United States"Are the owners of games allowed to run or request games?"
- You can certainly run games you create and submit runs to the site. Generally we don't like adding "I made this game in my free time and I'm here to make a community for my obscure game"
"Would this game be accepted?"
- We generally don't add text adventures, chat bot games, and things of this nature. 1980s popular text-based games would generally be accepted.
"How long of a category would I need to submit a run of to get the game accepted?"
- Not really applicable, but if random web based games are under 5 minutes, we're typically not a huge fan.
It's relatively subjective.
I'm just posting as a person who has played this game a bit, not really here in admin capacity, so the following is just my personal opinion.
I think the categories would make more sense as follows:
Categories: 2-island, 3 island, 4-island Subcategories: Normal, Hard Variable: Squad Type - (Custom, Steel Judoku, etc)
You could separate custom squads and assigned squads into subcategories as well I suppose.
The intention of subcategories is to better layout the redundant combinations, so that the category tab doesn't become bloated.
The IGT situation is kind of unfortunate at the moment. I abused it to get the lightning mech achievement, lol. Not sure what to do about that.
I don't really have a strong opinion on tracking carried over heroes or not. Keeping them disallowed might be preferable due to the time involved it setting it up.
JonnyFX: The fundamental issue here is that without spending substantial time in the game, I personally have no way of knowing if you're right or wrong. That board has 274 runs and the game has 4 active moderators and as far as I'm aware no one else has brought this up outside of you and apparently a youtube comment or two. 3 of the mods have a multitude of runs on the site in various games, so I would think this isn't some massive conspiracy. The only real way to sort this out accurately is by discussing it with the moderators and other runners. It isn't really an option to reflexively remove mods due to one user having suspicion.
SickMyDuck: Submit a run first and then we can look at adding you if the mod is still inactive.
Breadpan: It was probably either auto-deleted for not being set up or deleted for being empty. I'm not aware of the details.
havrd: Added due to inactivity.
ATM: Added due to inactivity.
Guilvegane: Discuss it with the moderator.
Jarko: If you submit a pending run, we can look at adding you.
Armageddon15: Runs pending, ok.
TheNewYorkGamer: That user was online recently. I don't know if that was or wasn't true when you posted. In the case of an inactive mod, we generally need a submitted run (or linked video if the category doesn't exist).
OBotocsW: Added due to inactivity.
Anerag: The games have like 2 mods and 5 runners. He just added you as a mod last week. If there's disagreements, try to sort them out before coming here. If he said the same thing should I remove you on an impulse?
Prinnyboyo: Mods inactive, ok
Eclipsed: I think that is a shortcoming of the current system. Runs just have dates currently. They are sorted by date normally, but if they happen on the same date it's probably just sorted by database position.
Dipper12359: The mods are active, please discuss it with them.
ffllame12: That request should generally come from the people directly involved.
Trent: Added due to inactivity.
ShadowFlame26: If you submit a pending run, we can look at adding you.
6oliath: Sometimes I go through and remove inactive mods if there are other people on the games.
namiflop: If you submit a pending run, we can look at adding you.
JayKayGame: As far as I can tell your runs were pending about 15 days. It looks like they were added.
MeltingComet: Super modded you and removed the highly inactive mod.
This was fixed yesterday as far as we know. If there are still leftover issues, please let us know.
Probably just some confusion about the game's relation to the other game. It looks like it was added.
chhipz: I posted on the forum.
Javi17: I contacted one of the moderators about this just now.
NerdyNester: I bumped up the one mod that's not a super.
sztalu: The mod is active, please discuss it with them.
Slevanas: Not to drive this issue into the ground, but making the user a regular mod doesn't solve this problem. Make a forum thread for the game and discuss it with the runners. If the other user came here and said the opposite, I don't think you would want me to remove you. Devil's advocate: Many viewers of the site don't know what "NG" means.
Mø: The guideline given for inactivity is 3 weeks of not logging in the site.
Kazmer: Run pending, added.
EeveeTube_MC: I'll add two of the series mods that moderate the base game and maybe they can handle it or appoint someone.
Pukeattack: If another user submitted a run here, I tend to not want to delete a game. The board's rules also provide a redirect to the automated boards maintained elsewhere, which could be useful. If you don't want to moderate, feel free to self-remove, but I'd rather not delete another user's run in this case.
frbnash: Many users on the site only speak one or two languages. Game discussions generally go on the game forums. I cannot understand exactly what you're asking because there are no pending or rejected runs on your profile.
OldWorldGamer: Please discuss it with the current moderators, possibly through a forum thread on the game's page. Adding more people to a page arbirarily is a recipe for disagreements.
NeoSlash72: If you have concerns about particular runs, please discuss them on the game's forums. Swapping music in some cases is not always viewed as a problem. If I recall, GTA runners were doing it so their runs wouldn't be muted by Twitch I think. If there's concerns about turbo runs, discuss them similarly. The site works better when people talk to each other.
robthegamer115: It looks like he was removed.
knewster: I added the runner with a time as a super and then you as a regular moderator.
PunchAnimation: The guideline for inactivity is 3 weeks offline. Please discuss it with the moderator.
TylertheTyrrific: The game has 5 moderators which is probably enough.
Kazmer: Added you since the user doesn't have a run and is inactive.
XerxesAsuras: Added you since the user doesn't have a run and is inactive.
CampingOnline: Run pending, user inactive, added.
Kendawg86: I recommended posting on the game's forum about the subject.
Psych0sis: I'll bump you up to regular since it seems like the mods are being strange about this. If it ends up such that you're the primary person maintaining the boards for a while, we can look at bumping you up to super. I hesitate to do this now because I don't fully understand the situation.
(A user was deleted in one of the posts above, so I don't know the details)
SandyX: I added scoagogo since he's very active.
vbnm271458: You're relatively new to the site so I'm hesitant to give you control of a board with that many runs. I posted on the game's forum.
Gustavo.Predador: I understand you're really interested in the series and doing runs it. I'm going to continue to let the series moderators handle it as they see fit. There is no benefit to adding super mods to series other than adding games, and we've had some disagreements in the game request form over how things should be added.
scoagogo: This seems to make the most sense, thanks.
Worsel5: I bumped up MLSTRM, he can add people as he sees fit.
Armageddon15: Added given the specific circumstances.
Derek_MK: Only site staff can attach existing games to series. I attached it for now. Online games sometimes land in a gray area, so if there's dispute over this we might later reconsider how it's listed within the series.
Note to self: Revisit 2048 Game.
Do any of the current runners and more active users want to mod this since the mods are getting inactive? No offense to vbnm271458, but they're fairly new to the site with a first submission and this board has a decent amount of runs already.
This controversy seems relatively ridiculous. Maybe there's more details I'm missing, but as far as I can tell: User A uploaded video with video issues making it potentially unverifiable. User B called User A a cheater. User A is in a large dispute with User B over being called a cheater.
I don't think it makes sense to call someone a cheater just because their video recording has issues. Has the user had this issue on other boards that I'm not aware of? It's fine to question and/or reject videos of bad quality, but we might be jumping to conclusions by labeling people cheaters. Maybe there's more here that I'm missing, but the details haven't exactly been clarified. How are we going to resolve this? Or are we just going to keep calling each other names and following each other around the forums?
Just gonna lock this thread, it's not working out so well.
I don't really have an opinion on that. Some US states don't enforce it and certain countries don't either. Game mods can decide in that case. In more extreme cases like physical violence or something I'd lean towards rejecting.
Video flaws happen and should be considered in the context of all the information around it, life's not black and white like everyone wants to believe. Youtube trashed up one of my videos the other day even though my local copy is fine.
It's a known shortcoming that the filters aren't multi-selectable. I think there are some issues in the back-end that need cleaned up to allow that. Additionally, I still find the filter display being in a dropdown to be awful. The filters are more intended for this purpose than the subcategories. Subcategories are more designed for things that are less comparable. Game should use them however works best for you, but that's the design intent. I agree that the current situation has substantial flaws.
If the games play substantially differently they should generally all get their own pages. When they're similar enough, moderator discretion can decide if they're split or not. If it's a straight port it often stays in the same page, but if there are notable gameplay differences it's a good reason to split the page.
I don't mind if people make blank pages specifically when completing a series.
Just for clarification, the state of the runs on the board should represent the community consensus of whether or not the run should be listed. Specifically: Mods + Game runners + other NES runners in this case.
Feedback was asked for on this topic, but not many users responded until a change was actually made.
With regards to the specific reasoning in the thread. A: Most games that allow emulators allow keyboard runs as far as I understand. It's difficult to enforce someone using a controller on emulator unless you force them to provide video of their hands. In my opinion a rule about using keyboard is not really something that can be subjectively applied to certain runs. Player A can use keyboard but Player B can't doesn't make sense.
B: "The way they are recorded", "I won;t be verifying any non streamed runs on this board. "
Super Mario Bros has the following in the rules: "Times below 5:21.00 need a video. Due to the popularity of the game, times below 5:00.00 are treated with suspicion. To maximise your chances of having a run verified it is highly recommended that you stream all of your attempts and provide split files. "
No particular person has to verify any particular run I suppose, but the state of the board should be such that it represents community consensus.
Additional:
Legitimacy of a run is contextual. After discussion people seem to agree that the Gotvg emulator has inaccuracies that improve play. People generally seem to think the Chinese FCEUX port is an okay representation of FCEUX. FCEUX is a generally accepted emulator.
The runner doesn't stream and only provides video, which can be good reason to scrutinize, but the video shows some of the common FCEUX displays for no movie file being played. It's certainly possible to fake those with some effort, so we can't really know for sure that it's legitimate. There's no video of the runner or video evidence he plays the game a ton, or things of this nature. So it falls in this really gray area where the community needs to decide if it's listed or not. That call should be made by the community.
There's really no "innocent until proven guilty" or "guilty until proven innocent", there's just community consensus on whether or not the run meets a given standard.
MelonSlice: No runs on the board, so have at it.
isaacrmhmd: Mod is inactive and run pending, ok.
Smurfquake: It looks like a page was added, if it needs categories when you're trying to submit, try the game forums first.
cohen77: Please discuss it with the user or on the game's forums.
D.E.M.O.: Run pending, user inactive, okay.
1nd33d: The game was deleted for being for below site quality standards for listing.
Jcoolaid: The mod is active please discuss it with them.
FunkyCatGames/MelonSlice: I bumped Jcool up to super mod, so he can now add people at his discretion.
kibo: Given that he added you to the series, I'll jump the gun a little bit and add you to the rest.
Jarhead_71: I messaged the mod. He verified some full game runs recently, so maybe he missed the ILs or something.
SickMyDuck: Added due to inactivity. Games should generally have more than one mod anyway.
Starskillers13: Moderators are generally added by other moderators, and that game probably has no need for more moderators. Also, a majority of the site's users are unable to speak French, so communication would probably be an issue.
Flootin: The mods are fairly active, please discuss it with them. You posted here 2 days after posting there. Not everyone refreshes this site daily.
PinkPajamas: Deleted leftover games
Captain-No-Beard: Mod inactive, run pending, ok
Kirinth: The guideline given for inactivity is 3 weeks. It looks like your run was added.
NitroKuite: The mod is a bit inactive and you already have runs on the board, ok.
Milength: I'm going to add you as a regular mod so the game has another user available to handle the board.
Splinter6: For the first game Run pending, mod inactive, ok. For the second, one of the mods is active, please discuss it with them.
Kendawg86: Please discuss it with the mods. They were around to add Dynasty Warriors 9 apparently. I'd recommend suggesting categories more specifically on the game's forums.
Alaskaxp2: Mod inactive, ok
DXL4e: One of the super mods is active, please discuss it with them.
Granolant: Removed due to very large inactivity.
Sylvie: Pending run, mod somewhat inactive, ok.
davehunter: I'll add you as a regular moderator since the run has been pending a while.
AceKrana: Added due to inactivity and you have a time listed.
Gustavo.Predador: I asked one of the series mods to sort this out. There's not a strong need for series moderators since all they do is add games to the series which can be done through the game request form, but we'll try to get it a series cover.
TwistedFlax: Run pending, ok
GhostT12547: The game has active moderators, please discuss it with them. There's not an inherent need for more moderators.
Psych0sis: The user has runs in the series. It's at least partially super moderator discretion who to add as what level of moderator. If users feel that changes need made to the board details, they should voice their concerns on the forums. I'm not sure what's up with the weird social situation. I'd also try discussing with the series moderators if possible.
In response to the general sentiments in this thread, as opposed to any specific post, I bumped Jcool up to super mod in hopes he is able to get a couple more people involved as opposed to site staff choosing sides.
EDIT/UPDATE: After some discussion I think the plan is to have someone else handle this due to having more interest.
