Forum Games Resources & General Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I think I'd try that out. I'd be a team of one.
And what you've posted there really seems like it'd be at home in Fan Fakes and not Forum Games or Competitive.
And you probably could've posted this in the Fan Fakes General or even the Ideas thread.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I really like what you've outlined so far, but I don't see how you could tie it to Forum Games and/or Competitive. I keep seeing comparisons to the CaC, but CaC keeps itself to just Fan Fakes. How does CaP make itself 'shared' between Competitive and Forum Games?
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

PMJ said:
Here's what I think should be done regarding co-hosts: Optional, but anyone who has or is willing to have one is looked at more favorably when compared to a submission from a similar member who does not have or is not willing to have a co-host (i.e. both members meet only the bare minimum requirements for hosting on PokéBeach). Anyone who has hosted a substantial game or competition on PokéBeach to completion will not be prejudiced against for choosing not to have a co-host since they have proven they have the drive and desire to get things done.
Click to expand...

While I like this plan in theory (in that it's simple, easy to implement, and solves the problem of not requiring everyone to have a co-GM), I do see a flaw in that it doesn't really address the problem that requiring co-GMs is meant to solve. It would be great if the co-GM requirement was done to foster more partnership and people working together to host games (since it rewards people who choose to follow that path), but the main purpose of the plan is to make sure GMs don't abandon games, and the bonus system doesn't really have anything to do with that.

EDIT: @prof.light: I like the concept and I think it's really cool. I also love that you allow people to work in teams or singly. The competitive aspects of the contest would stop me, personally, from participating (EVs, egg moves, competitive viability, etc. just go right over my head), though it's also a nice way to encourage people to work in teams together instead of everyone just entering on their own, so I understand those kind of rules from that perspective.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I would also like input on the co-host expectations from players that just play the game and don't host. They are the ones risking investing time into a game with the risk of a host failing them, so I would like them to have a say in how free/secure/strict they want it to be.

Of course hosts also play and have played and their input matters just as much, but so far I've only seen the input of people that also host and I would like to know the opinions of as many as possible for this.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

How about give the document to a moderator who has no intention of playing or even hosting to keep the information safe, then if the host is unable to continue then a substitute host is elected from the pool of dead players. (If there are no suitable candidates then an FG moderator becomes host).

EDIT: This can be ignored for people that have previously hosted succesfully.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

Well, I'm now banned from hosting games for some reason, so I guess I'm exclusively a player now...

I don't like this rule. Hosts are more than capable enough of hosting on their own, on this site and almost every other. In all of the games I've played with a cohost, only one has been truly successful, because oftentimes a communication error of some description leads to one of the hosts doing something wrong and then one of the hosts gets stressed out etc. etc.. Plus, things like post games take a long time because each of the hosts has to read through the other's postgame to make sure they aren't repeating anything etc. etc.. I just really thnk it is a bad idea to make co-hosts andalmost compuslory thing when more often than not the games reach a conclusion, but it is an unfulfilling one because of any number of screw ups along the way.

When a host designs a game, they know how they want it to play out in their head and how they would like it to be hosted. This is something which is difficult to translate to another person and that is why I do not like this rule. It is better for a game to be hosted well but not finished than to finish after a clusterf*ck.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

If you are investing months into a game just to see it fallout in the final 5 you are going to be pissed. Maybe having the last Host create a google doc with all of there plans that the new host can look at. It would help the game end smoothly. Of course it is equally annoying to lose the game because of a bad host.


I think choosing the two most qualified people to host together isn't a good idea. I think you should choose the two people who have the most Synergy. Just because Guy 1 and Guy 2 both have lead great games doesn't mean they work well together. Guy 3 and Guy 1 have a better chance of completing the game because it is shown that they actually work well together.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

As a person who has previously hosted a game and let it go to waste, I agree with the decision that some players should be required to have a cohost when they're running a new game. Having to cancel games is upsetting to both the players who have dedicated time to being active in it and to the host, who will be frustrated and embarrassed that they didn't bring their game to completion. So cohosts should be able to help remedy this problem, at least somewhat.

On the other hand, I agree that not everyone is going to need a cohost, since having one can make it harder to keep track of everything that you, as the designer of the game, want to happen. That is why I think that it would be much more beneficial to impose the cohost rule only on select groups.

Basically, people who are hosting a game for the first time or have shown a history of closed games should be required to have a cohost with them to ensure that their game doesn't end prematurely. Those people who have proved in the past that they can successfully host games should be able to be exempt from this rule, if they so choose.

As one of the member of the forums who spends about 95% of their time in the Forum Games section, I'd like to see the quality of the games improve in any way possible. Cohosts have the potential to be a huge help, but we need to make sure that they're not impeding the progress of games too. That's just my input into the whole matter.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

i have to agree with most of you guys point that New-host or host that have bad rep based on previous game need a co-host or better yet backup-host

However the problem with co-host would really effect if let say with the time different and such. The real host might have to waited to long for communication..

I prefer the idea of a backup-host instead where the backup-host will take over the game when the host decide to dissapear.
Since this will cut down the time for the host&co-host spending on waiting for each other reply..
The person being the backup host might really feel left & excluded though..

This is a long shot but..
in respect of the co-host..
If he have very high integrity that is

The host would post every information of the game in a qt .. Total roles & daily action records.. and give the link to the backup-host. If the backup-host can keep it honest, he/she would only look into the QT if the host goes MIA.. Or the link could be given to a Mod that is not playing and be given to the backup host if it has been decided the backup host should take over..

This way.. whoever became the backup host can still play like normal if the host is always around.
In respect of writing style and how the games should go. Just few the post at OP and personal creativity, the backup host would do fine when taking over.

Just my though. Since I know if i were to given the chance to host.. my main problem would be waiting for communication reply from my partner.. Since I can most of the time be online.. during you guys at NY are sleeping that is.. a simple discussion could turn into 3 days long chat with minimal content.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

Athena said:
PMJ said:
Here's what I think should be done regarding co-hosts: Optional, but anyone who has or is willing to have one is looked at more favorably when compared to a submission from a similar member who does not have or is not willing to have a co-host (i.e. both members meet only the bare minimum requirements for hosting on PokéBeach). Anyone who has hosted a substantial game or competition on PokéBeach to completion will not be prejudiced against for choosing not to have a co-host since they have proven they have the drive and desire to get things done.
Click to expand...

While I like this plan in theory (in that it's simple, easy to implement, and solves the problem of not requiring everyone to have a co-GM), I do see a flaw in that it doesn't really address the problem that requiring co-GMs is meant to solve. It would be great if the co-GM requirement was done to foster more partnership and people working together to host games (since it rewards people who choose to follow that path), but the main purpose of the plan is to make sure GMs don't abandon games, and the bonus system doesn't really have anything to do with that.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood my post. My reasoning wasn't to friendship is magic, it was basically saying hey, some of us don't need training wheels and it's a silly idea for us to require them when we can ride our bikes perfectly fine on our own and we've proven we can do it.

If you don't want a co-host and you're new to hosting, then fine, but know that if another guy submits who is also new and has a co host then we're probably gonna pick his game over yours. That's how I would see it.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

PMJ said:
Athena said:
While I like this plan in theory (in that it's simple, easy to implement, and solves the problem of not requiring everyone to have a co-GM), I do see a flaw in that it doesn't really address the problem that requiring co-GMs is meant to solve. It would be great if the co-GM requirement was done to foster more partnership and people working together to host games (since it rewards people who choose to follow that path), but the main purpose of the plan is to make sure GMs don't abandon games, and the bonus system doesn't really have anything to do with that.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood my post. My reasoning wasn't to friendship is magic, it was basically saying hey, some of us don't need training wheels and it's a silly idea for us to require them when we can ride our bikes perfectly fine on our own and we've proven we can do it.

If you don't want a co-host and you're new to hosting, then fine, but know that if another guy submits who is also new and has a co host then we're probably gonna pick his game over yours. That's how I would see it.
Click to expand...

I'm not favoring the fact that you guys would be picking a new host who have a co-host over the one that doesn't.
Like my point earlier, I myself apply to to host a mafia game. Yes I'm new to hosting. and also didn't submit a name of co-host. Since I believe the delay communication since me and most of people here having different timezone would impact more through a much more delayed n longer day/night phase.

In my situation, if i were to have a co-host it would be really unfavourable to him since he can't play nor do he is really required to do. So I don't really want to ask anyone to be my co-host (if my application is accepted) just yet. But maybe during registeration I might open the position if there is a person interested and i do have the amount of player needed (after excluding the co-host)
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I understand where the co-host rule is coming from but as a host myself I wouldn't have wanted to have a co-host. A rule I wouldn't be opposed to though is required people applying to be first time hosts to have co-hosts (Although I might be bias since I've hosted twice already and wouldn't have to obey this rule). The other idea that might be possible during the game is to encourage the host to send all the roles and information to someone outside the game (possible the first person to die) so that in case something happens that player would have all the information so they could take over or hand it to someone who would want to take over.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

bigfootaus said:
I think I'd try that out. I'd be a team of one.
And what you've posted there really seems like it'd be at home in Fan Fakes and not Forum Games or Competitive.
And you probably could've posted this in the Fan Fakes General or even the Ideas thread.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I really like what you've outlined so far, but I don't see how you could tie it to Forum Games and/or Competitive. I keep seeing comparisons to the CaC, but CaC keeps itself to just Fan Fakes. How does CaP make itself 'shared' between Competitive and Forum Games?
Click to expand...

I'm glad you like it; as to your question, I feel athena has answered it better than I could:

Athena said:
EDIT: @prof.light: I like the concept and I think it's really cool. I also love that you allow people to work in teams or singly. The competitive aspects of the contest would stop me, personally, from participating (EVs, egg moves, competitive viability, etc. just go right over my head), though it's also a nice way to encourage people to work in teams together instead of everyone just entering on their own, so I understand those kind of rules from that perspective.
Click to expand...

My personal opinion aside, the reality is that some people just can't get into competitive playing, and the same could be told for some people who don't care much about designing or drawing; the idea is that having a multi-disciplinary team, or at least a team of people who are friends having fun, is better because it allows the designs to be more polished, more complete in every aspect of judging (say, we have to judge two solo teams, one has a competitively-designed pokemon that is a design wreck, and the other has a great design, but an implausible movepool or strategies).

Besides, yes, the contest would indeed be hosted in fan fakes; but I talked with Ice arceus, and we came to the conclusion that links to it would be placed on competitive and forum games to get more players; after all, this task requires work and there are several areas to specialize; people from fan fakes can contribute their artistic skills and design, while people from competitive have their competitive expertise, move ideas, etc, and people from forum games have the drive and enthusiasm to enter games. And as groups of one and two are allowed too, no one is really left behind be it because they couldn't get a group or because they want to enter solo.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I totally agree with PMJ with the co-hosting.

I do understand where the rule comes from, as we have run into games where host abandonment was an issue (Seleno City and The Challenge 5). However, I feel like if you're able to prove that you can host your game on your own, then you should be allowed to do so (perhaps have something on the application form can be about this).

Having experiences with co-hosts on other sites with mafia games, I can attest to co-hosts dragging communication down as every action has to be defined twice (once to the player performing the action, and once to the other host). However, co-hosting presents another problem that it's been used to try to solve. What happens if the co-host drops from the game?

Anyways, whatever the decision, I'm still gonna submit my idea. Only now I need a co-host so contact me if you're interested in the kind of Werewolf games I make (deviation games; games that defy the norm).
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I like the discussion and new ideas here! It seems most of you really don't want co-hosts to be a requirement for Werewolf hosts, so we will more likely than not get this idea changed to something less drastic. I hope this new rule didn't scare anyone too badly. Don't worry, it will most likely go away now. :D

EDIT: I suppose by co-host, I meant more-so a backup host. The main host would always have final say, and the co-host doesn't need to do anything.

@professorlight, what if you made your game like CaC, where people can either enter image-based or text-based, but instead they enter in either design-based (just a drawing/picture of the Fakemon, a name, and the types), or competitive-based (all the aspect you mentioned in your recent overview post). You can rename those, of course; the names kind of suck. :p This way, people who don't have any experience with competitive battling or EVs or whatever can still enter.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

That's the point of teaming up, machamp; if someone isn't versed on design and/or art and/or competitive play, he can still find a group and enter anyway; there are a lot of factors that people can contribute to a team; creativity, logic, artistic skills, specific knowledge of that person, organization... or just plain enthusiasm and moral support; no one should be really left out doing nothing; if no team can take them, they can still choose to enter alone and see how far they can get; as in CAC, any mistakes they'll do will help them improve.

The idea of separating the work seems interesting, but I don't think the nature of the contest makes it appropriate; a pokemon isn't just a design, or a movepool, it is both things, and more; and should be always judged as a whole; that's why we'll have several judges, too; competitive play and design don't always mesh well, and one judge might not have the necessary knowledge on every aspect of the pokemon to make an informed decision.

So, it is possible to make dual contests, yes, but it would also keep people from learning new things, I think. By working together with people who know things you don't, you'll learn from them, and by being corrected by the judges, you'll learn more; who knows, maybe at some point we will be able to do it, if people learn enough that they can consistently make well-rounded pokemon in whatever category they're in.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

Machamp The Champion said:
I suppose by co-host, I meant more-so a backup host. The main host would always have final say, and the co-host doesn't need to do anything.
Click to expand...

As a player, I like the idea of a back-up host. I've been in Werewolf games (or at least one game) where it just ended abruptly and the closure there was abysmal. It's a bad experience for everyone involved when the game isn't finished to completion and the idea of a back-up host being used to prevent something like that is a very nice fix.

dmaster out.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

Machamp The Champion said:
EDIT: I suppose by co-host, I meant more-so a backup host. The main host would always have final say, and the co-host doesn't need to do anything.
Click to expand...
This. Using the term co-host seemed to have caused some confusion (back-up host is more accurate, sorry for that), because the idea we had was just having someone with the required information to continue the game in case the host cannot do this. They do not have any say/responsibility until the host can no longer continue, unless the host of a game wants to do it that way. If a game requires two hosts (or a host and co-host) they might still need a back-up host on top of that, in case one of them cannot continue the game.

So now that the confusion is hopefully cleared up, how does everyone feel about back-up hosts?
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

Better, but how would that not require the host to run everything by the backup?
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

They would have to make the information available and if the back-up doesn't understand something it might require some additional explaining. I assume hosts have the information for a game saved somewhere, so they just need to share it with one person.

There doesn't need to be much discussing/running things by them. It's simply informing them.
 
RE: Game Suggestions & General Discussion

I will still strongly prefer back-up hosts to not be automatically required for all GMs as the differentiation does not actually alleviate any of my personal concerns. In fact, all of my original post was made with the assumption that the co-hosts would function the exact same as back-up hosts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top