PROPOSAL - Future Ongoing TG Competition (Arcade/MAME)

  1. 11-27-2020, 07:14 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    With all due respect, I view this proposal as being extremely limiting yet overly complicated, and very likely to make existing problems exponentially worse.

    Case in point, the bulk of the discussion quickly began to focus on which titles to include, new v/s old, the rules for each, etc. Imagine what would happen if were actually put into practice. If you guessed more debate and/or more conflict, you're probably right.


    RTM REPLY - that's to be expected of an open proposal of this unique nature...community feedback is an absolute must.

    Simple competitions are of limited duration. A small group selects the titles, or pre-competition votes are tallied and from there titles are selected. Rules are created, sure, but by the organizers, and then people play those titles, under those rules, for a pre-determined period of time...a few days to as long as 3 months, typically.

    The nature of this proposal is more far-reaching in scope...the same number of titles annually, much like the Olympic decathlon, and with performances being tracked against the challenge for the long-term. So it is incumbent on the organizers to solicit as much feedback as possible before a second draft proposal is put forth for additional discussion prior to implementation. And maybe even a third draft if needed, but no point in creating something that is reflective of just the decisions of one person here...this competition is intended to give gamers of all skillsets a chance to see how they rank...and improve over time.
    Likes Barthax liked this post
  2. 11-27-2020, 12:17 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by RTM View Post
    RTM REPLY - that's to be expected of an open proposal of this unique nature...community feedback is an absolute must.

    Simple competitions are of limited duration. A small group selects the titles, or pre-competition votes are tallied and from there titles are selected. Rules are created, sure, but by the organizers, and then people play those titles, under those rules, for a pre-determined period of time...a few days to as long as 3 months, typically.

    The nature of this proposal is more far-reaching in scope...the same number of titles annually, much like the Olympic decathlon, and with performances being tracked against the challenge for the long-term. So it is incumbent on the organizers to solicit as much feedback as possible before a second draft proposal is put forth for additional discussion prior to implementation. And maybe even a third draft if needed, but no point in creating something that is reflective of just the decisions of one person here...this competition is intended to give gamers of all skillsets a chance to see how they rank...and improve over time.
    Don't get me wrong, your proposal does have merit, except that no matter which titles are chosen, the selections will be inclusive of a small group of people and exclusive of a much larger group of people. At least in theory.

    The problem, as I see it, is that the gaming community is already incredibly fractured, and the last thing it needs is something with a reasonably high probability of dividing it further.

    Honestly, I believe you may be over thinking it a bit, so I would suggest applying the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principal to your proposal. Thus, stripping away everything but the most critical aspects, and see what's left. For example, as an exercise, try forcing yourself to summarize it into a single paragraph.
  3. 11-27-2020, 12:51 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    Don't get me wrong, your proposal does have merit, except that no matter which titles are chosen, the selections will be inclusive of a small group of people and exclusive of a much larger group of people. At least in theory.

    The problem, as I see it, is that the gaming community is already incredibly fractured, and the last thing it needs is something with a reasonably high probability of dividing it further.

    Honestly, I believe you may be over thinking it a bit, so I would suggest applying the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principal to your proposal. Thus, stripping away everything but the most critical aspects, and see what's left. For example, as an exercise, try forcing yourself to summarize it into a single paragraph.
    Pretty sure the community isn't going to be divided because of the development of a long running tournament. People might not participate, but that is the case even for tournaments where people like the choices of games. The MGL, Atari Age, Crap Games, Tetris Champs, and a whole host of other tournaments show this.
  4. 11-27-2020, 01:03 PM
    the only way i can see it getting really controversial is if TG officially declares one set of games is somehow better than another set. favoritism can be a problem yes, but just a new way to compete? thats fine, people make new tracks all the time.
    Lode Runner Champion
  5. 11-27-2020, 01:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82 View Post
    Pretty sure the community isn't going to be divided because of the development of a long running tournament. People might not participate, but that is the case even for tournaments where people like the choices of games. The MGL, Atari Age, Crap Games, Tetris Champs, and a whole host of other tournaments show this.
    Perhaps, but is it worth the risk? An annual tournament with a selection of "top" games certainly sounds interesting, the only problem is selecting "top" games from a pool of thousands if not millions of games spanning multiple decades or generations. And who gets to choose?

    Then there are more practical considerations such as the venue. If it's at a physical arcade, do they have the games? On the other hand, if it's an online venue, things become much easier, except that I believe it would be better to include most/all games, but limit the timeframe to a single year at a time.

    Additional specifics of my reasoning about it can be found in the link below.

    https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthr...eo-Game-Scores
  6. 11-27-2020, 01:29 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    Perhaps, but is it worth the risk? An annual tournament with a selection of "top" games certainly sounds interesting, the only problem is selecting "top" games from a pool of thousands if not millions of games spanning multiple decades or generations. And who gets to choose?

    Then there are more practical considerations such as the venue. If it's at a physical arcade, do they have the games? On the other hand, if it's an online venue, things become much easier, except that I believe it would be better to include most/all games, but limit the timeframe to a single year at a time.

    Additional specifics of my reasoning about it can be found in the link below.

    https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthr...eo-Game-Scores
    Worth the risk? That's laughable.

    The rest of your response makes it seem like you haven't read the rest of the proposal which brings clarity to everything you've written...
  7. 11-27-2020, 01:40 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82 View Post
    Worth the risk? That's laughable.

    The rest of your response makes it seem like you haven't read the rest of the proposal which brings clarity to everything you've written...
    Laughable? Therein lies part of the problem. And yes, I read the entire proposal, which was anything but clear, at least at first glance. Hence, my prior suggestions urging simplification. My questions and comments may have touched on specific points addressed in the proposal, but that was intentional, to provoke thought in the reader.

    By the way, I'm a former programmer and database admin, so I can do complexity quite well. If I'm examining a ROM dump with a hex editor, that's one thing. However, when it comes to playing video games I see things a bit differently. It's all about having the proper perspective.
    Last edited by Raven; 11-27-2020 at 01:44 PM.
  8. 11-27-2020, 01:46 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    Laughable? Therein lies part of the problem. And yes, I read the entire proposal, which was anything but clear, at least at first glance. Hence, my prior suggestions urging simplification.

    By the way, I'm a former programmer and database admin, so I can do complexity quite well. If I'm examining a ROM dump with a hex editor, that's one thing. However, when it comes to playing video games I see things a bit differently. It's all about having the proper perspective.
    Your belief that establishing a tournament open to everyone poses a risk says more about your world view than anything else, so yes, your concern about "risk" is laughable. Especially when you've made it clear you won't be participating and likely won't be sticking around.
  9. 11-27-2020, 01:55 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82 View Post
    Your belief that establishing a tournament open to everyone poses a risk says more about your world view than anything else, so yes, your concern about "risk" is laughable. Especially when you've made it clear you won't be participating and likely won't be sticking around.
    Here we go again, invariably on forums there comes a time when a "senior" member feels the need to prop up strawman arguments to support their position. I've made my arguments quite clear, and I'm sorry, but I'm growing tired of burning strawmen.

    Otherwise, you should be careful when making assumptions about my intentions. I wouldn't be here wasting my time if I didn't see some value in it. Considering the checkered history of Twin Galaxies and it's membership, it's perfectly reasonable to test the waters before diving in. That, plus I've never really liked forums and their gimmicks like gamification, credibility, rankings, likes, upvotes, downvotes, etc.

    Content is king, and I judge people on their words and actions, not superficial nonsense.
    Last edited by Raven; 11-27-2020 at 02:03 PM.
  10. 11-27-2020, 02:07 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    Here we go again, invariably on forums there comes a time when a "senior" member feels the need to prop up strawmen to support their position. I've made my arguments quite clear, and I'm sorry, but I'm growing tired of burning strawmen.

    Otherwise, you should be careful when making assumptions about my intentions. I wouldn't be here wasting my time if I didn't see some value in it. Considering the checkered history of Twin Galaxies and it's membership, it's perfectly reasonable to test the waters before diving in. That, plus I've never really liked forums and their gimmicks like gamification, credibility, etc.
    There's no straw-man. You think creating a tournament poses a risk to the larger community. I presented a number of examples that suggest otherwise. You have offered nothing since then except a vague "is it worth the risk" statement.

    As for testing the waters. In another thread you talk about how you will never put your name on a site like this and then went on some ramble. You would need to use your name to submit here, so your participation, by your own admission, isn't going to happen... Plus you also said you're just here to kill some time while nursing a cat back to health.

    If you're actually here to get involved, then awesome, but that seems unlikely by your own statements.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Join us