Planning

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Anders_A
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Sollentuna, Sweden

Re: Planning

Post by Anders_A » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:46 pm

I had plans for a 4 player party style game for last year's compo. Unfortunately I never put in enough time to actually get it done, even though I'd really like to for this years compo. (One compo rule I had some trouble working around was the no prg-ram one. I needed some extra ram on the cart to get things working)

The chances of me actually making it for this year would probably increase a little if it was a dedicated party cart with neat features like shared scores between games and such, but I think such a requirement would dillute the already very thin nes homebrew scene a little too much.

Such a cart could be made anyways once there are enough authors of party games interested in adjusting them for it. I'm sure people wouldn't mind if some (or all) of the games were already released on the compo carts.

User avatar
pubby
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:15 am

Re: Planning

Post by pubby » Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:35 am

I'm pretty sure I said this last year but I'll say it again: People who want to create new categories (e.g. best 4-player game) should put up money of their own for the prize.

Also, the other thing I wanted to bring up was whether the scores of non-winning games should be displayed or not. Ranking the lowest-scoring games may be discouraging to creators, especially newcomers.

calima
Posts: 1245
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:16 am

Re: Planning

Post by calima » Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:46 am

I think it's important to know how you ranked even it was low.

User avatar
RogerBidon
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Planning

Post by RogerBidon » Fri Apr 28, 2017 4:04 am

As someone presenting a low-rated entry, I loved to see my score. It allows to compare to others watching objective numbers and (since details were released) it allows to analyze what's going wrong or not-so-wrong category by category. That's actually a very good thing and my favourite part of participating to compo/jams: never hopping to finish first, but see what to improve.

In the cart itself, the "runner-up" titles are sorted alphabetically so players do not start with a bias. It would not be useful to them to have the score and may be perceived as "This game is bad, you will not like it. Play it."

User avatar
gauauu
Posts: 714
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:21 pm
Location: Central Illinois, USA
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by gauauu » Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:14 am

RogerBidon wrote:As someone presenting a low-rated entry, I loved to see my score.
I agree. I was glad to see my score, even though it wasn't good. (And I don't mind having others see my score either)

User avatar
infiniteneslives
Posts: 2100
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:49 am
Location: WhereverIparkIt, USA
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by infiniteneslives » Mon May 01, 2017 12:25 pm

Not sure the best way to make this clear, but our definition of explicit is being questioned for last year's compo cart. Perhaps there's some E10 PG13 rating rules we can link to in the compo rules for games seeking inclusion on the cartridge.
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

na_th_an
Posts: 557
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Planning

Post by na_th_an » Mon May 01, 2017 2:01 pm

That would definitely help. The meaning and extents of "Explicit content" varies greatly from country to country. I think those who have entered in previous compos know what is or isn't acceptable, but, to avoid future problems with newcomers, I'd link to an official set of rules of what's considered "all audiences" in your country, which I think is what you are aiming for when you ask for no "explicit content" to be added if the entrant want his or her work eligible for the multicart :)

User avatar
rainwarrior
Posts: 7893
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:03 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by rainwarrior » Mon May 01, 2017 2:56 pm

na_th_an wrote:I think those who have entered in previous compos know what is or isn't acceptable, but, to avoid future problems with newcomers, I'd link to an official set of rules of what's considered "all audiences" in your country.
I don't think anyone really knows, because the definitions are always vague. If you live in a particular place, you probably have a reasonably good idea of what is "acceptable" for children within your sphere of culture, but that's about it, and there are no hard rules.

There aren't really hard rules for official ratings systems either, there are a lot of subjective decisions made by the various review board in place. They do generally have public guidelines, but the rating decision is ultimately made arbitrarily by a closed group. Some of the guidelines are stupidly arbitrary at face value (e.g. can you say "fuck" one time, but not two times in a PG-13 movie?).

What I think we really need is not so much an attempt to make rules, but a hierarchy of authority so someone can make the subjective call as needed. I think basically infiniteneslives should have the final say here, since he seems to have the most liability and is essentially the role of publisher here. (I can't think of any publisher that does not reserve the right to make arbitrary choices of censorship.)

Putting up some guidelines would be helpful though, as to lower the amount of potential surprise when a censorship decision is made.

User avatar
tokumaru
Posts: 11907
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil

Re: Planning

Post by tokumaru » Mon May 01, 2017 7:27 pm

rainwarrior wrote:If you live in a particular place, you probably have a reasonably good idea of what is "acceptable" for children within your sphere of culture, but that's about it, and there are no hard rules.
And even then there are families with different beliefs, values and traditions living in the same region, with varying degrees of tolerance to "explicit content". If you end up going with the lowest common denominator, things may get pretty limiting.

M_Tee
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by M_Tee » Mon May 01, 2017 8:11 pm

I've sorted the alphabetical list of ESRB content descriptors available here by category and intensity:
Blood
Animated Blood - Discolored and/or unrealistic depictions of blood
Blood - Depictions of blood
Blood and Gore - Depictions of blood or the mutilation of body parts

Violence
Cartoon Violence - Violent actions involving cartoon-like situations and characters. May include violence where a character is unharmed after the action has been inflicted
Fantasy Violence - Violent actions of a fantasy nature, involving human or non-human characters in situations easily distinguishable from real life
Violent References - References to violent acts
Violence - Scenes involving aggressive conflict. May contain bloodless dismemberment
Intense Violence - Graphic and realistic-looking depictions of physical conflict. May involve extreme and/or realistic blood, gore, weapons and depictions of human injury and death

Language
Lyrics - Mild references to profanity, sexuality, violence, alcohol or drug use in music
Strong Lyrics - Explicit and/or frequent references to profanity, sex, violence, alcohol or drug use in music
Language - Mild to moderate use of profanity
Strong Language - Explicit and/or frequent use of profanity

Humor
Comic Mischief - Depictions or dialogue involving slapstick or suggestive humor
Crude Humor - Depictions or dialogue involving vulgar antics, including "bathroom" humor
Mature Humor - Depictions or dialogue involving "adult" humor, including sexual references

Nudity
Partial Nudity - Brief and/or mild depictions of nudity
Nudity - Graphic or prolonged depictions of nudity

Sexuality
Suggestive Themes - Mild provocative references or materials
Sexual Themes - References to sex or sexuality
Sexual Content - Non-explicit depictions of sexual behavior, possibly including partial nudity
Sexual Violence - Depictions of rape or other violent sexual acts
Strong Sexual Content - Explicit and/or frequent depictions of sexual behavior, possibly including nudity

Gambling
Simulated Gambling - Player can gamble without betting or wagering real cash or currency
Real Gambling - Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency

Substances
Tobacco Reference - Reference to and/or images of tobacco products
Use of Tobacco - The consumption of tobacco products

Alcohol Reference - Reference to and/or images of alcoholic beverages
Use of Alcohol - The consumption of alcoholic beverages

Drug Reference - Reference to and/or images of illegal drugs
Use of Drugs - The consumption or use of illegal drugs
Some of these have already been clearly outlined in the A53 guidelines (gambling for example), but making a clear call beforehand in each category could help reduce confusion and minimize debate. Moreover, if arguments were to arise about what constitutes as what, the ESRB library of rated games is available for comparative reference.

na_th_an
Posts: 557
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Planning

Post by na_th_an » Tue May 02, 2017 12:33 am

Well, maybe everything is more simple: just add to the rules a notice that the publishers and organizators have the final word on what's considered acceptable for all audiences and may require retouches to the finished product if the author wants it included in the physical multicart.

I think that would sort things out. Of course I know the above statement is implied, but maybe making it clear from the beginning will avoid future conflicts.

User avatar
infiniteneslives
Posts: 2100
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:49 am
Location: WhereverIparkIt, USA
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by infiniteneslives » Tue May 02, 2017 11:45 am

na_th_an wrote:Well, maybe everything is more simple: just add to the rules a notice that the publishers and organizators have the final word on what's considered acceptable for all audiences and may require retouches to the finished product if the author wants it included in the physical multicart.

I think that would sort things out. Of course I know the above statement is implied, but maybe making it clear from the beginning will avoid future conflicts.
I agree with this. I think it's also important to realize the difference between the compo and the cartridge. There are no restrictions on compo entries one can be as artistic/explicit as they would like with their compo entry. But when it comes to including that work on a completed cartridge that's a community project, some discretion may be to be exercised.
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

JRoatch
Formerly 43110
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:01 am
Location: us-east
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by JRoatch » Sat May 13, 2017 1:14 pm

In the past we occasionally had missed or was uncertain about when and where updates to entries happens.

Could I offer a suggestion that the entry stubs contain a URL to where updates will be posted, and that the file names of the updates have some sort of incremented version number (whatever that be a serial number, day count, or date).

User avatar
Jedi QuestMaster
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Planning

Post by Jedi QuestMaster » Sun May 14, 2017 11:31 pm

infiniteneslives wrote:Not sure the best way to make this clear, but our definition of explicit is being questioned for last year's compo cart.
I didn't realize this was an issue. I do have plans for the next compo that would possibly touch the last entry in that ESRB list.

User avatar
pubby
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:15 am

Re: Planning

Post by pubby » Tue May 30, 2017 11:55 am

I wanna make sure we're still moving forwards.
  • Are the rules finalized?
  • Has NESHomebrew been contacted?

Post Reply