Kirk (@mrpossoms) and I finally finished our Post-Mortem on Ultimate Bro-Down. It took us nearly as long to write it as it did to make the game itself.

http://teamopifex.com/ultimate-bro-down-post-mortem/

I think there should be 1 simple rule for a time limited game jam ... judging can't take longer than making the games. Mainly I'm kidding here and certainly not complaining about the amount of work I'm sure each of the judges (except the one) have put in to make this all possible ... and of course, if there were 5 times as many entries, that metric would be completely impossible to live up to ... but you get my drift ... perhaps if the popularity rises again next year we should consider a simpler way to judge (first of all because its not like most of these games are truly in the same league of actually "competing" anyway ... given just a few minutes of playing each one it is obvious that there are about 4 tiers of games, with different types of focus, levels of fun / originality, polish, etc ...

Not that I have any answers yet on the details of how to make judging any easier / faster while maintaining the quality of the feedback (it probably isn't possible unless the number of games to review per judge is kept in line).

I think there should be 1 simple rule for a time limited game jam ... judging can't take longer than making the games.

Game Judging Jam?

I was thinking along the same lines... if participants increase next year, better have more judges, and at least 3 of them cover each game, but the roster could vary.

This could lead to some level of imprecision for the ratings (for example, if a judge judges more harshly than others, it would be unfair to the ones he rates).

I assume that doing so would come with a strict guidelines for how points are distributes, but it would be much harder to vote elements like "fun" or "theme" for sure then...

Not really, in the navy we have judges and ratings on people for "advancement" all the time. In some scenarios this is as in depth (in fact more) than what we have here. You would have 10 - 14 judges for 250 people. And they would be graded on category and a small writeup.

When the contest gets bigger it becomes more about raw numbers and values. You reduce overall point values so that you don't get crazy disparity.

IE: Fun = 3pts instead of 25. This way if somebody does judge super harsh it is not a massive killjoy for the rest since there will only be one value of disparity between the votes.

Theres also the possibility that every judge will play each of the games, and the ones that are not his to judge, he will only provide the "fun" points in his opinion.
Though it will require every judge to play each of the game, and that might take alot of time as well...

Anyway, any news from the fifth judge?

Theres also the possibility that every judge will play each of the games, and the ones that are not his to judge, he will only provide the "fun" points in his opinion.
Though it will require every judge to play each of the game, and that might take alot of time as well...

Anyway, any news from the fifth judge?

no from 5 judges, only 3 will play a game and decide scores for each game.

Anyway, any news from the fifth judge?

Not sure.

All others are done though, so we should at least have quorum...

Anyway, any news from the fifth judge?

Not sure.

All others are done though, so we should at least have quorum...

Bestow upon us the results good sir.

That's Slicer's call :P