At 9/3/16 11:46 AM, f*ckoffasshole wrote:I'm not interested in democracy. Not in this case.
What I want? Play good games.What I don't want? Struggle through a sh*tty game because the author sucks and is an attention whor*.
Prove yourself FIRST, then add medals.
The solution that comes to mind would be to avoid games you don't want to play (IOW ones with low ratings), but at the top of the list I guess there's no room to be selective. :)
Why so many great games have no medal?
These for example
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/679281
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/678906
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/678715
I mean, I would enjoy the sh*t out of earning medals from these games.
(btw, sometimes I do PM the authors to add the medals for some of the better rated games, but for some sneaky reason they don't reply)
Yeah, I wish jmbd could've added medals to all Achievement Unlocked games in particular, the one that did have some was something else. And there's a lot of more creative games that aren't really structured for achievements, that would really benefit from at least one final medal. I usually leave a 'the only thing this game's missing is medals' note in my reviews for games like that. It happens that authors do take notice and add some, but most of those authors don't seem that engaged with the community. On the flipside, amateurs are much more likely to add medals to their games if you suggest it. I agree it's a shame with great games and no medals, but the freedom to add medals to your games does go both ways. IMO it's good that it's up to the author, and not the site. Total freedom. But of course I'm not always happy with the freedoms other people take.
As for getting more 'good' games with medals, a note on the submission page about the API, medals, highscores, etc, might make more authors aware of the potential. I don't think a lot of them know there is an API here, and if they do, I don't think everyone realizes the increased exposure medals would give them. Then again, there are probably those who would rather their game be free of achievements; similar distractions. It bugs me when I see a game with built-in achievements and no medals though. With everything already prepared like that it'd be so easy to add!!
Sometimes, a mistake is made and a great game that I had FUN playing
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/679988
Also gets medals, but this is an exception to the rule.
A mistake...?
I'm not saying that my solution is perfect. I only voiced an opinion.
However, I wouldn't mind if something, ANYTHING was done about that.
Mind you, I would probably lose 50k of medal points (if not more),
if my idea was implemented, but still, it would discourage people
from adding medals to their sh*tty games.Of course, you raise a lot of VALID points. I can only agree.
We are wasting time on worthless game for the sake of medals.
And because I am one of the top earners, obviously, it affects me the most,
because I got through a lot of sh*t for the sake of points.
Maybe I am retarded for doing so, but god, medals are also a promotion for newgrounds,
so newgrounds should be a little more selective.
Medals have no value, just like pokemon have no value. And yet, losers like me keep collecting them.
I rarely stumble upon a game so crappy I don't enjoy playing it myself, so the potential loss of medals due to authors realizing their games are crap feels like a bigger problem to me than the quality of the game itself, but maybe I just haven't played enough crappy games to be bothered by them... indeed, medals are a big incentive on NG too, and probably brings in a lot of gamers here. If NG was selective, I wonder if we'd gain more players, and thus more games. Or if less authors would start making games, and thus we'd get less players...
Well you just can't put a price on the potential euphoria gained from unnecessary accomplishments! :) Sometimes I wish there were no achievements, anywhere; that we could go back to the essentials of what gaming really should be. Not a grind, but an experience. Good old fashioned fun! But then again medals are fun too, in moderate amounts...
If you have a better idea, I'm all ears. It shouldn't be difficult to think of a better solution, because
I just threw a bone.
All I wish, is that there are some standards, or stricter control over who can add the medals.
It's not democratic, and it shouldn't be. Medals are something extra, something elite.
I like my idea on medals having to be validated before submission, though that doesn't solve this particular 'problem'.
After some more thought though, the idea of medals being an elitist addition doesn't sound that bad, considering that users who add medals to crap games probably get pretty discouraged by all the negative feedback they get. It'd be better if adding medals was a privilege you had to work to get, by which time they'd hopefully have improved enough to get a more positive response. It could be made a reward for game makers, not a discouragement.
Maybe simply requiring an author to have at least one game pass judgment, before they can add medals to their games, would be enough? Or a certain quota of positive (3 stars or more?) reviews, to add a more unbiased layer of user judgment. Whereas people often vote on submissions with regard only to B/P when they're under judgement, there's no incentive for them to 'cheat' with reviews, unless they sincerely want a specific author to start adding medals to their games, in which case fulfilling the demand of said users would probably be in the best interest of the site, and they'd be acknowledging the submission quality. Thoughts?
As a finale to my post, I am currently listening to "Mr.President - Up 'n away " to cheer myself up.
Hadn't heard that one before! Nice.
