CWM wrote:I don't really get it, to be honest. Even in genres I'm very familiar with, I'd have trouble finding 25 games worthy of being on a "Top" list, and you want to add even more because 25 isn't enough? That there is crazy talk.
Still, plenty of users manage it every year. I like to think of it less as an absolute "best of the best" and more a way of giving credit to many games that have proven enjoyable in some way. By now I've seen enough comments about leaving games off and long-time voters switching out entries to think it's at least worth a trial. I don't know how many will want to make one, but even if it's only 1 out of 4 that still makes 20-odd HMs total.
CWM wrote:The current system seems like an attempt of sorts to merge multiple top25 lists into one, but in practice it's just a weighting system with arbitrary integer scores, which I think is unnecessarily complicated.
It isn't arbitrary, users can still assign weight however they want and IMO it's simpler to count games rather than needing to have everybody counting point totals. It's not really a 'typical' system, but that's part of what gives the whole event its charm.
Stevens wrote:I was thinking of something a little different too:
Instead of 25 what if everyone listed their top 10-15? You weight them the same way and you can still compile a list of the top 25 based on scores.
It would also make people really think about what games they want to list or leave off.
Lists of <25 in the main T25 voting used to have reduced weight. If I were to ever bring them back (very doubtful), I'd probably do that too, based on to the notion that, well... the idea is to vote for 25, by having the knowledge of the genre to comfortably do so. Disallowing them didn't really decrease the number of voters either.
Perikles wrote:I don't want to sound pessimistic, but I have strong doubts that everyone who voted all these years actually fulfilled the requirements. I honestly don't think it's really necessary, there's no reason to play classic shooters if you're exclusively into danmaku or vice versa just to "qualify" for the vote. It certainly helps if you're at least somewhat familiar with a broad selection of games, but at the end of the day almost everyone is just going to give his favourites a spot on the list, not the games he thinks to be the objectively best.
IIRC the main intention was to give genre noobies/more casual players a baseline for how much experience they'd need to participate. It's hard to throw a proper top 25 together when someone's only played 50 or so in total, plus it encourages them to at least try a few different styles.
chum wrote:I've interpreted this guideline not so much as a requirement, but more as a recommendation. As long as you can think of 25 games you think are worthy (sense of quality differs, so I would personally only put something I think is unquestionably great overall on my list, but others may be harder to please) then that's enough, it doesn't matter how many of the CAVE titles or other farm sacred cows that you have "played". Nobody can force you not to vote.
If someone does not feel like they can muster 25 games they feel strongly enough about then they should not vote until they've played more games.
This is also a very good way of looking at it.
oh geez lots of posts
borislaw wrote:1. a companion list ranking the top 5 shmup series.
This would draw from such a relatively tiny pool that someone could probably just throw up a regular thread with a poll and see what happens. For the others, you can always comment on whatever you want in the matching discussion thread. No downvotes thx.
