techant wrote:
I set up a small spread sheet (handwritten) where I have split my evaluations in to four sections, and then I plan to total up my scores to get my final ratings. The four sections are based on those we were instructed to evaluate-
gamer_extreme_101 wrote:
2.Holds should be judged based on use of elements (I.E - All of the monsters look well thought out and not just place to meet requirements), design, and on fun and enjoyment factor. The rank goes from "Perfect" (10) to "Good" (5) to "Neutral Opinion" (2) to "Negative Opinion" (1-0).
As well as those on the original board [url=http://www.drod.net/forum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=4412 http://www.drod.net/forum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=4412
That's interesting. I used exactly the same method, although the way I categorised things was slightly different.
My four sections are as follows:
1. Access -Number of rooms that meet the access rule.
each room must be accessible from the entrance without having to clear out any rooms before it. This will also help so that, when you play each hold you won't be stuck on that hold forever because you can't pass a room that leads to the rest of them.
Well, I didn't personally vote on this rule because practically every room is accessible from the start, and really, if you complete all the rooms in order, there should be no real problem with half-clearing a room. That's just my personal opinion, though.
2. Use of monsters - Total number of rooms with a good use of monsters. (I.E - All of the monsters look well thought out and not just place to meet requirements),
The default is one for the entrance/exit which I do not count. (But if that room is really good I may give it a bonus point under #4 fun rooms below)
I used slightly different criteria for that voting. When I looked for "
good usage"
of monsters, I looked at the sorts of puzzles that were being presented, and gave higher ratings to more unique, varied and unusual rooms, since those obviously had been thought out well and designed to be different. I still gave good votes for well-designed rooms, but even more so if those rooms were unusual.
3a. Design 1 - Total number of rooms that are consistent with the theme. I view the theme as the one presented in the contest and expanded on by each player.
I didn't rate on theme, because the limitation was in a sense the theme, so all holds technically had it. One or two were based around a central, secondary theme, which I took into consideration, but most of this section I placed under 2.
3b. Design 2 - A 1 to 10 score on the overall design and look. This one is very subjective.
This was my "
Aesthetics"
vote. I rated this criterion on how good it looked, both on screen, and on the minimap, since it is, of course, a hold, so it should also look good too, as well as play well.
4. Fun Rooms - Total number of just plain fun rooms. this means good puzzles. I guess this is very subjective as well but I think an average player should enjoy the hold, with an occasional really challenging room. If the whole thing is so hard that only an expert would enjoy it then I am not as likely to score it as fun. As I said this is subjective you will have your own view of fun. 
I rated this slightly differently to you. Although basically the same for most cases, for one or two holds with the sort of puzzles I didn't like, but which were obviously well-made, and would be fun to certain people, I didn't penalise the hold as badly as I would have if I had been purely subjective.
I will be adding these up and then I will rate them according to the scale. "Perfect" (10) to "Good" (5) to "Neutral Opinion" (2) to "Negative Opinion" (1-0).
I took an average of the scores and rounded to the nearest value. To make it a little more fair and focus on the more important aspects of the holds, I multiplied the Element Usage and Fun scores by 2, so Aesthetics wouldn't play such an important part in the hold, as it isn't as important to me.
The problem with my style of analysis at first was that it clustered all the hold scores in a small area around 5-6, since I rarely view something as "
perfect"
, so 9s or 10s were highly unlikely to come up. Since I had to rate mine as 10, this wasn't really as fair as it should have been, so I am going to try a slightly different way of determining the scores, which takes into account my own hold being a 10 (under those rules previously, I would not have voted 10).
Thanks for the suggestions, although this is how I am voting anyway. I was only asking to get one or two things clear, like whether to vote on the entrance rooms and the stories or not, since these were not mentioned in the initial posts, but they were mentioned as important in the reset, or were not explicitly clarified.
If storylines are to be regarded as important, then I'm still not going to pay as much attention to them, since it will be unfair for those holds which do not have one (because we were not told having one is a requirement), but which are still worthy of a high score anyway.
It's nice to know that there are people who are analysing holds like this, though. I thought that I was taking this contest too seriously.
Thanks.
[Edited by agaricus5 at
Local Time:12-23-2004 at 12:08 PM]
[Edited by agaricus5 at
Local Time:12-23-2004 at 03:42 PM]
____________________________
Resident Medic/Mycologist
