demosthenes
Member
GraveRobberX said:
I also agree on top 5
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
GAF GOTY 2010 Rules Discussion
- Thread starter timetokill
- Start date
I also agree on top 5
tea_and_crumpets
Member
demosthenes said:I also agree on top 5
I would also like this system
demosthenes
Member
tea_and_crumpets said:
Have 5 be the max, 10 is just too many. If anyone wants to not do 5 just drop off the other places but don't affect the remaining.
So if someone does 2 it would be
Game A: 5
Game B: 4
3:
Game A: 5
Game B: 4
Game C: 3
jarosh said:
Then make the thread, son.
Looks like some people want it limited to 5 votes in the GOTY. I don't really like that idea. I have way more games than that that I'd want to list. When you have like 4 different gaming platforms, you play a lot of games over the course of a year.
but whateva, no big deal either way
marathonfool said:
If people are so hung up on not only the top position, but subsequent positions, here's a fixed model that could be used.
1. 4
2. 3
3. 3
4. 2
5. 2
6. 2
7. 1
8. 1
9. 1
10. 1
Any list smaller than 10 would just be cut off at that number. So a 4-item list in the model would be...
1. 4
2. 3
3. 3
4. 2
Lists of this type would have the desired max 4:1 point ratio, would allow up to 10 games to be voted on, would have the points tiered like timetokill seems to want, and everybody's 3rd game would have the same point value as everybody else's 3rd game. It's also a little bit easier to understand since you aren't plugging values into a formula, and it'd likely be easier for a parser to do automatic calculations on too.
The tiers could be played around with if people wanted. For example you might have three of the 3-point valued games, but I kind of like the spread I used as an example.
timetokill
Banned
ZealousD, you'll note that's the exact same score structure I showed for 10 games in the OP :lol The difference is keeping the numbers static or not. It's really not complicated, and in fact was the model I was going to use for some time, but the new model was put in to address various comments/concerns. Obviously no system is going to make everyone happy. But this thread is a good gauge of who/how many will be unhappy, I guess.
timetokill
Banned
ZealousD said:
Things like people not wanting others to post only one game, or at least wanting something that encouraged posters to list more games if they had them, etc. A lot of what Cheesemeister said:
It's a philosophical issue, kind of. You have people that want different things from the voting process and how the GOTY system reflects GAF. And so on.
timetokill said:
Couldn't you just institute a minimum voting requirement? Keep that fixed structure, but require that people list at least 3 games or something.
Guevara said:
Look, we can play that game all day.
1. 4
2. 3
3. 2
4. 2
5. 2
6. 1
7. 1
8. 1
9. 1
10.1
Oh, 3rd and 5th shouldn't receive the same points. 6th and 10th shouldn't receive the same points. Only way you can fix that kind of thing would be to make the 4:1 ratio higher, to something like 5:1 or 6:1. Oh, but then the ratio is too high.
And hey, maybe some people feel like there isn't that big of a difference between their second and third place picks. I'm even sure there's many people that will struggle to decide between their 1st and 2nd.
timetokill
Banned
ZealousD said:
I could (it would be 3) but there will still be people saying they only want to list one game, or they only played two games from 2010, and etc. etc.
In previous years there was a requirement of 3 games listed, and some people argued the route of putting the favorite game at 1. and putting Imagine Babiez and things at 9. and 10. Last year's format, and part of the appeal of decreasing the total range in general, is allowing people to list one game but decreasing their overall impact over other games (3:1 ratio last year, 4:1 max this year, compared to possible 10:1 in other years).
This is exactly right. One of the things I got a lot of positive feedback on last year was that a lot of people felt the tiered system reflected how they felt about their games better, and that they didn't have to stress about arbitrarily ranking games they felt were about as good as each other.
Sort of the compromise this year is to add one more tier, so that we have our "BEST - Great - Very Good - Good" tiers instead of just "Best - Great - Good".
Cheesemeister
Member
Guevara said:
You're complaining about a lack of integer resolution, basically pointing out jaggies and asking for anti-aliasing.
The solution to that would be extremely simple: start by multiplying the point values by 10. Then you have more integers to work with. Of course, this enters into the realm of the margin of error and the statistical noise involved in asking thousands of opinions.
If it would make people feel better, I don't see a problem with it as the value ratios would still be maintained.
Cheesemeister
Member
To illustrate my above post...
40/37/34/31/28/25/22/19/16/13/10
40/37/34/31/28/25/22/19/16/13/10
Cheesemeister said:
This is the best of both worlds. I salute you. TimetoKill, I do believe he has achieved the best of both worlds.
Point differences are offset by position, so gives accurate differences from one to ten, but also keeps to the ratio the one you conceeded to.
It's very simple, and logical.
People should just worry about doing their top ten, knowing that ranking counts, and you can do the math in the backgroud in Xcel or something, like you said in the op.
Haunted
Member
Cheesemeister you old wizard, I think you just solved this equation.Cheesemeister said:
Keeps the ratio most people agreed on, rewards people listing more games via a bigger pool without affecting the top games and differentiates between every single entry.
This is the one to use for 2011.
DanteFox
Member
what's wrong with the system we used for 2008 and before? Even if there might be a more efficient system, shouldn't we also place some value on consistency? If we keep changing the system every year, our results won't be as comparable to each other across years, and that's one of the great things about the GAF goty imo.