Desidious's Feed

Desidious
02-24-2021 at 11:18 AM
22 Comments
Rate this Entry

Track creation proposal.

Since it seems a little more plausible now, what are some opinions on those that have 100+ valid track creations no longer need SP to create a track? Of course SP is still needed to donate.


This could really benefit newcomers needing tracks created, especially on the newest generation systems.


Please discuss.

ThanksST3Retro, JJT_Defender thanked this post
Likesdatagod, ST3Retro, JJT_Defender liked this post
Comments
  1. Barthax's Avatar

    I don't have a for/against argument. For me, the initial entry cost enforces a thought process which aids me in reviewing what I intend but then I still make mistakes... I've experienced the "free cost" scenario back when I was a ref & even then peer review was a good feedback process. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    [Edit:] LOL, you have to type two \ characters to get one... Someone's left in an escape function in the coding of in the web site (programming reference). :P

    Likesdatagod liked this post
  2. datagod's Avatar

    I think the cost should still apply. New users should be encouraged to reach out to us older folks to help explain things. It can be a little intimidating but that is what community is all about.

    I wish there was a way to see all the tracks I have helped to fund. I spend the majority of my SP on funding tracks that others created. Would be nice to see how many I did.

  3. ST3Retro's Avatar

    I am all about tradition. I have no issue doing what needs to be done, reviewing games etc.. I think talking to others about how things work is important. Might be good to get people the information about track creation when they sign up and maybe an acknowledge post that you have to like before continuing like what many discords do. Just a thought. I appreciate the quick responses and support from community members. Very cool!

    LikesPixe Sukola, datagod liked this post
  4. timmell's Avatar

    maybe a discount for experienced track creators. Otherwise the floodgates might open

    Likesdatagod liked this post
  5. Desidious's Avatar

    What flood gates? There's only 6 people with 100+ tracks created and this has been going on for what... 6 years?

    Likesdatagod liked this post
  6. sdwyer138's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by timmell

    maybe a discount for experienced track creators. Otherwise the floodgates might open

    I don't think its the cost really matters. Someone experienced in adjudicating and writing tracks probably already has hundreds of SP to burn.

    And if you don't, just go blindly click yes on the first dozen subs you come across, wait two days, you can now launch and fully fund a track on one's own. With zero oversight by TG or peer review.

    There needs to be a new track proposal system where a track can be proposed without any initial cost, have an opportunity to be peer reviewed and revised if needed, perhaps even voted on, then it can be subject to funding and SP can be charged to the initiator when it goes live.

    Likesdatagod liked this post
  7. Desidious's Avatar

    That's even better. It shouldn't cost initially but it needs to be able to be reviewed then the sp can be used. The initial cost still can be off putting if the person that is asked to create it isn't a game they have any need to play. Yes I get it is 10 sp but I guarantee that track creation could become more common if that was alleviated.

    Thankstimmell thanked this post
    Likesdatagod liked this post
  8. Snowflake's Avatar

    i remember when jace first talked about track creation the idea was floated that good tracks would be earners. everytime someone submits to your good track you actually get some small cred for their submission. In that way, good track writers will actually earn the sp they need to make more tracks. implementing that idea may give the same net result you want, and remove the bias of deciding who did a godd/bad job since a formula will be invovled.

    Likesdatagod, Barthax liked this post
  9. Snowflake's Avatar

    more i think of it, more i'd like that implemented. cause therse also an issue wiht derivatives, where sure without it, games like angry birds are problematic and need it. but iwth it, its pretty easy to really abuse and just derivatives to cover anything and put super complex rules in the title to handle that. with track earners though, no need for derivatives, it wouldnt matter paying for every single angry birds track since they'd also all earn you back their cost.

  10. Desidious's Avatar

    While we are at it, receiving a notification when a new track is proposed would definitely help.

    Thankssdwyer138 thanked this post
  11. Jace Hall's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake

    i remember when jace first talked about track creation the idea was floated that good tracks would be earners. everytime someone submits to your good track you actually get some small cred for their submission. In that way, good track writers will actually earn the sp they need to make more tracks. implementing that idea may give the same net result you want, and remove the bias of deciding who did a godd/bad job since a formula will be invovled.

    Yes I had forgotten about this. The amount awarded would need to be fractional per submission, otherwise it could be used by the track creators to recursively generate SP.

    Hey @admin staff - what do you think?

    LikesSnowflake, Barthax liked this post
  12. Snowflake's Avatar

    yeah i'm sure even beyond programming issues the exact ratio would take some thinking through

    Theres no doubt it obviously HAS to be less than 3 points since then yeah the tempation for abuse would abound, actually it would have to be less than 2 points since subs really only cost 2 if you vote on your own. realistically though even though 2 is a super obvoius too high number, the correct upper bound as lower as it is is tougher to say

    i dont think it'll be hard to get people with opinoins on good ratios.

    i'd suggest it basically coming down to "how many people have to submit on a track before we decide the track creator should've had the track for free".

    this comment is long enough, i'll leave it at that before daring to hazard a guess on a ratio i think is fair

  13. Desidious's Avatar

    You guys talk about abuse but really.. how easy could it be to abuse without getting caught? Everything is logged and if we get notifications when a proposal is created, that would help immensely.


    I'm just saying that it's hard to really abuse this system if it is very transparent.

    Likesdatagod liked this post
  14. Desidious's Avatar

    @Jace Hall another thing to consider is cleaning up your derivatives area. Right now, if you have a ton of derivatives it is a giant guessing game to find the right one and there's no order to it at all. If there was a way to at least separate it by console it would alleviate some frustration.


    Part of the reason there are a lot of games with one track that I've created is simply navigating the derivatives area isn't fluid or seamless.

    Thankssdwyer138 thanked this post
  15. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Desidious

    You guys talk about abuse but really.. how easy could it be to abuse without getting caught? Everything is logged and if we get notifications when a proposal is created, that would help immensely.


    I'm just saying that it's hard to really abuse this system if it is very transparent.


    Abuse is probably the wrong word but leaving a mess of impossible tracks behind that needs cleaning up: that's definitely something that can (has) happened even with the current costs (and not just JJT).

  16. Snowflake's Avatar

    yeah we can use a word other than abuse, but the system itself would be such that using it breaks things down so replace any other word if the word/semantics are the hang up.


    i believe the above explanations though as to why the exact number is hard to figure and needs to be figured are solid even if the word "abuse" is causing distraction.

    Moving past those semantics and on to the substance, what return rate do you think would be appropriate under such a system?

    LikesBarthax liked this post
  17. Desidious's Avatar

    Well if we remove the skepticism I believe that the track creation system will be cleaner and easier to use and would make those that normally wouldn't create tracks to consider it. There are tons of games that aren't track or that are completely unheard of. It would be great to get things added as games are made for newer systems too. Alleviating the initial SP for either those that are in good track creation standing or just removing it in general and making it where only members that didn't create the track are allowed to donate to pass the track proposal seem like better options than right now.


    Also cleaning up and making it easier to find previously created tracks for derivatives is a must.


    See, I'm just not the competitive type... I've tried and I don't think I'll be emotionally stable enough to really get into hardcore competitions. That's okay for me really. But one thing I love to do is just play games and find games while letting others compete on them. I really enjoy making tracks and I would prefer to focus almost all my energy here to making them.

    LikesBarthax liked this post
  18. Snowflake's Avatar

    theres a work around i use that i know some people dont like, but i include the game name in the track itself. the results in my tracks having the game name twice, but its the only way i can find them in the derivative drop down. i can definitely agree that while the current derivative drop down leaving off game name may not technically be a "bug" its definitely a yuge design flaw.

  19. sdwyer138's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jace Hall


    Yes I had forgotten about this. The amount awarded would need to be fractional per submission, otherwise it could be used by the track creators to recursively generate SP.

    Hey @admin staff - what do you think?

    Or just prevent a founder from earning off their own track?

  20. Barthax's Avatar

    Finding the most recently created track should always be at the bottom of your drop-down list. Granted, that's not always the case.

    In terms of finding an old original track to create derivatives, I lean on my knowledge of HTML - which isn't so simple to pass along but here goes. If you right-click the drop-down and use Inspect or Inspect Element (exact wording de3pendant on browser), you'll get an additional window/pane with the source code and the drop-down list (called a select tag [or node] in this context) will get highlighted. Each of the things in the drop-down list is an option tag which will have additional information in this context for you to figure out if it's the one you're after - easiest of which is the game name shown:

    Here I've highlighted a typical "Points" track. Notice it's for 720 Degrees. There are other, easier to identify options around it & you (the human) can find those easier than an "EMU - Points" option and then move one or two up or down as necessary.

    Quick tip: the drop-down lists can be jumped through by typing letters. How proficient (speed) you are at typing will increase your options. For a typical one-finger typist each press of the keyboard will jump to "the next" entry which starts with that letter. Touch-typists should be able to get a word or two into a track title for a more exact jump (until the feature switches back to the first-letter match again - depends on computer speed also).

    Don't bother trying to amend anything in this view of the site. Close the window/pane (there's an X in the upper-right if its a pane-view) & go back to the main form. Don't worry about the errors at the bottom of the page: they're "normal"...

    ThanksSnowflake, Garrett Holland thanked this post
    Updated 02-25-2021 at 10:45 AM by Barthax
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Join us