Skip to Content

Critique the February Showdown Entries

17 replies [Last post]
Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008

Use this thread to comment on the entries for this month's showdown, "Love in the Air". Entries may be found here: http://www.bgdf.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3819
and another wonderful bunch of weirdness they are too.
Don't forget to vote for your favourite title as well as for the games themselves.

There are 9 entries this month - one additional entry that got lost during the hack attack is now present and correct.

note to self: don't agree to run this event in February again. The number of times I mistyped February started to get silly.

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Important edit to this post

A couple of days ago, I got a delayed entry via the 'Geek. Now, the entrant knows that it was late; it all got tangled up with the horrible sitehack issues at around that time.
But I was willing to consider just tagging it onto the end of the list, as it was an entry, even though it should have been disqualified due to lateness (whoah - two potential d/q's in one month!)

However, there was a larger problem. The entry consisted of two graphic files. One was for board and pieces, but the other was the ruleset. Now, the rules of the contest are pretty firm on this: the entry shouldn't include links to external files. In this case, I could see how the files might have arrived as inset graphics, but not how they could have been displayed within the usual entry thread.*

I have now been rightly chastised by the entrant in question who noted that their original submission - trapped by the system - was indeed in a text version, and that he offered to send it again in that form to me. For various reasons, I didn't register this properly and all I recalled was that he'd linked two graphic files. So, in this case, it was entirely my fault that this went wrong. I want to assure the person in question that I didn't mean this posting to sound as though I was being particularly snide about their entry and I am sorry that it came across that way.

Thank you for your attention in this matter. Normal service will now be resumed.

(*however, I am willing to link to their graphics from the entry thread for those people who'd like to see it anyway.)

seo
seo's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

So to sum it up: are both entry #9 and #10 elegible? Only #9? Neither of them? I'm still in the process of reading all the entries, but if I were to found any or both deserving of my vote, are they elegible?

Seo

Xaqery
Xaqery's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/26/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Stupid hackers. #9 is valid. I think the two that *may* not be valid are #8 and #10

seo
seo's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

That was what I thought at first, but Surra's edit of his post about #10 made me think mabe it should be elegible. That's why I asked.

Seo

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Scurra wrote:

I have now been rightly chastised by the entrant in question who noted that their original submission - trapped by the system - was indeed in a text version, and that he offered to send it again in that form to me. For various reasons, I didn't register this properly and all I recalled was that he'd linked two graphic files. So, in this case, it was entirely my fault that this went wrong. I want to assure the person in question that I didn't mean this posting to sound as though I was being particularly snide about their entry and I am sorry that it came across that way.

I think the person in question would get MUCH better results if they understood that SNAFUs do occur, and they are not intentional. I was forwarded a copy of the person's complaint with regards to site issues and the post could definitely be classified as RUDE. That person must understand that this site is provided as a service, and a FREE service at that. I was more than a little disturbed to see the juvenile nature of the complaint. We work very hard to keep this site going and we don't appreciate such an attitude. Also, these showdowns are supposed to be low key exercises in FUN. I'm not sure why anyone would take it so seriously as to chastise the operator of the contest.

I say cheers to you Scurra for doing such a good job and being willing to take on this month's showdown.

-Darke

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Darkehorse wrote:
I say cheers to you Scurra for doing such a good job and being willing to take on this month's showdown.
Thanks. For the record, a text version of the (ineligible) entry has now been added to the list, simply for completeness.

I think we all appreciate that sometimes things go wrong, and it they're going to go wrong, they all go wrong at once :-)

Neoclown
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Critique the February Showdown Entries

From what has been posted, both #8 and #10 are eligible unless the voters vote otherwise.

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

There isn't an entry #10. There are nine clearly numbered entries. The last one has been included because I felt it was unfair not to mention it; however I specifically didn't give it a number so that people didn't vote for it.

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

I currently have fewer votes for this month's* contest than there were entries (and that's saying something, given the confused state it ended up in!)

I shall extend the voting deadline for one more day. Please vote, and make the exercise worthwhile. Thanks.

(*technically, last month's contest...)

Xaqery
Xaqery's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/26/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Maybe you should list who you have votes from.

I voted but maybe because of the hackery it was lost.

- Dwight

evilupine
Offline
Joined: 09/04/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

I sent a second PM with my vote just to be sure. I suggest that we all do that unless Scurra posts a list of people who have already voted.

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

OK, I have votes from (in alphabetical order)

doho123
epigone
evilupine
sebastian
seo
xaquery
yogurt

It'd be nice to have some votes from non-entrants! (ooo, what a giveway ;-)

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Results now posted.
Congratulations to seo and yogurt, who were fighting it out neck-and-neck all the way through the voting.

seo
seo's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Winning this month's GDS is the best news for my birthday, today, so all the delay seems to have been just part of a perfect timing plan by Scurra! ;-)

Interestingly, the games that ended on 2nd, 3rd and 4th place are the ones I voted for. And Honey I love ewe was my vote for best title too. So not only I'm glad for my win but for how the whole voting ended. :-)

Congratulations to all, specially to Yogurt and Doho123 for yet another rostrum finish.

On a side note, once again I was right on target catching Yogurt's authorship. I really enjoy your sense of humour.

Seo

Hamumu
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Critique the February Showdown Entries

I'm sorry I didn't send in votes. It was a combination of the hacking nonsense which blocked me for the first part of it, and then just the laziness that comes of not having sent in an entry. I started reading the entries before the hacking, but then that happened I just forgot about it.

I really struggled for a while with an entry, but I never even had a solid idea. I just kept bouncing different things. The love theme was tricky, but the real killer for me was no cards. I was just at a loss there! I need to learn how not to use cards.

Congrats to the winners, despite your lack of my very valuable blessing!

Yogurt
Yogurt's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2009
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Happy birthday, Seo!

Funny that the premises of our entries were so similar: young people sneaking away for love. Focusing on couples helps us avoid a problem that games about individuals have, which is that how can you have a winner and loser in a happy relationship?

I have to say, outrageously punny title-wise, I was robbed. "Abstinence makes the Head Girl fondle!" That's three puns in one! Philistines! :)

I liked Love Me Blender a lot. Doho was braver than me in creating it too, making each game in the sequence slightly different. I wanted to do something like that, but I wasn't sure if that would disqualify the game in some judges' eyes, even though I myself rewarded it. Gun shy, I just left that part out. Blender was a very clever game in many ways. It kept surprising me.

I also liked Pun Lola Pun a lot, especially for this particular contest about repeated sequences of love! The game could probably use a few more consequential decisions. The rule about dying if you land on your partner and an upturned tile confused me. Wouldn't the tile always be upturned if someone was there?

As for Me Pull Meeple and Planetary Bump, it took two planetary system games for me to get the joke.

Thanks for the compliment about the humour in the game, Seo. I found myself laughing at this one for a few days afterward. (Not to mention chanting "modesty, decorum and self-respect!" for no reason at all. My poor wife.)

Yogurt

evilupine
Offline
Joined: 09/04/2008
Critique the February Showdown Entries

Congratulations and happy b-day Seo! This contest is great. I was surprised at how complete a game I was able to make in only seven days, quite an eye opener for me.
Thanks guys and good luck next time :)

P.S. I would have posted sooner but I've had a busy week.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut