IF Comp 2011 Results

[David Whyld]

I mean I'll only be voting for games that haven't been updated. Any game that has won't get a vote from me at all.

[Hannes]

Alright. That's as good a rule to select which games to play and rate as any.

[David Whyld]

Well, the IFComp organiser confirmed on the IF Forum that the rule is staying so I'm officially out of the comp from now on as an author. Shame really. I used to look forward to the comp and I was quite excited about it this year. Now, though, what a joke it's become...

[P/o Prune]

That makes two of us, David.
Not that I think that an Adrift game at the 30th place will change much. But I don't care to attend a competition where I don't agree on the rules.

[Duncan_B]

Boo hoo.

[billy7720]

I mean I'll only be voting for games that haven't been updated. Any game that has won't get a vote from me at all.

A sad statement to say the least. Not everyone is perfect the first time around. I would vote on a game like this for the purpose of the person's ambition to keep the game alive and frequent fixes make the game better. That's how I see it.

I may have some mistakes in the past and updated the two games I've worked on, but this shows that a person is doing what they can to fulfill the requests of the players. That is not only ambition but loyalty and respect for the players.

I've said my piece. By the way, I have not had time to play any of the wonderful looking games that have been made by others since I've been so busy making what I have. This is a shame since I play IF to break away from the boredom of reality.

Peace.

billy7720

To be very blunt, the next time around I will vote but not just for length, originality or anything of the like. It's for those folks that do keep their games updated and made better for the sole purpose of not just long but short games as well as games that are a good "attempt" at a pretty decent idea.

[David Whyld]

A sad statement to say the least. Not everyone is perfect the first time around.

Isn't that the point of having the game tested in the first place? I'm not saying that games shouldn't be updated at all, particularly not if bugs are found, but I don't like the idea of games being updated during the voting period of a competition. For me, that goes against the whole spirit of a competition.

I wonder if this new rule will give rise to buggier games being entered into the IFComp with people figuring they can use the initial feedback from the comp as a kind of betatesting and skip the usual testing phase altogether?

[billy7720]

A sad statement to say the least. Not everyone is perfect the first time around.

Isn't that the point of having the game tested in the first place? I'm not saying that games shouldn't be updated at all, particularly not if bugs are found, but I don't like the idea of games being updated during the voting period of a competition. For me, that goes against the whole spirit of a competition.

I wonder if this new rule will give rise to buggier games being entered into the IFComp with people figuring they can use the initial feedback from the comp as a kind of betatesting and skip the usual testing phase altogether?

David,

I absolutely agree on the fact that it is a pain for games to be updated during a voting procedure. That is true, but what about the players? I understand where you are coming from.

How about the author leaves up the original game and if it's updated, he can upload that as well in another area of the upload area? this would make it a bit easier for the judges I'm sure and fulfill the constant need of bugs being fixed for the players.

i doubt this will cause a rise in buggier games. Yes, rushed games are buggy. This has happened to me and I have learned from it but how else will the "newbie" authors learn? I can gather it's not all about "perfection" but the reluctance of getting everything in order before a game is released.

Once again, I can see where you're coming from on this subject but I stand firm to those authors that keep their works updated. I see ambition, a will to succeed and the respect to the players from the author. Actually, this makes me proud that I updated my games and to be honest I would be more than happy to update them further. I have no issues with this and it will make the game better and better.

[Duncan_B]

For me, that goes against the whole spirit of a competition.

Lame.

I wonder if this new rule will give rise to buggier games being entered into the IFComp with people figuring they can use the initial feedback from the comp as a kind of betatesting and skip the usual testing phase altogether?

I don't know why you would even wonder this. A vote is a vote. No-one is going to just use the initial round of voting as their beta-testing phase because their games would suffer for it. Not to mention, we saw this year that a number of judges never even played updated versions of games. The better written, more thoroughly tested games will come out on top.

[David Whyld]

For me, that goes against the whole spirit of a competition.

Lame.

In what way? I think it's borderline cheating allowing updates while a competition is running. Why is thinking that "lame"? Care to clarify? Or is one word replies all you can be bothered with?

[Duncan_B]

Care to clarify?

I've already done so. I'm just tired of hearing you go on about this. "This goes against the spirit of a competition" is about all you've had to say. Updating is standard in professional competitions-- which apparently makes it a "joke" to you. It's ridiculous.

Would you enter a game with no beta-testing just because the comp allows updates? Of course you wouldn't. Why do you expect other people would?

[David Whyld]

Care to clarify?

I've already done so. I'm just tired of hearing you go on about this. "This goes against the spirit of a competition" is about all you've had to say. Updating is standard in professional competitions-- which apparently makes it a "joke" to you. It's ridiculous.

Would you enter a game with no beta-testing just because the comp allows updates? Of course you wouldn't. Why do you expect other people would?

Lame

[P/o Prune]

Updating is standard in professional competitions

I hope I'm not taking this out of context, but what professional competitions allow updates after the voting has started?

[Duncan_B]

I have already mentioned three mainstream, globally recognized game competitions that allow mid-comp for updates earlier in this thread.

Look, if anyone wants to artificially limit their playing audience to the maybe four people in this community that actually play IF and provide feedback, that's fine by me, but I think an author is only shooting themselves in the foot if they swear off something as big as IFComp. The enemy of an author is obscurity.

[P/o Prune]

I have already mentioned three mainstream, globally recognized game competitions that allow mid-comp for updates earlier in this thread.

Indiecade, IGF, and Slamdance

I took this from the Indiecade website:
Once you hit the submit button, you may continue to update your submission until the deadline, May 31, 2011 (or June 15, 2011 for late submissions), at which point all submissions will close and no further changes may be made to your submission.
This doesn't seem like that you're allowed to update your game through the competition.

I couldn't check IGF due to a "samrtfilter" at work, and when I googled "Slamdance" I got hits to a filmfestival, so I really can't comment on them.