Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Spring Thing 2008 results

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Greg Boettcher

unread,
May 6, 2008, 1:48:27 PM5/6/08
to
The results of Spring Thing 2008 are:

1. Pascal's Wager, by Doug Egan
2. Without A Clue, by David Whyld
3. Blue Lacuna: Sneak Preview, by Aaron A. Reed

The results were pretty close, with the games' voting averages being
6.93, 6.07, and 5.86 respectively.

I'll be contacting the winners shortly about prizes, and I'll also
update the Spring Thing home page soon, but wanted to announce the
results here first.

By the way, we did get more voters during the last week, so maybe it
was a good idea to extend the deadline.

Congratulations to all the entrants, and thanks to the voters!

Greg

Ryusui

unread,
May 6, 2008, 3:02:09 PM5/6/08
to
Well, I hope this teaches Mr. Reed that it pays to finish his games
before releasing them to the public...

Jim Aikin

unread,
May 6, 2008, 3:36:41 PM5/6/08
to
Ryusui wrote:
> Well, I hope this teaches Mr. Reed that it pays to finish his games
> before releasing them to the public...

I agree with your feeling about submitting an unfinished game to a comp,
but I don't think there's any need to rub it in or get heavy on him.

The game is very promising, and I'm sure it will be good when it's finished.

--JA

Ryusui

unread,
May 6, 2008, 3:56:49 PM5/6/08
to

"When it's finished" is the operative word. It wasn't, pure and
simple, and it left a bad taste in my mouth. It left me wanting more,
to be sure, but if an author doesn't care if his project has its
intestines hanging out, it speaks ill for the finished product.

Jon Ingold

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:02:05 PM5/6/08
to
On May 6, 8:02 pm, Ryusui <TheRyu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I hope this teaches Mr. Reed that it pays to finish his games
> before releasing them to the public...

Goodness. I do think this is unbelievably rude. I mean, seriously: the
guy puts hours of his time into creating something you actually liked
and the best you can say is "It's not enough"? What about
encouragement? Who cares what the rules of the comp are? The gist of
it is - either the game gets made because you guys want it to, or it
doesn't (or it does but no-one plays it, which is sad too, but that's
not the point right now). The fact is, Aaron could have made it all
okay by chopping it mid-way and sticking "END OF BOOK 1" and it would
have been fine, like, gosh, I can't wait for the next part. There's
not much difference between there and here.

IF really needs people like Aaron who are putting a lot of time into
making something different and unusual. Truth is, we're not the
public, not really (and not the public Aaron wants to reach, if I've
interpolated from the intro sequence hints correctly). And we're
certainly not important enough to worry unduly about the spirit or
rules of any particular comp. That really isn't the point, or it
shouldn't be.

Anyway, way to start a flame war: presumably you don't agree. So my
point in this is to say, for myself at least, I'm *really glad* people
are making ambitious interesting and different IF. It'd be nice if
some of these got finished, sure, but I'd far rather they got half-way
middled first. The rest can follow.

I'm half-tempted now to do a Panks and release *all* my half-finished
WIPs to the annual IF Comp. Some are so old that when I play them I
can't even remember what's unimplemented stuff and what's being
getting stuck because I've forgotten what to do. Hell, let's have a
Vapourware Comp - a comp for all those great snuggets of games that
you're now fully well-aware that you're not going to finish. Like an
Intro comp for stuff in rough-and-buggered alpha. It'd be fun. Maybe
it'd kick-start a few into a full release. I really wish someone would
kick my unfinished masterpieces into shape.

Authors of the world unite! We have nothing to lose but our audiences!

jon

Jim Aikin

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:09:13 PM5/6/08
to
Jon Ingold wrote:

> Hell, let's have a
> Vapourware Comp - a comp for all those great snuggets of games that
> you're now fully well-aware that you're not going to finish. Like an
> Intro comp for stuff in rough-and-buggered alpha. It'd be fun. Maybe
> it'd kick-start a few into a full release. I really wish someone would
> kick my unfinished masterpieces into shape.

I like it. We could call it JunkHeapComp. You give a 10 to the game that
pissed you off the MOST because the damn author didn't finish it.

--JA

Victor Gijsbers

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:18:44 PM5/6/08
to
Jon Ingold wrote:
> On May 6, 8:02 pm, Ryusui <TheRyu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, I hope this teaches Mr. Reed that it pays to finish his games
>> before releasing them to the public...
>
> Goodness. I do think this is unbelievably rude. I mean, seriously: the
> guy puts hours of his time into creating something you actually liked
> and the best you can say is "It's not enough"? What about
> encouragement? Who cares what the rules of the comp are? The gist of
> it is - either the game gets made because you guys want it to, or it
> doesn't (or it does but no-one plays it, which is sad too, but that's
> not the point right now). The fact is, Aaron could have made it all
> okay by chopping it mid-way and sticking "END OF BOOK 1" and it would
> have been fine, like, gosh, I can't wait for the next part. There's
> not much difference between there and here.
>
> IF really needs people like Aaron who are putting a lot of time into
> making something different and unusual. Truth is, we're not the
> public, not really (and not the public Aaron wants to reach, if I've
> interpolated from the intro sequence hints correctly). And we're
> certainly not important enough to worry unduly about the spirit or
> rules of any particular comp. That really isn't the point, or it
> shouldn't be.

I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments--and frankly, I'm astounded
that Blue Lacuna finished with an average score below 6. It's an
incredible piece of work, and I think fully deserves our attention and
support.

Now it could be argued that it just was not (in its present state) the
right piece of work for an interactive fiction competition. Maybe. But
if that's the case, then our community has a serious lack of resources
for encouraging authors who are working on something vast, complex and
ambitious. Instead of encouragement, instead of people offering to
assist Aaron in finishing up his potential masterpiece, I'm seeing hate
posts on the newsgroup and 1-star reviews on IFDB. Bizarre.


Kindest regards,
Victor

RootShell (IFReviews.org)

unread,
May 6, 2008, 2:59:07 PM5/6/08
to
Congratulations to the winner...

A IFReviews.org games review page is available at:

http://www.ifreviews.org/index.php?competicao=128

Kind regards,
RootShell

Victor Gijsbers

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:25:01 PM5/6/08
to
And in all the consternation, I'm forgetting to say: congratulations,
Doug Egan!

Yours sincerely,
Victor

Daphne Brinkerhoff

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:29:34 PM5/6/08
to
On May 6, 3:18 pm, Victor Gijsbers <vic...@lilith.gotdns.org> wrote:
> Now it could be argued that it just was not (in its present state) the
> right piece of work for an interactive fiction competition. Maybe. But
> if that's the case, then our community has a serious lack of resources
> for encouraging authors who are working on something vast, complex and
> ambitious. Instead of encouragement, instead of people offering to
> assist Aaron in finishing up his potential masterpiece, I'm seeing hate
> posts on the newsgroup and 1-star reviews on IFDB. Bizarre.

To repeat what I said in an earlier post: isn't that what IntroComp is
for? Things that have beginnings but aren't finished, that you want
feedback on?

Also, a vote of "1" doesn't preclude a longer post or email describing
the merits/flaws of the current work. I haven't written one (because
I'm lazy), but isn't that what the author is after? Does a post
saying "I gave it a 10, it's great, end of story" really help him any
more than "I gave it a 1 because it wasn't finished"?

--
Daphne

Ryusui

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:33:07 PM5/6/08
to
Apologies. Take it as a sign of how impressed I was with Blue Lacuna:
if I didn't find the game downright mesmerizing, I probably wouldn't
be so irritated by how it leaves me wandering about in zombie mode
rather than *ending* like a proper demo: a single line of code could
have rectified this.

It's one of my quirks: the more I love a game, the *less* forgiving I
will be of its shortcomings.

Jon Ingold

unread,
May 6, 2008, 4:46:48 PM5/6/08
to

> Does a post
> saying "I gave it a 10, it's great, end of story" really help him any
> more than "I gave it a 1 because it wasn't finished"?

Hell, yes.

I mean, the author might want detailed feedback, advice and opinions,
and that stuff's incredibly useful if sometimes a little hard to bear
(everyone's a critic, right?), but that's a lot of work to write up
decently and it's a lot of work to work through for him. Straight
encouragement and a bit of enthusiasm: that's at least half the point
of writing the thing. (Well, potentially, anyway.)

Jon

dgeng...@gmail.com

unread,
May 6, 2008, 6:14:58 PM5/6/08
to
On May 6, 4:25 pm, Victor Gijsbers <V.Gijsb...@let.leidenuniv.nl>
wrote:

Thanks, Victor, and thanks to all who judged the competition, or beta
tested the games.

All three games in this competition were labors of love, and written
in such entirely different styles that this competition offered
something for all types of players.

I started writing my game back before Inform 7 was even available.
Hopefully my next endeavor won't take so long.

Dave, authoring "Pascal's Wager" as Doug Egan

Emily Boegheim

unread,
May 6, 2008, 7:21:36 PM5/6/08
to
On May 7, 4:33 am, Ryusui <TheRyu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies. Take it as a sign of how impressed I was with Blue Lacuna:
> if I didn't find the game downright mesmerizing, I probably wouldn't
> be so irritated by how it leaves me wandering about in zombie mode
> rather than *ending* like a proper demo: a single line of code could
> have rectified this.

But it does have an ending. It will let you keep exploring after the
ending if you want to, but it certainly tells you at that point that
you've "finished" the sneak preview. Did you not find it?

Greg Boettcher

unread,
May 6, 2008, 7:25:53 PM5/6/08
to
On May 6, 12:48 pm, Greg Boettcher <WRITETOgre...@gregboettcher.com>
wrote:

> I'll be contacting the winners shortly about prizes, and I'll also
> update the Spring Thing home page soon, but wanted to announce the
> results here first.

The web page is updated now:

http://www.springthing.net/2008/

Concerning Blue Lacuna, I just have one thing to say. As you can see
on that web page, the game garnered a standard deviation of 3.25,
surpassing all Golden Banana winners, and giving Aaron the distinction
of being -- well, a kind of honorary Platinum Banana winner.

Greg

Mark Tilford

unread,
May 6, 2008, 8:16:49 PM5/6/08
to
On 2008-05-06, Victor Gijsbers <vic...@lilith.gotdns.org> wrote:
>
> I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments--and frankly, I'm astounded
> that Blue Lacuna finished with an average score below 6. It's an
> incredible piece of work, and I think fully deserves our attention and
> support.
>

I grade games relative to each other. It doesn't have that much effect
on the annual IF comp, where there's going to be a good spread, but the
games in the Spring Thing tend to be of good quality, some will be
greatly underrated.

Ryusui

unread,
May 6, 2008, 10:12:48 PM5/6/08
to

I did reach the "ending." It just felt like the author didn't care.

Aaron A. Reed

unread,
May 7, 2008, 12:16:43 AM5/7/08
to

For what it's worth: originally I *was* going to cut things off at
that point with an "End Part One" message, but I thought some people
might want to keep exploring and working on puzzles they were in the
middle of (since the story event that triggers the ending is not
directly tied to the puzzles). So I thought I would optionally allow
people to continue, if they wanted to.

It seems providing that flexibility soured the experience of Blue
Lacuna for many players. I apologize; it was not my attempt to seem
arrogant or careless.

--Aaron

dott.Piergiorgio

unread,
May 7, 2008, 9:48:48 AM5/7/08
to
Jon Ingold ha scritto:

> I'm half-tempted now to do a Panks and release *all* my half-finished
> WIPs to the annual IF Comp. Some are so old that when I play them I
> can't even remember what's unimplemented stuff and what's being
> getting stuck because I've forgotten what to do. Hell, let's have a
> Vapourware Comp - a comp for all those great snuggets of games that
> you're now fully well-aware that you're not going to finish. Like an
> Intro comp for stuff in rough-and-buggered alpha. It'd be fun. Maybe
> it'd kick-start a few into a full release. I really wish someone would
> kick my unfinished masterpieces into shape.

LOL ! I can agree; if someone noticed, I never speak about my projects,
(more or less pet ;) ) because I prefer that steam remains in their
places, engineering spaces in the bellows of ships of yore ;)

Seriously, many people are prone to "farsi prendere la mano", as we say
in Italy, that is, adding ever more details, rooms, objects, bells &
whistles, etc, and never ending the project. One start, let's say, an
adventure in an abandoned mansion of roughly 20 rooms (in the IF sense)
then in the process one ends thinking "in this guestroom a small cabinet
room will be nice" "mmmm... will be a nice touch if above the living
room table will be a chandelier" and so on, never ending the WIP.

Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.

Message has been deleted

Jason Ramboz

unread,
May 7, 2008, 1:18:34 PM5/7/08
to
On May 6, 4:18 pm, Victor Gijsbers <vic...@lilith.gotdns.org> wrote:

> Jon Ingold wrote:
> > IF really needs people like Aaron who are putting a lot of time into
> > making something different and unusual. Truth is, we're not the
> > public, not really (and not the public Aaron wants to reach, if I've
> > interpolated from the intro sequence hints correctly). And we're
> > certainly not important enough to worry unduly about the spirit or
> > rules of any particular comp. That really isn't the point, or it
> > shouldn't be.
>
> I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments--and frankly, I'm astounded
> that Blue Lacuna finished with an average score below 6. It's an
> incredible piece of work, and I think fully deserves our attention and
> support.
>
> Now it could be argued that it just was not (in its present state) the
> right piece of work for an interactive fiction competition. Maybe. But
> if that's the case, then our community has a serious lack of resources
> for encouraging authors who are working on something vast, complex and
> ambitious. Instead of encouragement, instead of people offering to
> assist Aaron in finishing up his potential masterpiece, I'm seeing hate
> posts on the newsgroup and 1-star reviews on IFDB. Bizarre.

I completely agree! I think Blue Lacuna got a very unfair outing. The
way I see it, had this game been finished, it would have easily won
the competition. Heck, it would easily have won (or at least placed
very highly in) a competition with far more entries. Judging by a(n
admittedly quick) glance at the Spring Thing results page, it appears
a lot of people rated it a 1. The only reason I can think that they
would do this is because it's unfinished. But I've seen IFComp games
with far, far less polish, interest, and all-around goodness get
higher ratings.

To rate this game a 1 is, in fact, to comletely ignore the game as it
stands. The author didn't try to hide the fact that it's unfinished:
he even announced it in the title, calling it a "sneak preview"
version. I submit that if that's going to be a problem for a judge,
that judge would have done better to simply not play the game and not
vote on it. When you open a game to play (and presumably vote on) it,
you're agreeing to rate that game based on the content inside it. By
rating it a 1, many people have tossed out the content and judged the
book by, essentially, its cover.

Giving Blue Lacuna a 1 completely ignores all the things it does
incredibly well. As one example, the level of newbie-friendliness, and
the attention paid to the new-player experience, is phenomenal. Newbie-
friendliness has been discussed (possibly ad nauseam, depending on
your tastes) in several threads lately, with quite a few suggestions
being made on how to ease the learning curve for IF. Well, here's a
game that actually -implements- some very good ideas (some of which
arose during said threads), and, presumably, did so before the recent
spate of discussion. I think the tutorial mode is something many
authors should look at and consider incorporating into their work, and
the conversation and one-word examine and highlighting features are
great even for veteran players. And I also particularly enjoyed being
able to choose between story and puzzle mode. I very much hope that we
get to see source code for this game at some point!

Overall, I found Blue Lacuna a very well implemented, rich, and
entertaining experience. I know I for one am eagerly looking forward
to the final version. It's unfortunate that the author ran up against
a time crunch and was unable to finish the game for Spring Thing, but
I don't think he deserves any of the defamation he's been receiving
here.

-- Jason Ramboz

Aaron A. Reed

unread,
May 7, 2008, 1:25:42 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 9:41 am, Andreas Davour <ante...@updateLIKE.uu.HELLse>
wrote:
> Considering the fact that Blue Lacuna induced very strong feelings, how
> about specifying in the rules if games entered for the comp has to be
> finished or not?

Here's the thing. I consider the portion of the game up until the
large message reading "This is the end of the sneak preview, thanks
for playing!" to be complete. The only difference between what I
entered and what so many people seem to want is the removal of the
optional material presented after that.

If anybody found bugs *before* that point, I haven't heard about them.
I would love to get any bug reports!

> I personally think it's sloppy, how ambitious a try it is. There's no
> shortage of IF competitions these days to submit to , but maybe a
> rules clarification can set things straight?

There seems to be some impression going around, here and elsewhere,
that I violated the rules. To be clear: I didn't, and if I had,
presumably Greg Boettcher, the competition organizer, would have
disqualified the game.

With the number of Spring Thing entrants dwindling from year to year
and the future of the IF Art Show in question, I hardly think altering
competition rules to allow *fewer* games is the solution.

--Aaron

Jason Ramboz

unread,
May 7, 2008, 2:56:12 PM5/7/08
to
I just wanted to add that this is in no way meant to take anything
away from "Doug Egan" and Pascal's Wager. Congratulations, Dave/Doug,
and thanks for a very fun (and time-stealing!) game! Hope you do
something fun with the prize money. :)

-- Jason Ramboz

> -- Jason Ramboz- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mark Tilford

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:16:48 PM5/7/08
to
On 2008-05-07, Jason Ramboz <jra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I completely agree! I think Blue Lacuna got a very unfair outing. The
> way I see it, had this game been finished, it would have easily won
> the competition. Heck, it would easily have won (or at least placed
> very highly in) a competition with far more entries. Judging by a(n
> admittedly quick) glance at the Spring Thing results page, it appears
> a lot of people rated it a 1. The only reason I can think that they
> would do this is because it's unfinished. But I've seen IFComp games
> with far, far less polish, interest, and all-around goodness get
> higher ratings.

I rate the games relative to each other. 10 is defined as my favorite
game that comp; 1 is defined as my least favorite game. A game might
score a 10 if entered in a one-hour comp, a 3 in the if comp, or a 1 in
the spring thing.

>
> To rate this game a 1 is, in fact, to comletely ignore the game as it
> stands. The author didn't try to hide the fact that it's unfinished:

As it happens, while it was well constructed, the game failed to
interest me. As such, it landed in last place.

---
mjt

Ryusui

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:24:04 PM5/7/08
to
"Optional material"? There's more to do after I reach the powered
pyramid? I would never have guessed it; I spent most of chapter 9
wandering around until I looked at the clues and learned I had locked
myself out of every possible victory path save one (the one with
"consequences"), and I never saw anything to imply there was anything
left to do but reach the summit with the power turned on. But then, I
chose "story" mode as opposed to "puzzle" mode. And I never did find
the wind-up head's missing ear...

*Everything* up to Chapter 9 was flawless. If the entire game was that
quality, it would easily be one of the most ambitious and well-written
story IF titles to date.

Apart from the obvious, I have three issues, one of which is a bug:

1. One of the thoughts in the dream sequences is unimplemented. This
is - literally - the only genuine bug I remember encountering in the
whole game. I'm pretty sure it was in the library sequence, if it
helps.

2. Chapter 9, as I've already said, was an annoying bottleneck.
Breaking my leg in the climb was treated as a significant story event,
so I didn't think to undo my mistake, but its net effect was to lock
me out of victory until I learned from the clues that I could cover
the steam vents...and then only during a rainstorm, an event which
occurs only rarely in the game's time cycle.

3. My avatar has the common sense not to try to enter the ravine at
high tide, but not enough not to risk climbing the crack when it's
wet. (On that note, "push vine" is a rather obscure action.) This
would be an acceptable bit of railroading were breaking my leg
absolutely necessary to continue the plotline, but unless there's been
a terrible misunderstanding, I am acting under the assumption that
it's not, and it seems unfair to inconsistently enforce safeguards for
the sole purpose of inciting the player to needlessly hinder himself.
Speaking of the ravine and the consequences of breaking my leg, the
time-based puzzles and restrictions are the game's weakest link in my
opinion; at the very least they're the running thread through my
frustrations regarding the last part of the game. It seems a bit
mimesis-breaking for the player to be forced to wait several days just
so he can push a statue in a rainstorm...

Blue Lacuna cribs from so many sources - Myst, Doctor Who and Sliders
all immediately rush to mind - that it's a testament to the author's
ability that the time-old "traveler between worlds" concept could be
made genuinely fresh and compelling. It's rather like getting into the
skull of a Time Lord, only the vague hope of "maybe I'll come back
here again someday" is replaced with the ironclad despair that "once
you leave, you can never come back". You're a Wayfarer, something of a
cross between Kino from Kino's Journey and the original Flying
Dutchman: blessed to see all the universe has to offer, yet cursed to
wander it forever. Again, there's something genuinely compelling about
the protagonist of Blue Lacuna, and I can't wait to see how his story
continues. I just hope that the chapter 9 of the finished version
proceeds with the same smoothness as the ones before it...

Aaron A. Reed

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:33:04 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 12:56 pm, Jason Ramboz <jram...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just wanted to add that this is in no way meant to take anything
> away from "Doug Egan" and Pascal's Wager. Congratulations, Dave/Doug,
> and thanks for a very fun (and time-stealing!) game! Hope you do
> something fun with the prize money. :)

Seconded. I have really enjoyed watching the Spring Thing develop its
own unique character over the past few years, and Pascal's Wager is
another great example of the kind of game the comp is becoming known
for: experimental, philosophical stuff that plays with the medium in
thought-provoking ways. I haven't had a chance to play Without A Clue
yet, but based on the flurry of posts for hint requests a few weeks
ago, it sounds like another great romp from David Whyld, a man whose
productivity continues to leave me amazed and envious. (And fittingly,
the last of his games I played was The Reluctant Resurrectee from last
year's Thing, which as I recall induced giggling.)

And a shout-out, too, to Greg, for running the competition again this
year. Spring wouldn't be the same without you!

--Aaron

Greg Boettcher

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:40:29 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 10:41 am, Andreas Davour <ante...@updateLIKE.uu.HELLse>

wrote:
> Considering the fact that Blue Lacuna induced very strong feelings, how
> about specifying in the rules if games entered for the comp has to be
> finished or not?
>
> I personally think it's sloppy, how ambitious a try it is. There's no
> shortage of IF competitions these days to submit to, but maybe a rules

> clarification can set things straight?

I disagree, for a couple of reasons. First, I think the ST rules are
too complex. If I felt like devoting the time to it, I'd revamp the
rules to make them simpler. I'd rather not add another complicating
factor to the rules unless I really have to.

But that's just it... it just doesn't seem necessary. The voters have
spoken, and anyone who knows anything about ST history will have a
disincentive against doing what you want to prohibit. If they want to
do it anyway, why not err on the side of permissiveness and let them
do it?

But both of these points are probably moot anyway, since I may well
not organize the ST next year. I'll let the newsgroups know as soon as
I decide on this.

Greg

Aaron A. Reed

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:42:32 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 1:24 pm, Ryusui <TheRyu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Optional material"? There's more to do after I reach the powered
> pyramid? I would never have guessed it; I spent most of chapter 9
> wandering around until I looked at the clues and learned I had locked
> myself out of every possible victory path save one (the one with
> "consequences"), and I never saw anything to imply there was anything
> left to do but reach the summit with the power turned on.

I'm curious: how far did you get in your relations with the old man?
There's quite a lot of story related to him; in fact the primary
ending for this release is just after a significant scene between the
two of you. It sounds like you didn't see this, though.

As to the point about timing and victory paths: I can see how this
could be an annoying state to get into, and will maybe reconsider
exactly how this works. One of the design goals is to allow the player
to take actions that affect him, and then live with the consequences.
So: you are allowed to try jumping across a chasm that's described as
too far to jump across, but one of the consequences is that you've got
a broken leg after that, and the number of solutions to various
puzzles decreases. (The game is never put into an unwinnable state via
this mechanism, though.)

(By the way: there's more ways to solve puzzles than are in the hint
guide on the website.)

--Aaron

Greg Boettcher

unread,
May 7, 2008, 3:48:05 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 12:25 pm, "Aaron A. Reed" <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There seems to be some impression going around, here and elsewhere,
> that I violated the rules. To be clear: I didn't, and if I had,
> presumably Greg Boettcher, the competition organizer, would have
> disqualified the game.

Aaron is right that I would have disqualified the game if I thought it
had broken the rules. The rules say "all games must be finishable by
the organizer." When I received Aaron Reed's game, I had to make a
judgment call. I erred on the side of permissiveness, and I don't
really regret that decision.

Greg

Ryusui

unread,
May 7, 2008, 4:24:31 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 12:42 pm, "Aaron A. Reed" <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm curious: how far did you get in your relations with the old man?
> There's quite a lot of story related to him; in fact the primary
> ending for this release is just after a significant scene between the
> two of you. It sounds like you didn't see this, though.
>

I pried pretty much everything I could out of Progue before he got
paranoid; first he started avoiding me after I opened the door
(*loved* that puzzle, BTW; I got a kick when I realized why the
obvious solution didn't work), then he started hiding up on the
mountain after I took that tumble.

I did manage to piece together his story, though.

*ROT-13*

Gur zlfgrel bs gur rtt unf zl vagrerfg cvdhrq...V xabj gung gur
jvaqfvtu gerrf pnzr jvgu gur nyvraf naq gung gurl gevrq gb fcrnx jvgu
Cebthr, gb trg uvz gb svk gurve qrivpr...gurl frrz oravta rabhtu, ohg
fbzrguvat gryyf zr Cebthr unq n irel tbbq ernfba gb zvfgehfg gurz...

Nyfb, nz V pbeerpg gb nffhzr gung orsber ybat V jvyy unir gb nffrzoyr
cnvag, oehfurf naq pnainf va beqre gb snpvyvgngr zl bja qrcnegher?

Ron Newcomb

unread,
May 7, 2008, 7:29:11 PM5/7/08
to

I'm probably going to make an ass of myself here, but something's
bugging me.

Regarding an email I received from the comp organizer, Greg, was
everyone aware of this:


> Thanks for the votes. I need to remind you of something,
> though, and then ask you a question.
>
> The reminder is this: I'm asking people to give each
> game a score on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being best. You
> can give as many 10s as you want, as many 1s as you want,
> etc.
>
> By contrast, it *looks* to me as though you intended to
> say you liked Blue Lacuna the best and Pascal's Wager the
> least. If so, could you please write back to me with the
> actual scores you want to give?
>
> If not, I'll assume you actually meant to give Blue
> Lacuna a 1 out of 10, Without a Clue 2 out of 10, and
> Pascal's Wager a 3 out of 10.
>
> Thanks again for voting.
>
> Greg
>
> Ron Newcomb <psc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> #1 Blue Lacuna
> #2 Without A Clue
> #3 Pascal's Wager

Was everyone aware of this, because I sure wasn't. I thought it was
kinda pedantic to interpret #1/#2/#3 that way, and if Greg's email had
been lost in my spam filter, well... it only takes such a thing to
happen to one or two voters to sink a game to last place.

Maybe I'm just being a sore voter-loser, or maybe my newbie status
caused me to assume the wrong way of doing things was right, I dunno.
I just thought it relevant.

-Ron

Emily Short

unread,
May 7, 2008, 8:19:13 PM5/7/08
to
On May 7, 7:29 pm, Ron Newcomb <psc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Maybe I'm just being a sore voter-loser, or maybe my newbie status
> caused me to assume the wrong way of doing things was right, I dunno.
> I just thought it relevant.

Without having access to the scores, I'm going to guess that this was
not a common misperception. The 1-10 scoring scale is the same one
used for the IF Comp and for probably the majority of IF mini-
competitions, so most long-term voters are likely to be quite used to
it.

Sarah...@gmail.com

unread,
May 8, 2008, 4:59:51 AM5/8/08
to

I agree with you. I think Blue Lacuna is a very well made game. I
can't wait for the finished product! And speaking as a newbie to the
if world, it is newcomer friendly. It really appealed to my
imagination. Out of the three games it was my favorite. I didn't vote
though. I still feel too new and I didn't want to mess up the results.

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Greg Boettcher

unread,
May 8, 2008, 2:21:38 PM5/8/08
to
On May 7, 6:29 pm, Ron Newcomb <psc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Was everyone aware of this, because I sure wasn't.   I thought it was
> kinda pedantic to interpret #1/#2/#3 that way, and if Greg's email had
> been lost in my spam filter, well...  it only takes such a thing to
> happen to one or two voters to sink a game to last place.

No, there was nobody else this year who gave scores of 1, 2, and 3. If
there had been, I would have written to them as I wrote to you. This
only happened once before, during a previous year, and I managed to
resolve the misperception then as I did in your case.

Thanks for voting, by the way; we need more newbie voters.

Greg

Ron Newcomb

unread,
May 8, 2008, 7:53:40 PM5/8/08
to
On May 8, 11:21 am, Greg Boettcher <WRITETOgre...@gregboettcher.com>
wrote:

OK, well I rest easy now. Thanks Greg. And if you need a tester to
make the ST website fool-proof, I know of a highly qualified fool to
test it. :)

-Ron

0 new messages