At 5/13/24 12:44 PM, Anonymous-Frog wrote:
It should be noted that Newgrounds' award system is ranked by score. Higher score means (or should mean) better movie. However, being ranked, said system is also a competition, and competitions need to be fair.
If one megacreator makes 30 cut-down, middling movies in 1 year and wins 30 trophies, and another creator uses that same year to make 1 movie that wins 3 trophies, would that be fair?
While both sets of movies could be entertaining to the right kind of people, would you consider it "fair game" if someone who put in a fraction of the work per movie is rewarded tenfold?
Even if this is the same amount of effort between both sets, would you consider this disproportional?
That being said: if your creative drive is motivated largely by fame, growth, and lucking out on someone else's algorithm, is it really worth encouraging and rewarding?
It's essential that both creators and voters should take caution and responsibility.
Well think of it like this. The one megacreator who makes 30 cut-down, middling movies in 1 year and wins 30 trophies, would probably gain short-term attention with each of those. People would enjoy them, but quickly move on to whatever's next. Maybe if they're a series users would keep coming back to them and enjoy them as a whole, but in individual regard they probably wouldn't get that much acclaim in the long run.
The one who makes that 1 movie and wins 3 trophies (I suppose you mean say a daily, a weekly and a 'users choice' or similar) would probably get recognition way past the submission date. He may get into the Top 50 of all time. He may go viral. He'd most probably get a monthly prize for it as well - assuming it's original content. The effort involved in his work would make it stand out against counterparts, and hopefully become something people truly remember, celebrate and keep coming back to. Hopefully it didn't just take a long time to make but was that good too; the effort focused on a cumulative grandeur in the final product.
Sure the megacreator would get more trophies, consistent buzz, and continual viewership. But then again he would also be putting out content regularly, and keep users engaged, which the other creator would not. That he receive recognition even for more short-form work seems fair too no? He'd be keeping things going as we await this other big thing from the other user, who takes all the more time on his craft.
I don't think either's wrong. As long as the user who actually makes that one amazing piece DOES get recognition for it when it comes out. If not - if they unfortunately just don't have the viewership or following they may initially need to be recognized when they put out the work of a lifetime - then it'd be unfair to me. But not unexpected. With how competitive the world is these days it ought be common sense you also can't just appear out of nowhere and drop something amazing and expect everyone to see it. Ideally they'd have at least a teaser or trailer or some kind of other marketing going on before it to build up the hype - which the megacreator with more short-form content on the other hand may manage to maintain with a more consistent upload schedule.
To some extent I think you need to learn to play any algorithm to truly be seen these days. Ideally you'd do it in moderation, so your followers also don't get disappointed at sub-par work, which seems to the fate that's befallen for example the infamous Foamy lately. If you can sustain short-form content in a way that it entertains and appeals to people, then I really see nothing wrong with it.
The trophies you win here are always fun to get, but IMO they aren't the ultimate show of success either. Being included in a P-Bot post won't give you thousands of views, usually. Being frontpaged will. I think that as long as manual selection (the frontpage features) and long-term community selection (most popular submissions, playlists etc) still trump short-term community-based selections (these posts) - then the system is fair after all. You'll ultimately get recognized and get more views more so by the quality of your submissions than by the quantity of them - though a balance between the two may be the ideal if you really want to build a following, and keep it; remind the world you're still relevant.
I think you maybe place too much value on these trophies in particular. Though I agree creative drive motivated largely by fame, growth, and playing the algorithm isn't ideal, I can understand that if you want to sustain yourself on creative crafts these days, then to a certain extent it's necessary to focus on all three of these factors. The best content creators IMO gain their following organically, by just making great stuff, but I don't fault anyone for trying to market themselves or remain relevant either, as long as it's done in a tasteful way.
I wonder if Atastic's intention is any of these, I get the impression they're just having fun with it, be the content short form or no. Unfortunately it does seem short-form content is the way things are going everywhere, and that we'll probably be getting a lot more animation of the sort moving on here regardless. IMO though that's neither here nor there in a P-bot post, but something best left for the review space. If enough users actually leave a 'this was great, but wouldn't it be even better if it was a little longer?' maybe these would get longer, though I'm not sure most users actually want this kind of content to be more long-form...
Both creators and voters get to decide what content gets showcased here for sure, and what kind of content is socially accepted in large, but who are we to say what's right or wrong when the community is just that, a community? What should they be cautious about? What is their responsibility? Isn't this ultimately a creative free-for-all; up to each user to decide what to make, and for the community to decide what they like and encourage? Ultimately encouragement is the fuel that drives us I believe; feedback and constructive critique, faulting may not have as ideal a result, it may create more enmity than understanding.