Wow! A lot of interesting and important questions are being discussed here. Well, mainly three that I can see.
The rule of "finished" games, the subject of judging, and the types of apps.
I'll try to adress these as best I can right now.
First of all, the set of rules I smashed together in that first post was, as is stated, impromptu, meaning they are thrown together off the top of my head with no real planning. I figured it was best to just get on with it and let the community be part of defining the final set of rules.
So! On to the issues!
I agree that it might be better to simply have a rule about PLAYABLE games, or to just let everyone submit as they please. As some of you said, I think this will regulate itself because if a game is more fun to play in its unfinished state than a finished game, then that unfinished game probably shouldn't be excluded on the grounds that it is not finished.
I'm defining finished right now by having a 1.0 release, in a sense. That it has "Gone Gold" as they say in the industry. Of course, in the homebrew "market" the definition of finished and unfinished is very difficult. Nethack has a 0.51 release, but I'd say it's a much more entertaining and playable game than some that are considered "finished".
So the best thing would probably be to let people submit their game in ANY form, alpha, beta or Gold. In most cases, alphas will be so riddled with bugs and shit that they're not even playable at any practical level, so they'll naturally end up in a sort of "discard" pile pretty quickly.
Now, who judges these games?
I admit I must not have been thinking straight when I suggested that games would be available for free download AND be eligible for release contracts while at the same time having to be complete games at their point of entry.
So I propose a system where a hand-picked jury of outstanding community members (say ten, fifteen people) are chosen to judge entries. They will be the only ones to have access to the entered games, and will be given a set of instructions on how to rate games. Think something like the Monthly roundups at www.gametunnel.com but with each reviewer submitting five scores or so based on graphics, sound, playability, etc. The exact categories are details that can be worked out later.
The judges can submit games themselves, but they will of course NOT be allowed to review their own game, and all "reviews" will be monitored by other members of the administration who will look for signs of bias in the judgings, and taking judges to task if they seem to be judging other games badly to promote their own games or a game they have a bias toward for any kind of reason. A short written text will have to be submitted with a description of what makes the game good or bad, which would make identifying bias easier.
Does that sound like a logical way about things?
regarding the types of apps... PERSONALLY, I'd like to say no emus and no apps that aren't games, but I might be of a different opinion than others on this. The good thing is that this is community based, so if the majority of the community wants emus and can argue well for them, there's a good chance emus will be included. But as of right now, I'd have to say no to emus.
My basis for this being that an emulator doesn't take into account game design, graphics, sound or playability in the same way other games do. If you make a good emulator, it has an unfair advantage in that it can play hundreds (and sometimes thousands) of games that the entrant didn't have to make him/herself, and quite a few of these might be absolute classics. It goes in the same vein as ports, really. I'm not saying it's not a lot of work doing emulators, it's just that it's different from other games, and they requires something external to actually be of any use.
Also, the goal of this competition is to give the GP2X a good library of games. Standalone games that can attract people to the GP2X. There are emus for it already. Good ones. There are emus on all the other handhelds as well. What the GP2X needs, in my opinion, is a good, solid roster of good, solid games that play well and that don't exist everywhere else. Something to attract people to purchase it.
Does that make any sense? I'm not sure. If not, tell me, and I'll try to make my point clearer.
Another thing:
This administration (currently me and psymastr) will also be responsible for making the final decisions. Yes, this means that the community won't have FULL control of EVERYTHING. No, this does not mean that nothing you say will be taken into account. It's important that the community is heard and considered when making decisions, but it's also important that a few people can sit down, have a chat, and do a vote in a quiet manner.
In my head, I'm seeing decision being made by way of unanimous votes in favour, meaning that all administrators will have to agree that the decision being made is the best one for the contest and the community. It could be difficult, but if twelve randomly chosen people (in a court jury) can come to a unanimous decision, then I'm sure four or five of us can as well. Of course, sometimes, one has to make compromises, but that's just the way things are.
Phew. That was a long post. Did I miss anything important? I hope not. If I did, I'll be around to clarify in any case. Anyone interested in being a part of the administration should contact me by PM, by the way. Psymastr, I'll contact you very shortly.
