Discussion about a reform on LDCs

[Nwolf]

a double LDC like that wouldn't work

[Supershroom]

Um, yes, I didn't see that the two 21st LDC's had entirely different judges. It would be a theoretical loophole to have 3 judges for every half each, and then 2 additional test judges in one half. But that sounds too complicated, so I still prefer to give it a try on a mini-LDC.

[*Emelia K. Fletcher]

I'm not that receptive to the idea of running a controversial judging style that discards results in the higher/lower bounds on my mini-LDCs but it depends on what the lemons say

[MessengerOfDreams]

Try it on a duel or something. Don't ♥♥♥♥ with the canon of the LdCs

[~Yuri]

Hey Shroom, I remember you said you could duel with me after the LDC, right? How about testing your concept in our duel? I think the idea in theory isn't bad, but I don't know if it would work in the practice. I wouldn't mind testing this in a duel, but doing this in an LDC or a mini LDC would cause way too much of an impact, as for what I've seen in this thread, people don't seem really enthusiast with this idea.

[NanTheDark]

I wanna judge that duel! I wanna judge things!

[-BY]

Hey Shroom, I remember you said you could duel with me after the LDC, right? How about testing your concept in our duel? I think the idea in theory isn't bad, but I don't know if it would work in the practice. I wouldn't mind testing this in a duel, but doing this in an LDC or a mini LDC would cause way too much of an impact, as for what I've seen in this thread, people don't seem really enthusiast with this idea.

Yurimaster saving the day. ^^
I'd offer myself as judge as well, if this is going to lead somewhere.

[Harmless]

To me, my individual score of Shroom's series (14/20) was perfectly justified. The level dragged, lagged, got annoying and too repetitive; but if he'd executed his ideas a bit better, because he did have good ideas, he would have had a much higher score from me. On the objective side of things, I still gave him a 7 something out of 10 in Fun because I wasn't too fond of it, but it was technically not bad at all. In some ways, I marked him down more because he used too many ideas. If you get lots of really good gameplay ideas, you should use them for different levels, not all in the same series, because otherwise how do you move on from that?

Funny, the reason I gave Shroom the score that I did was because I actually felt it was very technically challenged and poorly executed (and not very creative at all). I'm not saying you're wrong, but if we were to implement Shroom's judging system, there should be normally no reason to cut my judgings because I had a lower, yet different opinion and experience with his level. Yet they would cut my judgings anyways to prevent 'biased low-score judgings' or whatever it was.

At least he would have Nwolf's to look on though. Clearly he too wasn't happy with the level, yet that's no reason to cut mine.

On the topic of 'low scores given by judges', if you've noticed Shroom wasn't the only one who received a low score from me. Plenty other people received quite a bit of criticism as I have stated in the LDC topic. If my scores in general are a little lower than some people's, then in the overall sense it shouldn't be viewed as an unfair advantage. Granted, those levels that did strike me as excellent received a higher scoring, but that's the job of a judge in the first place.

Well, maybe I've made the impression to say that my idea would be an overall perfect solution and it would bring ultimative fairness and zero unfairness. I've never meant to say something like that. Judging will forever be subjective. But heavy deflections are odd as well. No matter if the judges don't participate or the levels are anonymous, they will still happen here and there. They need to be curtailed.

You're going to need to be more specific on 'deflections'. Although I assume by that you're talking about judges that happen to be an 'odd ball out'.

There are pro's and contra's for my idea, but still I'm sure the advantages overbalance the disadvantages. It's not a perfect solution, but a kind of approach or harmonisation.

Are you sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? I think some of us have given plenty reasons as to why it would not work.

[~MP3 Amplifier~]

Exactly, Harm. This is why judging is subjective. I thought the platforming was technically good because things like jumping over invisibility gaps or stepping onto invisibility blocks, if executed better, would have been quite fun and not an extremely common idea. Or the block chase in the last level. But this is what I consider technically good gameplay, not everyone will obviously feel the same.

[Harmless]

Yeah, again, I'm not saying your wrong.

Although this is pretty solid logic that you shouldn't cut out a judging because of the overall score given, be it lower or higher than another judge's score.