This question is mainly for the site mods out there.

Recently, a game I requested was denied. Now, this is not a complaint post, I'm just curious about the process for deciding if to approve or deny a game request for SRC.

Now, some background: The games I speedrun and moderate right now, are (mostly) 2D side-scroller platform games, on the web, from varying types, lengths, and eras. God knows how many of those exist out there on the internet, and on SRC in particular.

Quote from the request games rules: "At this time, we are not adding the following: Short/Trivial Games... If there are 100 flash games with similar content, we're probably not looking to track them. ...". I understand and respect that, but it's still kinda ambiguous. This rule I quoted was probably not really enforced in the past times, I guess, because the site is full of such short and trivial games. Hell, even 2-3 of my own games will probably not be accepted today as well.

Now, for 2D side-scrollers, they can be in different types and forms, of course. There are some very short games (1-5 minutes), medium length (5-15 minutes), and some very long ones. They can come with 15 or 30 short levels with each one lasting 5 seconds in average, or one giant map filled with enemies and obstacles. Some games have some gimmicks into them (like upgrades and powerups you need to collect, or some cool weapons and gadgets), and some are more simple and straightforward. However, at the core of it all, all those games still have one similar objective - to walk and jump to the end goal, and that's it.

So, I guess my real question is, what is the threshold? How long a game should be, or how "interesting" should it be, or a combination of both, for it to NOT be regarded as a "short/trivial" game?

If we take "extreme" cases, you can think of a game with a "revolutionary innovative gameplay mechanic" but can be finished in only 3 minutes, and another game with 100 short levels which lasts for 15 minutes, but all you can do is walk and jump over platforms, and is (probably) super boring to watch.

I know that there is no one definitive answer, but I would appreciate if you could share some of your personal thought process regarding this.

(I also realize than when a game I request is denied, I kinda feel bad about wasting the staff time :) )

We can't really speak about games that were accepted retroactively. The site's standards have changed since then due a couple of reasons but personally, I don't really see thresholds creating additional standardization. It would most likely only lead to granting a requester additional, perhaps unfair leverage after their game got rejected to circumvent a rejection reason by simply saying it met a certain or all given threshold(s), which is both a rough scenario for site staff as well being kind of impractical due to simply every game being different and possibly not always having a or all thresholds apply to them.

The current rules in /gamerequests are rules we want users to follow and are partly guidelines for site staff to use when treating game requests. The site is simply not looking to track certain types of games. It's how it is. Though, every game request will still be looked at on a case by case basis since simply every game is different in its own way, but could lack certain aspects such as originality, length, development etc. that are not in line with these rules getting them rejected. If a game is rejected because its short/trivial, but a user wishes to acquire additional details as to why their game was rejected or give us additional details in return as to why their game request should be accepted, they should simply reach out to site staff. It is by no means always immediately a done deal.

My point wasn't really about retroactive games, but I see your point on those being general guidelines. Also knowing that a reject decision doesn't have to be final, or can be open to discussion at least, is useful to know. Thank you for the answer!