My only concern *hoists a vested interest flag* is, with so many v0.01s being churned out how does the team spot games of potential interest amongst the sea of dross?
Among the many reasons, there's probably the fact that a first release is rarely enough to have an opinion. Your game (
You must be registered to see the links
, because he deserve some ads) is one of the really few exceptions.
How many games started with an one hour long initial release telling a good story, and after that had a bunch of rushed 5 minutes updates every now and then ? And there's also the opposite, games that really improve with the time.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not for one moment saying they should check every new game.
Anyway I think that it's more something like a blind pool. Every member of the staff, mods and uploaders (?) give something like 5 games that, for them, worth it, then the ones with the more votes are put in the featured list. So, even if only half of them have played the game, if it's a really good one there's chance that it appear on the front page.
But...from the opposite side of the table, I'm a tiny new dev with a game somewhat different to the usual run.
Don't worry, your time will come, I'm sure of that. I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one who generally wait for the second release before trying a game. You can't humanly play all the games, nor even test all the new ones. So, most us probably wait for few updates ; at least to have the possibility to see what the bravest of us have to say about the game.
How can they possibly manage to identify new games of interest effectively in the tide of new games? (and no, I'm not actually saying mine should be there I merely raise it as an example of one that could be easily overlooked - I'm sure there are others)
Kind of words of mouth.
It's obvious that staff members, mods and uploaders don't read everything, but in the same time they read way more than us. They are taged for this or that, and like they are humans, they can't do otherwise than see more than the message where they are taged. When you pass part of your time doing this, unconsciously you start to know that when "this guy" say that a game worse it, you'll like it. You also start to feel, by the global ambiance of the thread, when a game is good or not. And when one or the other happen, you try the game.
To this add the fact that they aren't members like the other, more people talk to them, more people tell them that this game worse it, while they say it to more people.
It's just a guess, but it's based on the time I was mod, in another life and another part of the numerical world. And for me, it's the reason why the "featured games" list is as accurate as it's humanly possible. If a game really worth the try and isn't in the list, it's only because the list wasn't updated since the first release of the game.
But regardless of that concern, I still think it adds more than we lose.
Totally agree. There's more than 3.500 games, with around 30 new each month. It's clear that a sub section with less than 30 games wasn't anymore representative of what is effectively popular ; and also can't anymore be representative of this.
The forum needed new tools for this, and the staff is actually deploying them.
