highscore.com idea

[Xonatron]

What do you all think of this idea?

http://highscore.com/

(Please move this post if this is the wrong place for discussion.)

[CStarFlare]

Ain't nobody got time for that voting shit.

[Xonatron]

Maybe it could be more about voting bad entries down, than voting good entries up. The site is still in beta and is likely looking for constructive criticism. I'm curious if this can work somehow.

[CStarFlare]

I feel like I probably shouldn't be too down on it, since I run a competitor and all.

Requiring (or even encouraging) video evidence of every score you post is kind of silly, though. (case in point)

Looks like they're also accepting speedruns? That's cool.

Trophies look interesting, but I giggled when I read about the trophy equivalent of "FIRST POST"! (see above example)

Edit: does the site keep scoreboards? Every time I click a title it asks me to log in to enter my score.

[Kollision]

does the site keep scoreboards? Every time I click a title it asks me to log in to enter my score.

I think only scores already approved by the "community" are added to a game's table
and people must be logged in to see them

The effort is nice, but of course it needs to be polished.

[BareKnuckleRoo]

Maybe it could be more about voting bad entries down, than voting good entries up. The site is still in beta and is likely looking for constructive criticism. I'm curious if this can work somehow.

Unless you have serious reason to suspect a score, a score shouldn't be suspect. I don't think allowing runs to be allowed/disallowed based on anonymous votes is a good idea especially when it's so open for abuse. The honour system works well here, and while there's probably some scores that are made up, the people posting the really impressive scores generally know to back their stuff up with photos, replays, and generally in discussions display a good knowledge of the game they're playing. Voting worries me that it could easily turn into a popularity contest and be open for abuse, and the voting doesn't require people to actually know anything about the game (you're probably expected to, but you can't reasonably test everyone on 'x' game's knowledge for "is this legit?"). If a run comes under scrutiny, a forum like this works as a better place for someone to publicly defend the run as they ought to.

Let the cheaters do what they want, they'll fuck up and get outed eventually. Then comes the well-deserved mob justice with torches and pitchforks, and all is well again. that bullshit run is eternally preserved on the Xbox port's online leaderboard, hahaha

[NTSC-J]

I would be interested in a feature that lets me actually look at the high scores for all the games.

[Keade]

Just like BareknuckleRoo, I find the idea that anyone can rate any game annoying.
I think voting might work with the detection of blatant cheating, but it will fail in most cases (snowball effect, malicious votes, etc.)
The problem with votes is that there is no way to properly vote most proofs, it is objectively impossible to upvote a MAME screenshot (it requires about 2s to make one up, this is too easy...).
You could minimize this issue by providing several types of votes (for instance, a "I trust this user" rating ( ), a "no visible cheats used rating", "no cheats at all" rating, a "this uses default settings" rating, etc.) but this would be complicated and I can't see it working for poor "proofs", one cannot make assumptions out of those.

3 suggestions :
- What about putting a vote limit to prevent people spamming votes all over the place or voting without thinking first ? (this is going to happen eventually)
- Just voting "no" seems incomplete and too easy to me. People should be able to back it by providing additionnal details (for instance: "retarded dodges all over the place", "use of cheats", etc. a few standard choices could be provided to the user to make it easier).
- I do not know what currently becomes of fake submissions (very low ratings, etc.) but I would suggest leaving them available somewhere for future reference. This could become the ultimate list of cheated hi-scores
+Typo: "Intials" on page http://highscore.com/home

[Despatche]

i remember this

I would be interested in a feature that lets me actually look at the high scores for all the games.

this

[Serious]

Hi everyone,

I'm the webmaster of Highscore.com.

Kollision just let me know about this thread, and I'm glad to have a chance to engage with you guys about the site, and to have your feedback.

The site is still in beta and is likely looking for constructive criticism.

This is correct. Rather than building a site that people might not like or want to use, I made the site available in an incomplete state so I could gather people's feedback to shape what it would become.

So far, most of the input and participation has come from the retrogaming community (especially 1980s console gamers). This is my main background/interest as well. (I collect and play Atari, Commodore, and Odyssey 2 games).

I'm really happy to see some comments and constructive feedback from you guys, as I'd very much like for the site to be useful to more modern shmup players as well.

Something that has been a challenge so far is that most of the feedback I've gotten from the site's users has been very positive, and there has been very little constructive criticism so far.

I'm happy to have found this thread where people have been asking good questions and pointing out things that they think are issues.

I'd like to engage with you all to try to turn your ideas and feedback into improvements.

Maybe it could be more about voting bad entries down, than voting good entries up.

Correct. Rather than have a self-appointed authority determine what is legit or not, the idea behind High Score is peer review and approval.

On High Score, the idea is to provide a venue where you can try to win the recognition of your peers (in addition to showing off your accomplishments).

Requiring (or even encouraging) video evidence of every score you post is kind of silly, though.

Video evidence is not required.

A user can submit either photos or video. The only requirement is that there be some type of evidence to document your achievement that other members can look at to help them determine if they believe your claim or not.

What type of evidence is provided is up to the submitter, and whether or not it will be accepted is up to the voters.

Looks like they're also accepting speedruns? That's cool.

Yes. This is something I'd actually like to see more of. (No TAS, though, unless maybe a separate category for that is created.)

Trophies look interesting, but I giggled when I read about the trophy equivalent of "FIRST POST"!

"First" trophies exist to create incentive for people to submit scores where none exist yet. There is an element of competition with some players to claim the most "First" trophies.

There are currently 14,922 games listed in the database, but only 6,052 scores on those games so far. My thinking is that it is better to have some score for each of these (so there is something there for a better player to beat) than no score, so this is why an incentive to submit the first score for a game currently exists. This may be much less necessary in the future.

The larger rewards are given for scores that beat several other scores on the same game. The point values on trophies multiplies based on the number of players beaten by the score.

Edit: does the site keep scoreboards? Every time I click a title it asks me to log in to enter my score.

Yes.

You can view the top scores for any game by searching for it. If there are no approved scores in the database for that game, yet, there are no scores to display.

Here's an example of the score list for Yars' Revenge, Game 1A:

http://highscore.com/game/?g=400

There are also lists of all of the top scores on the site for all games, but you currently must be logged in to see it.

The tables of the top scores on all games is here:

http://highscore.com/scoreboard/

I think only scores already approved by the "community" are added to a game's table

This is correct.

- I do not know what currently becomes of fake submissions (very low ratings, etc.) but I would suggest leaving them available somewhere for future reference. This could become the ultimate list of cheated hi-scores

Scores that have been rejected, removed, or are not yet approved are still available to be viewed on the site, but they will not show up in the tables of the highest scores.

It may be hard to find these scores at present. Perhaps that is something I should make easier to do?

The best way to reference past submissions that were not accepted into the database are via the evidence log on a user's profile.

Perhaps a user's profile should also have links to scores they submitted in the past that were rejected?

Unless you have serious reason to suspect a score, a score shouldn't be suspect. I don't think allowing runs to be allowed/disallowed based on anonymous votes is a good idea especially when it's so open for abuse.

Voting worries me that it could easily turn into a popularity contest and be open for abuse

Just like BareknuckleRoo, I find the idea that anyone can rate any game annoying.
I think voting might work with the detection of blatant cheating, but it will fail in most cases (snowball effect, malicious votes, etc.)

So far, this hasn't been much of a problem. Most of the people voting have been pretty fair, and in some cases I think they've actually been a little too generous.

the voting doesn't require people to actually know anything about the game

I agree with you on that. I'd like to find a way to improve that.

If a run comes under scrutiny, a forum like this works as a better place for someone to publicly defend the run as they ought to.

Users can currently post and respond to comments on their score submissions and on their profile. This is the space that people currently have to defend their scores, or to explain to other users reasons why they think a score submitted by someone else shouldn't be accepted (and why they think people should vote against it).

Let the cheaters do what they want, they'll fuck up and get outed eventually. Then comes the well-deserved mob justice with torches and pitchforks, and all is well again. that bullshit run is eternally preserved on the Xbox port's online leaderboard, hahaha

People's actions on High Score, in regards to the scores they have submitted in the past, do stick with them.

This currently takes two forms:

1. The total of all votes (positive and negative) on all scores add up to a percentage representing the user's reputation on the site. Most users maintain a reputation score above 80%. Those who haven't been able to maintain that score are the ones who have a history of doing things that the rest of the community considers suspect.
2. All evidence a user has submitted for their scores in the past remains viewable from their profile page.

Something that does not yet exist on High Score is the ability to remove an accepted score where cheating is later found to have occurred. This is something I'm working on right now.

Just like BareknuckleRoo, I find the idea that anyone can rate any game annoying.
The problem with votes is that there is no way to properly vote most proofs, it is objectively impossible to upvote a MAME screenshot (it requires about 2s to make one up, this is too easy...).
You could minimize this issue by providing several types of votes (for instance, a "I trust this user" rating ( ), a "no visible cheats used rating", "no cheats at all" rating, a "this uses default settings" rating, etc.) but this would be complicated and I can't see it working for poor "proofs", one cannot make assumptions out of those.

- Just voting "no" seems incomplete and too easy to me. People should be able to back it by providing additionnal details (for instance: "retarded dodges all over the place", "use of cheats", etc. a few standard choices could be provided to the user to make it easier).

I agree. I'm already planning to allow voters to choose from a list of reasons why they voted against a score, and for that to be given as anonymous feedback to the person who submitted the score, so they'll have a better idea of what they need to do to get more positive votes the next time.

This enhancement is very high in the wish list, and I hope to have this implemented soon.

- What about putting a vote limit to prevent people spamming votes all over the place or voting without thinking first ? (this is going to happen eventually)

This is a really interesting idea.

Right now, the I believe the actual problem is people sometimes voting 'Yes' on a score without really considering it carefully enough.

If there is a ration on how many votes a user can cast per day (or per hour), then perhaps they'll be more thoughtful about how they cast those votes?

I've also given some thought to making public what someone's overall Yes/No voting ratio is (without exposing what their votes were on specific submissions) so people can see who is being overly generous with their votes, and who is being overly negative.

+Typo: "Intials" on page http://highscore.com/home

Oops.. That was hidden from me because that label only appears before you've entered your initials.

I'm fixing it now. Thanks!


Thanks you guys for all of the constructive feedback and questions. Please keep them coming!

-- Serious