Again, not much to say about today. Honestly, a large chunk of it was spent on my e-mail. (I hadn't checked it since last Thursday...though at least there were only ~200 new emails instead of ~800, since the election is over and I'm no longer being bombarded with countless "donate money" emails from a zillion campaigns.)
Still, I did manage to get in two hours, so that's something. I'm still behind, of course, but it's something.
Oh, and the rankings came in on the previous game jam, and I got 3rd place in Writing...sort of. My "Score*" came in 3rd, but my "Raw Score" came in 1st. I have no idea how they calculate the Score*, other than reducing the score of everyone who didn't get the median number of rankings. (Seriously, my Raw Score for Writing was 4.429, but because I didn't get a whole 10 rankings my Score* was bumped down to 3.801. My score for Interpretation of the Theme suffered even worse: it went from 4.714 down to 4.047. Wait, actually, that's the same amount, it just looks worse somehow.)
Anyway, regardless of the bitterness of having my score reduced just because fewer people gave it ratings...actually, no, I'm not done with that yet. In some of the game jams on itch.io, I can understand that there are wide disparities in the number of ratings games receive. I mean, I just went to the "Top Past Jams" page and the first one on the list had 5,377 entries and 143,000 ratings, and yet the average number of ratings per game was 26.6 with the median number being 18...yet some games received over 250 ratings. (Ouch. I went to the last page of the ratings, and there was a game that received only one rating, with a straight 4.000 from whoever rated it...which was shoved down to a 0.943 because it was the only rating.) So, yeah, in a jam of that size, I can get...well, no, actually, I can't really wrap my head around any of the thought processes involved in a jam of that size. But the thing is, the jam I was in? It had a total of 20 entries. There was no excuse for anyone not to rate all of them, and yet the median number of ratings was 10, with an average of 9.2 ratings per game. In other words, not everyone who submitted a game bothered to rate them. I rated every single game in the jam (other than my own, of course), but evidently a lot of the others didn't bother, or they only bothered to rate the short games (though even the most rated game only got 12 ratings). Mine, of course, at about 230k words, was anything but short. Seeing as we have no control over whether or not others rate our games (and in one the size of that 5k monster of a jam, no control over whether anyone can even find the game!), it does seem rather shockingly unfair that we're penalized for the failures of others.
In the long run, it's not like it matters; there's no prize for "winning" this particular jam or anything. It just kind of rankles me that I'm eternally on this posted ratings board several numbers down from where I would be if the ratings hadn't been skewed like that. (Two #3s that would have been #1, a #8 that would have been...did I figure that one as #4 or #5? It was complicated by one of the ones above me also having been shoved down by fewer than the median number of ratings. I didn't calculate the others, but the point remains.)
*sigh*
I guess deep down somewhere I do actually have a competitive side. Probably why I generally avoid anything that remotely resembles competition; I secretly don't like losing. :(
Ugh, now I'm in a weird, sour headspace.
Whatever I was going to say, I've forgotten it.
Hopefully I'll remember it tomorrow.
Total time spent on my projects in November to date: 17:52:47.96
No comments:
Post a Comment