At 5/14/09 04:07 PM, 25272D wrote:
At 5/14/09 04:01 PM, mongoid wrote:
I really like the idea of a small panel of accomplished artists and NG employees to decide the relevance of a submission's quality.It's impossible to judge fairly like that. The point of a game is to appeal to the populous, even if 5 of the panel members enjoy it, every single member of the public could hate it. Only part of a game is the programming and design, playability and general enjoyment is also a major part and 5 top end people can't decide that, can they?
If everyone is on the same scoring system, it's the safest bet.
I disagree. The current system is easily "hacked", based on a legion of fanboys that vote 5 on anything their beloved artist/programmer makes, and vote 0 on everyone else. It's also influenced by 6 year olds who think that anything with a mario sprite is the best game they've ever played. Popularity, especially that which is derived from a user base of somewhat anonymous voters, often has little to do with the quality of a game. It moves into an agenda-based form of ranking that is demoralizing and unfair to those who put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into their work.
If I was given a high rank from a committee of accomplished developers, I would take that much more seriously than a flood of up-votes from juvenile and sophomoric n00bs.