• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Games Database
  • Game Discovery
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Forums
continue reading below

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

angelus_04Jdawg445PegbiterVegetable Party

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Community Playthrough Procedures

Avatar

Total Posts: 4479

Joined 2008-01-09

PM

Because of some issues raised in the community playthrough voting thread, I want to get some feedback that will lead to a list of procedures we can use as a reference for the future.  Much of this has been discussed at length, but I’d like to hear from as many people as possible.  Let me know if I have omitted anything or if you think of something else that needs to be included.  I’ll tally up the answers and post them here.

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader? 

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not? 

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

     

Save the earth.  It’s the only planet with chocolate.

Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

Ideally a game should have a leader to qualify for a CP.

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?


I prefer a CP with a leader.

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?


None. At the very least someone has to set up the thread & pace it.

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Anyone can nominate a game.

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Preferably. But in the event that a game without a leader wins I like crabapple’s suggestion of waiting 2 or 3 days to call out for a leader.

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

Yes two weeks is enough.

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Yes.

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

Nominations should begin fresh each time.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 2702

Joined 2007-01-04

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

It must have a leader

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?

I prefer with a leader

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

None
4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Anyone can nominate a game. This person does not have to be the leader

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Yes

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

Yes

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Yes

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

Fresh each time

Heart

     

I enjoy playing adventure games on handheld systems- PS VITA, Nintendo DS and ipad mini.

Avatar

Total Posts: 886

Joined 2009-11-10

PM

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

It’s better but not necessary

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?

I prefer with a leader in general. If there’s no leader, I think one of the player has to agree to at least create the thread and all players should agree on a timeline (so a form of lightweight leadership).
But a leader does bring a lot to a playthrough. So it’s definitely preferable.

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

Having a leader is always going to be better. If there’s none, I think it’s still possible to handle it but definitely not ideal

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Anyone can nominate a game.

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Preferably. But I think it’s fine if someone states that later on. It’s sometimes hard to predict ones schedule far in advance.

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

Yes. For games without leader, I would consider waiting a couple of days after the vote to find someone who would like to be a leader.

EDIT: Actually, I would say that maybe 1 week is enough, But I do agree with Doom that we are not in a court of law and so don’t need to be extremely strict about times..

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Yes, I think it’s fair.

Lady Kestrel - 01 March 2020 03:00 AM

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

Fresh each time with a reminder of what the previous nominations were

EDIT: Adjusting my answers based on the replies…

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 476

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

My opinion is not very important as I don’t have the time to participate to CPTs usually, but I hope it can help. I often follow the threads and voting process.

I have seen several times in the main CPT thread that things seemed to be a bit tensed about some rules - or did I misunderstand? Too many rules and some people could go away? I apreciate the fact that there is a structure but please everyone relax and enjoy games first! Smile

—-

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

It is probably better, but imo the majority is enough: just proceed with the vote and then you see.

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?

I much prefer with a leader, so everyone is coordinated.

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

Games without: chapters or linear progression or objectives (like Gorogoa, The Witness, etc)

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Anyone can nominate?

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Definetely yes, state it! But leave it possible to state it after too…

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

I find it too long already… I’d go for a 1 week period personally Tongue

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

It’s too long and too complicated. In case of a tie I would choose the game that was the first one to be nominated.

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

The list of games could be brought back as a reminder (it can give some good ideas), but the nominations should begin fresh.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 8218

Joined 2012-01-02

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

Yes.

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?


No

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?


None.

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Anyone can.

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Crabapple’s suggestion.

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

Yes.

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Yes.

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

No.

 

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1273

Joined 2013-08-25

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

I’m not sure. Simple majority sounds fair, but all CPTs so far had leaders, and everyone was made aware that a nom needs a leader in order to win. It’s not like that it became a surprise for someone OUT OF A SUDDEN. Also…

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?


I much prefer a CPT with a leader, but I also see how it can work without one. What I’m strictly against is the “Time’s out!” rule. Like when some troll voted for a game at the last minute and I was only 20 minutes late with my own vote, but was told “Sorry, you are too late”. 20 freaking minutes. Or when Advie said that he was willing to lead the game, but this wasn’t accepted because “The voting is over, you voiced this too late”. We are not in court, it is alright to be late. There is absolutely no need to make things THAT formal. Not to mention we all live in different time zones.

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

Linear games divided into short chapters.

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

Absolutely, anyone can nominate a game. I often nominate games I haven’t played, but want to try.

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

This is a good idea. So that people would know that someone is experienced enough to lead the game, even if he can’t make his mind yet.

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

I think ONE week is enough, two weeks is way too long, not much happens during that time. Just look at the current CPT: I voted 4 days ago and there has been no voting since. And my vote was cast after another 3 days of silence (as far as voting, not quarrel goes).

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Again, too long. A couple of days should be enough to decide.

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

Fresh. For example, sometimes I lose interest in the games I previously nominated, or I lose faith in them. Either way, it’s not that hard to write down your nom again.

     

PC means personal computer

Avatar

Total Posts: 6342

Joined 2013-08-26

PM

I’ll repeat what I said in response to one of LadyKestrel’s posts: It makes me sad that you want us to vote democratically on an anti-democratic voting rule. So I won’t vote.

I do hope that the few people who are still interested in playthroughs will realize that all those rules (and waiting weeks for the results) are not necessary for 3, 4, 5 participants, and that spontaneous CPs will make a comeback. But I’m not holding my breath.

     

Nothing but endless sea… no sign of America yet… unless it’s on the other side of the boat… is that how boats work? - Veronica, Overboard!

Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

Karlok - 01 March 2020 10:20 AM

  But I’m not holding my breath.

Please do.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 6342

Joined 2013-08-26

PM

chrissie - 01 March 2020 10:36 AM
Karlok - 01 March 2020 10:20 AM

  But I’m not holding my breath.

Please do.

 

     

Nothing but endless sea… no sign of America yet… unless it’s on the other side of the boat… is that how boats work? - Veronica, Overboard!

Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

Karlok - 01 March 2020 10:20 AM

I do hope that the few people who are still interested in playthroughs will realize that all those rules (and waiting weeks for the results) are not necessary for 3, 4, 5 participants…........

Well, there seems to be a few people interested in playthroughs that have bothered to take the time to post their thoughts here in this voting thread - despite the idea that “all those rules (and waiting weeks for the results) are not necessary for 3, 4, 5 participants…” i.e. the rule of Karlok.

Yes, for sure flash playthroughs & sudden unannounced ones can work but we’re not really discussing these ones here are we? Karlok, why can’t you just take part, vote for your answers & make your thoughts known in a pleasanter way?  Smile

     

Total Posts: 930

Joined 2004-01-06

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

I think a game that wins but has no leader should at least have a chance to get a leader after the voting ends. In the other thread I suggested calling out for a leader for a winning game and waiting maybe 2 or 3 days after the voting ends to see if a leader steps up.

It’s often 2 or 3 days before the CPT thread appears anyway. I wouldn’t want to delay the CPT longer than that, and hopefully a leader would volunteer in a day or less.

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader?

I’d much prefer a game with a leader.
Some leaders have put a lot of work into preparing their playthrough—doing a lot more than simply saying “play up to this point and discuss.” I don’t understand why their work is being considered “dispensable” because to me it is an essential part of what makes a good Community Playthrough.

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

None would be better without a leader.
A game that’s extremely linear or easily divided into chapters might be doable, but probably not optimal. I’d have to see an example to be convinced otherwise.

4.  Does the person nominating a game have to be the one who leads it or can anyone nominate a game?

People who are not leaders should be allowed to nominate a game. There have certainly been playthroughs where someone volunteered to lead a game after it was nominated by someone else.

5.  If a person is thinking about leading a game, should s/he state that during the voting process?

Only if they want to. Not everyone knows what their schedules will be and whether they will have time.

6.  Is two weeks enough time for the nominations and voting or do we need more time?

Maybe less than two weeks, depending on how busy the voting is. If votes are still coming in regularly after a week, maybe extend the voting. If the voting has settled down after one week, why wait?

And how few is too few votes to have a playthrough? Is 3 votes enough for a CPT? Do we assume other people will join the CPT who didn’t vote for the game? Would extending the voting actually help gather votes or is it just a bad time of year?

The problem with constantly delaying things is that some people have schedules. Say someone knows they will have lull in work or school of a month or so when they’d be able to play and contribute to a CPT. After 2 weeks, that time is half gone already. If voting is extended after that, the person might as well retract any votes they may have previously made because they won’t have time to join the playthrough beyond the first chapter.

7.  It has been stated that in case of a tie, voting should be extended for another week and should be open to everyone who wants to play one of the tied games.  Do you agree with this?  If not, why not?

Why delay a whole week? It sounds a lot like you’re putting off something disagreeable, like doing your taxes or writing a term paper.

In fact, when there are a lot of votes with little or no overlap of voters between games, and different leaders, why not have two concurrent CPT’s instead of delaying? Haven’t we had something like 15 votes each for games in the past? Wouldn’t that be enough for a CPT of a game even if another game also got 15 votes?

8.  Should the list of games from the previous round of voting be brought forward to the next round or should nominations begin fresh each time?

Fresh. People can always renominate games if they want. Some games I’ve given up on ever winning and simply replayed by myself, and I doubt I’d ever vote on them again.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

crabapple - 01 March 2020 12:40 PM

In fact, when there are a lot of votes with little or no overlap of voters between games, and different leaders, why not have two concurrent CPT’s instead of delaying? Haven’t we had something like 15 votes each for games in the past? Wouldn’t that be enough for a CPT of a game even if another game also got 15 votes?

Yes. I’ve wondered in the past on seeing different people voting for different games why there couldn’t be more than one playthrough when there’s either little or no overlap between the number of subscribers to each of the playthroughs so perhaps that’s something to think about?

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 8218

Joined 2012-01-02

PM

Hold your enthusiasm Chrissie, let us just deal with one, at least for now.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5074

Joined 2012-03-24

PM

Okay, I’m cool.  Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 942

Joined 2017-09-18

PM

1.  Is it necessary for a game to have a leader to qualify for a CP or should any game win with a simple majority?

Not necessary.

2.  Do you personally prefer a CP with or without a leader? 

Without.

3.  In your opinion, what kind of games would do best without a leader?

Lots. Kentucky Route Zero is a good example. Another might be Dear Esther. Open world games like Eastshade or Outer Wilds, and freeform games like Journey. I can’t think of anything a leader could say that would improve instead of tarnish the experience of those games, when it’s better to jump into them blind and make of them what you will.

Or take The Witness. It would completely ruin the game to have a leader say “solve X, Y and Z puzzles at area 12, and let’s meet there when we’re done.” Discovery is a big part of that game, and I’d argue the same for Myst. I could cite a bunch of other games where that is the case, and the more I think about it the more come to mind.

Many games are designed like this, to be leaderless, and I’d argue all games are designed to be played without a leader. Discussion, however, is an entirely different thing. Playthroughs can have discussion without the players being led.

I don’t have any opinion on the rest of the questions, so I’ll leave it there.

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!

Back to the top