Absolutely love the idea of Theceplay, making money while bringing in new member, just genius. I don't know how it works right now but I would love to see the scores of those new members stay in a normal leaderboard and not just the bounty system.

Jace Hall, datagod liked this post

I would have loved to have been involved but sadly 1am is too late (uk time) this is good though great to see discussions like this

datagod liked this post

Originally Posted by Pixe Sukola

Absolutely love the idea of Theceplay, making money while bringing in new member, just genius. I don't know how it works right now but I would love to see the scores of those new members stay in a normal leaderboard and not just the bounty system.

Technically the scores are still just normal leaderboards, currently only presented in the bounty system, but I would think that @admin staff could also represent them in the score database too.

What do you think @admin staff ?

Pixe Sukola, datagod thanked this post

@Jace Hall at 26:43 you discuss working with companies (MK in this case) to submit scores and do bounties etc.. Well most games nowadays have automatic score keeping and submission. Ridge Racer 6 and 7 did this all the way back in 2006/2007!

If TG could work alongside game developers to keep the scores on TG's servers and display as they usually do in game this would be a HUGE deal.

Take DOOM Eternals hoarde mode for example... This is what TG needs. Some way to automatically accept scores from inside the actual games and be THE place for all record keeping. Not saying it would be easy but it would certainly help with new members, growing TG and increasing the lifespan of TG in the future. It would also negate the requirement for submission points via third party users/games

Excelliron, datagod liked this post

Originally Posted by Rotunda

@Jace Hall at 26:43 you discuss working with companies (MK in this case) to submit scores and do bounties etc.. Well most games nowadays have automatic score keeping and submission. Ridge Racer 6 and 7 did this all the way back in 2006/2007!

If TG could work alongside game developers to keep the scores on TG's servers and display as they usually do in game this would be a HUGE deal.

Take DOOM Eternals hoarde mode for example... This is what TG needs. Some way to automatically accept scores from inside the actual games and be THE place for all record keeping. Not saying it would be easy but it would certainly help with new members, growing TG and increasing the lifespan of TG in the future. It would also negate the requirement for submission points via third party users/games

Not being contrary for the sake of it-

I think most people's problems with accepting in-game leaderboards here is that one could still cheat to get the score.

Jace Hall, Fly, MyOwnWorstEnemy, datagod, Garrett Holland thanked this post

Desidious, Don Atreides, Fly, Snowflake, Garrett Holland liked this post

Skimming thru that some-

Something standing out to me is TG making no profit...

Not talking out of both sides of my mouth here-you've heard me complain about frivolous spending, everyone knows I'm kinda a cheap ass.

Still, the idea that you Guys receive no financial benefit for providing this site just blows me away, seems no fair.

Jace Hall, Garrett Holland thanked this post

Silent Apostle liked this post

Briefly, here's the math associated with blind voting. Depending on the caught invalid score submission rate per 100 submissions, credibility caps at the following levels:

credibility*0.95^invalid + (3*(100-invalid))

invalid is the number of invalid submissions per 100

1% invalid → 5940 max credibility
2% invalid → 3015 max credibility
3% invalid → 2040 max credibility
4% invalid → 1552 max credibility
5% invalid → 1259 max credibility
6% invalid → 1064 max credibility

This assumes that invalid scores are correctly identified at some point.

If the invalid scores are not caught during adjudication or later during dispute (i.e. bad scores are erroneously left in the database), there is no credibility limit.

Jace Hall, datagod, bensweeneyonbass thanked this post

Excelliron liked this post

Originally Posted by Rogerpoco

Skimming thru that some-

Something standing out to me is TG making no profit...

Not talking out of both sides of my mouth here-you've heard me complain about frivolous spending, everyone knows I'm kinda a cheap ass.

Still, the idea that you Guys receive no financial benefit for providing this site just blows me away, seems no fair.

It takes time and patience to build some things. Fortunately now we have the kind of foundation needed to support a dynamic business model.

With community support there is finally an opportunity for TG to really take some positive forward steps.

We will see.

Rogerpoco thanked this post

Rogerpoco, Excelliron, datagod, Garrett Holland liked this post

Originally Posted by Rotunda

@Jace Hall at 26:43 you discuss working with companies (MK in this case) to submit scores and do bounties etc.. Well most games nowadays have automatic score keeping and submission. Ridge Racer 6 and 7 did this all the way back in 2006/2007!

If TG could work alongside game developers to keep the scores on TG's servers and display as they usually do in game this would be a HUGE deal.

Take DOOM Eternals hoarde mode for example... This is what TG needs. Some way to automatically accept scores from inside the actual games and be THE place for all record keeping. Not saying it would be easy but it would certainly help with new members, growing TG and increasing the lifespan of TG in the future. It would also negate the requirement for submission points via third party users/games

The main reason TG may not want to do this is because it is very difficult to prevent cheating/data manipulation.

Most of the in game leaderboards you see on any game (even mobile) contain significant amounts of manipulated results.

This is interesting and helps to demonstrate why human verification implementations like TGSAP can do a better job of authenticating than in-game verification.

Of course, the downside of TGSAP and similar methods is that they are slower and have more hassle/friction for the user involved in the process.

Rogerpoco, Rotunda thanked this post

Rotunda, Excelliron, datagod liked this post

Popping up on android right now

Rogerpoco thanked this post

Rogerpoco liked this post

Originally Posted by Desidious

Popping up on android right now

Me too, on PC, I just reported it to the error thread.

Originally Posted by Jace Hall

The main reason TG may not want to do this is because it is very difficult to prevent cheating/data manipulation.

Most of the in game leaderboards you see on any game (even mobile) contain significant amounts of manipulated results.

This is interesting and helps to demonstrate why human verification implementations like TGSAP can do a better job of authenticating than in-game verification.

Of course, the downside of TGSAP and similar methods is that they are slower and have more hassle/friction for the user involved in the process.

Actually, fair point and very true! I agree.

Would be nice if these publishers chose TG for it's solid verification method but they don't care enough i don't think.

Garrett Holland liked this post

I was unable to attend on account of that I've been sick and that I had to work early today. Perhaps we could try this again sometime?

I noticed a lot of talking about blind voting and changes that could possibly help but never once brought up how it could affect the speed of the submission queue. As it stands now, there's an assload of back-queued submissions sitting around because no one has the means to adjudicate them properly or just won't period.

In no way would I want a time limit implemented (people put their time into these) but there absolutely needs to be more incentive than what we have now and/or better means (manually timed submissions). We all know that long time users have an easier time getting most of their submissions through but the time it takes for newer users can vary and be off putting as it is right now so any changes made should take this into consideration.

I dont think blind voting is a problem. But I agree it takes a long time for some submissions. The way the submission queue is setup now a submission can quickly get buried and therefore take a long time to adjudicate, commenting on them no longer "bumps" them to the top either.....this has left a large number of legit performance that are nearly a year old that havnt went through yet. If I was a new member and my submission was taking that long I'd be a little dismayed.

This can easily be fixed by simply using the drop-down windows at the top of the submission queue, but I assume its a high percentage of people who dont use that feature. Ive been going through and voting on older submissions lately.

I dont necessarily think anything should be changed, not without considerable thought, but that is somehting that happens with the current submission queue layout

Pixe Sukola liked this post

Idea 1:

'Linked PSN Accounts'
Right now it appears possible to link ones Xbox account to their TG profile in order to showcase their Xbox achievements/trophies. I wonder if something like that might not be possible for ones Playstation Trophies through our Sony PSN accounts.

Idea #2-
'Theme Week (Console)'
TG occasionally announces a certain week ' Nintendo GameCube Week', 'Vectrex Week', 'Sony PlayStation3 Week', or whatever random console admin chooses, in which gamers are given
an extra incentive to submit to that particular console during the specified time period, possibly through a bonus Submission Point, a bonus Credibility Point,
by not charging submission points for submissions to that console during the given time, or whatever management feels is most appropriate.

This might help give some of the more neglected console leaderboards some love, fill out some of the console leaderboards that are presently bare-bones, spur competition and discussion around the games on the chosen console, and basically just give something else that people can do and work towards around here. I just assume a week for the time period, it could be shorter or longer of course depending on whatever you think would be most apropos

datagod liked this post

I've always understood TG data is it's primary asset but it is great to hear TG is sourcing revenue streams without resorting to a simple firesale on "just any data held". ;)

Was there a subject matter after the exploitation subject which began around 45 min in? Skimming through it was still going at 1:30 and the Zoom participant pool had dropped. Glad I didn't sit through 45 minutes of cyclical predicting statistical analysis on something that hasn't happened.

datagod thanked this post

Garrett Holland liked this post

Originally Posted by Barthax

Glad I didn't sit through 45 minutes of cyclical predicting statistical analysis on something that hasn't happened.

Predicting things (cyclically or otherwise) that have already happened is kinda cheating.

datagod liked this post

Originally Posted by Don Atreides

Predicting things (cyclically or otherwise) that have already happened is kinda cheating.

You didn't answer my query but kept regurgitating. ;)

Imagine an A.I. that has been trained to adjudicate gameplay.

Silent Apostle thanked this post

Silent Apostle, Barthax, Garrett Holland liked this post