1. Hey! Guest! The 32nd GMC Jam will take place between Feb 22nd, 12:00 UTC (Friday noon) and Feb 25th, 12:00 UTC (Monday noon). Why not join in! Click here to find out more!
    Dismiss Notice

The GMC Jam Suggestions Topic

Discussion in 'GMC Jam' started by Alice, Feb 13, 2017.

  1. TonyStr

    TonyStr Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2017
    Posts:
    25
    hey, I'd just like to say that the /r/gamemaker discord server (well over 500 people) is happy to promote the jam! I think it would be great for the jam if you reached out to the admins, more poeple would only make the jam better! (discord link: https://discord.gg/By6u9pC )
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2017
    Detective Pixel and Juju like this.
  2. Kousenai

    Kousenai Furry Flaebae

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    72
    Hey, so, GMC Jams are cool and all, but I haven't kept track of the forums for a while and apparently the 'handicap' part of the Jam has been removed now...?
    Why were they removed? I think it was a really cool part of the jam that made the games interesting. Not being able to use the mouse, jump, have enemies, use text, or things like that just encourages everyone taking part in the Jam to think outside the box a bit with their game design/gameplay.
     
    TonyStr and Shawn Basnett like this.
  3. Dr. Wolf

    Dr. Wolf Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Posts:
    56
    I don't think I can agree with this. My feeling is that any restriction that stands to reduce the quality of the finished games is bad, because:
    -People may want (or need, in order to justify spending the time and effort!) to make some further use of their Jam projects, whether as portfolio items or even the basis for smaller commercial releases.
    -People may feel reluctant to share projects that don't meet a certain absolute minimum standard.
    -There may be less support during the judging phase if the games aren't as fun.
    -Restrictions encourage "good-for" thinking ("good for a game with these restrictions," "good for a jam game," "good for a Game Maker game," "good for an indie game," etc.), which is already a problem with the jam format in general.
     
  4. Kousenai

    Kousenai Furry Flaebae

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    72
    Well, I actually think that it kind of makes a game unique therefore more fun... but, I see the point in your view, so, fair enough. ^^
     
    TonyStr and Shawn Basnett like this.
  5. Pere

    Pere Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2017
    Posts:
    20
    [Suggestion] Explain exactly how the winner is chosen in the main forum post

    It's not clear how exactly the winner is chosen.

    In a rating system where the votes aren't quantitative (0-5 like ludum dare), but rather as a list (1st, 2nd, 3rd), where not everyone votes the same amount of entries, it's hard to calculate who should be first, and it could be done in different ways, resulting in different flaws:
    • If the votes are reverted (1st of 10 would be 10 points for that entry, 2nd would be 9...) and added up, then the games with more overall votes will have an advantadge.
    • If the votes are merely added up (1st gives 1 point, 10th gives 10...) and the first winner is the game that has less points and the last is the one with more points, then the games with less amount of votes and votes of people that voted less entries, will have an advantadge.
    • if its done by the average, then that would be fair as long as all games are voted many times
    • etc.
    Depending on the way used, the strategy for making your game might change: for the first one you should focus on getting a lot of attention with your title, so a lot of ppl play ur game; with the second that would leave you worse off....

    So, my point is, the exact way the winner is chosen should be explained, not only in the voting post, when the jam ends, but rather in the main post, so ppl can take it into account when making the game.

    Thank you ;)
     
  6. Cloaked Games

    Cloaked Games Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2016
    Posts:
    760
    This debate has already been over, at any rate, here is the text from the old voting topic:

    "How results are decided?
    (the information here is not necessary for voting; it's mostly for people who want to understand how votes are calculated to produce the final results)

    When it comes to the games ranking, the voting system used is 1/(rank + 1). It means for each ranking an entry appears in, it will get a score of 1/(rank + 1), and no score for other rankings.

    When it comes to best-of awards, the winners must have gathered the most votes in their respective category. If multiple entries have the most votes, the Jam host may choose one or more entries among them to win the award. This is to avoid situations when e.g. 5 entries tie for 2 votes for the best devlog, and they all win; at the same time, it's still the community that decides which entries get the most votes.

    The best reviewer is chosen arbitrarily by the Jam host, but the community opinion may be taken into account (just not in a "systematic" way)."

    It's not that important. If you have the best game, you'll win. If you have something in the middle the results start getting fuzzy, but just because the ability to rank games is so limited. They're often so close together it is really just an average. Don't stress about the scoring too much.
     
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  7. Ralucipe

    Ralucipe Member GMCJam Champ

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2016
    Posts:
    103
    I have a question about how the voting system works...

    In each Jam's voting topic, the following statement is made:

    Forgive me if I'm missing something blatantly obvious here, but I cannot wrap my head around how I'm giving stronger support to my top 3 by voting for more games. It appears to me that the amount of 'credit' given to a game is fixed and has nothing to do with the quantity of games that I rank. In fact, because voting for more games gives them points that they otherwise would not have, it seems to me that casting more votes actually weakens my top 3 picks because it boosts their opponents.

    I have no problems at all with how the voting system works - it's just this one statement that I read every Jam that doesn't make sense to me.
     
  8. Alice

    Alice Toolmaker of Bucuresti Forum Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    648
    Ah, sorry about that, during the first Jams there was actually a little different system.

    Right now, we use pretty simple 1/(rank+1) system, which means that 1st place gets 1/2 score (0.500), 2nd gets 1/3 (0.333), 3rd gets 1/4 (0.250) and so on. Every unranked entry gets plain 0 points. In that regard, no matter how many entries you rank, you give the same score to your top picks.

    Earlier, we used so-called "normalised" 1/(rank+1) system, which more or less worked the same way except for one thing - the unranked entries were treated as if each got the next rank after the last entry. So, if you rated 10 games, then the 10th entry got 1/11 score (0.091) and all the unranked ones would get 1/12 score (0.083).

    Well, technically speaking, there was an extra step of subtracting the unranked entries score from all the ranked ones. So, the first entry would get 0.500 - 0.083 = 0.417, then the second 0.333 - 0.083 = 0.250, then the third 0.250 - 0.83 = 0.167 and so on till the 10th entry, which would get 0.008 score. Though whether the unranked entries scores were subtracted or not didn't change the overall standings. It was more so that unranked entries would stay at 0 points, which is more intuitive than a bunch of entries magically getting a score of 0.083, even though the reviewer didn't really like them.

    Somewhere along the way, the normalised ranking was ditched in favour of the regular one. First, because the normalised ranking was particularly "punishing" for 3rd places in typical 3-rank Jam (if reviewer only rated top 3, they'd give the first place measly 0.050; it's 4-5 times less than what would be given with full ranking). Second, because the problem the normalised was trying to address - some people would play only several games or so and they would rank their least favourite entry "above" all the ones they didn't play - that problem turned out to be less relevant during recent Jams. Now it seems most reviewers try out all the entries at least a little (even if they don't rank all the way), so such a measure is not as necessary anymore.

    So yeah, you are correct; that remark was a leftover that somehow slipped our radars until now. I'm going to remove it from the current voting topic, so that maybe it won't cause any more confusion. ^^'
     
    Ralucipe likes this.
  9. Misu

    Misu The forum's immigrant

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    600
    Anouncement:

    I was talking with Alice by the end of the previous jam about the jam player; Im currently working on a new one that is more up to date. Hopefully ( if we dont get the sooner dates picked) might be able to finish it before this next jam.

    Anyway, I'd like to know your opinions and suggestions regarding the jam player itself and any possible thoughts about a new jam player in general. Please do share your ideas :)
     
  10. curato

    curato Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2016
    Posts:
    121
    The main thing with the player that stuck out to me was that I could go through and rate each game but then I had to go back through everything and look and manually pick and rate everything. It would have been nice if it would have automatically ranked the games and then let me tweak if I disagreed.
     
  11. Misu

    Misu The forum's immigrant

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    600
    My plans for this new jam player includes a new rating system that is base on scale bar that can range (depending on your custom choice). This substitutes the 5 choice of quality system the previous player has since 5 options per 4 clasifications (not counting the overall) only limits up to 20 vary scores out of ton of entries that can easily get the same score with one another. Of course that this is a preference so some people are use to this. The new system allows you to customize the scale rate a bit so it fits the range standards you prefer. It comes with 4 typical categories (as usual) and once all four are triggered, it automatically sets the overall score for you on the left corner. I kind of understand where you going through when it comes to tie breaking scores. Ill think of a way to easily handle this situation. Ig any of you think there is a good way to perform tie breaks easily, im open to knowing. :)
     
  12. dadio

    dadio Potato Overlord Forum Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Posts:
    197
    Just an observation/thought before the next Jam train starts rollin'...
    Last few Jams have seen activity/chit-chat split across Discord, YMMV, but I don't really think this is a good thing.
    I think it scatters focus and feedback and makes it harder to keep track of what exactly went on in each Jam.
    I understand that some folks prefer the format of a Discord chat, but all that Jam banter is kind of lost to the sands of time...
    whereas on a Forum (such as this) there is a much more permanent record of everything that went down.
    When you slip on da ol' nostalgia glasses in a year or 8 for a trip down that Jammy memory lane, it's nice to have everything still there, in one place.
    Just thought I'd bring it up before the Hype kicks off.
    (Here's hoping we get a tasty Theme!)
     
  13. Micah_DS

    Micah_DS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Posts:
    446
    Yep, I'm all for switching back to just the forums for the GMC jams. I feel like the Discord has done a little more harm than good. I've noticed some people having to cross post or repeat themselves to make other's aware of things, and the timeline is just a bit more of a pain to follow and look back on when it's split between two places.

    The only thing I really like about the Discord are the separate channels for team building and coding help, but I don't know if they're all that necessary really, and even if they are deemed useful, something similar can be achieved here with another thread per jam anyway.

    I guess being able to actually 'chat' is the main upside, but in reality I feel like that's a downside, because you'll likely be pretty inefficient if you're trying to chat and make your game at the same time. But posting a progress update every now and then makes more sense to stay focused, and it also makes for far less 'fluff' banter for people to wade through, so that's why I find it better to just stick to the forums, as it feels like it's really more jam-friendly ( or something ). Just my view though, of course.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2019
    dadio likes this.
  14. HayManMarc

    HayManMarc Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    815
    I agree.
     
    dadio likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice