthy review on every game and my schedule is already pretty tight).


Additionally those "professionals" could give some detailed and helpful review (something you rarely get and, at least I, always appreciate as a developer).


Of course it's harder to organize and hard to find people for, but I guess it could be done, it has been done before.


Alternatively (and that also brings me to the point in your post I would like to address): Do it like the IGF pre-selection, where a huge bunch of voluntary players/journalists/developers each are assigned a few games they are asked to test (and of which they should select a top 3 and also write a short review), which then (because of the number of testers) is calculated in a overall top 10 (not exactly, but you get the idea).


This is also quite some work to set-up, but would involve the community a bit more (as it's not only a handful of jury members). In general any system like this will probably result in better reviews and interaction than a purely open vote (as we have seen last time).


On the matter of updates: Also do it like the IGF process: Allow updates to the game at any time with any scope, but be aware that the testers may also try out the game at any time after the submission deadline, so they might experience the patch or they might not. So you can submit a buggy build and fix it later, but testers potentially play that and rate it down.


In general, though, I would only allow fully finished (or almost finished) work, rationale: every last competition.

I think something like the first pandora contest (platformer compo) could be fun. I think tighter limits on application type and genre (especially in games) fosters new ideas better than a completely open one. Trying to differentiate from others becomes a matter of ingenuity, originality and polish instead of just happening make something in the general direction of what people want.

I agree, something like LudumDare48 for the Pandora (or maybe just use one of the LD48 events as a set-up for devs to create something, which then will get rated on this board, too). - though 48 hours (or 72 in the jam) is very tight to create something finished and worthwhile - a theme or other restriction (technical maybe, give some basic framework which has been used - promote some of the engines around here - maybe a sparrow3d/Penjin/... compo...).

If there is another contest I would propose to ensure that only fully usable software is allowed to enter. Without naming titles here (their authors do work in their free time, still) there have been too many games winning high places in compos before, just for their graphics and afterwards there was little or no work applied to them.

I totally agree, knowing that I am one of the major culprits in this matter, too.


It's really sad to see some of the top-scoring games in past competitions not being finished to this date (and some of them probably never).


Sure it sometimes is hard to find the time and actually finish something, but it feels good afterwards (for both the developer and player), so it should be encouraged.


Bug-fixes and minor feature additions after the compo are okay, but submitting a something only remotely resembling a game or finished program should not be allowed.


Overall I don't think there should be another compo just yet and I ponder if compos are so great after all.


In general we get like one or two new, great things out of them, a bit of mediocre stuff and a lot of unfinished messes.


I wonder whether we would get the great stuff anyway (well Greyout might never have happended, Schizophrenia probably would never have happened, but those are neither great nor finished, sooo...).


Sometimes people need a kick in the butt, an approaching deadline to get them working, but the really great stuff usually happens out of curiosity, self-motivation and dedication, this does not need a compo.


Well, that's a rather harsh view, but that's how I feel and I totally blame myself for part of it, too. It does not feel good to not have finished a single game in years, but having started four.

 

[pmprog]

Reason for that is simply: You can't trust a public vote and even if you could, look how many people voted last time - that hardly is a representative number of the community (and there WAS enough time to try out all entries - I even wrote a quite lengthy review on every game and my schedule is already pretty tight)

Yeah, I'm kind of guilty with that one. I didn't even try out any of the entries until after the compo - partially because I forgot, and partially because I had too many other things going on at the time.

Well, that's a rather harsh view, but that's how I feel and I totally blame myself for part of it, too. It does not feel good to not have finished a single game in years, but having started four.

If it makes you feel better, I've started plenty more... and the best I've walked away with was CyRacer3D, which was coding in a few hours, and currently has a 1 star rating on the repo, so you could argue if it was even worth putting out.


I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with compos, I just need to get myself organised in order to be useful in anything...


Now where's my calendar gone???

 

[moxie]

Isn't having a one star rating on the repo just an indication that The Repo Asshole has found your game? IIRC, there is someone who out of spite prowls the repo and one-stars things just because of [insert random grudge here]? I must ssay I haven't tried your game yet (I will when I get my panda back, promise!), but I just wanna say that a one-star rating does not mean that it wasn't worth doing. Y'know.

 

[pmprog]

Fair comment Moxie.


Anyway, Foxblock, I've been watching your Project4... and I'm loving it. In fact, I'm not even bothered about the "shooter" bit, just dodging all the enemies is fun enough - especially when trying to get them to kill each other off. Most pleasing

 

[_wb_]

Having a jury makes sense, but I also like to have the "open" aspect of public voting. Perhaps a hybrid system is best, where 50% of the points can be earned from the jury and 50% from a public voting thread. Both the jury and the public should be encouraged to explain their votes by providing constructive feedback.


I don't really like the idea of having a fixed genre contest: yes, it forces people to do new things that make their entry "stand out", and it is also easier to compare the entries, but I think it is too restrictive, and I like to have entries in many different genres. Also, how would we choose the genre?

 

[foxblock]

Anyway, Foxblock, I've been watching your Project4... and I'm loving it. In fact, I'm not even bothered about the "shooter" bit, just dodging all the enemies is fun enough - especially when trying to get them to kill each other off. Most pleasing

Thanks There won't be a shooter bit, evading and tricking enemies into destroying themselves is what it is all about and it's great to hear that aspect is fun.


Though, you know, next time post that in the development thread, that's what it is for and it generates activity and possible interest as other people can see your positive opinion and maybe also try the game (and we don't need to go off-topic here)