REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK: Forum Games.

[Expletive Deleted]

A question for the board.

We currently have three games running. As I've said before, I prefer it kept to two. I had been planning on sticking with the Popularity Tournament and Contest of Champions, with Survivor games only coming up if one of the others was on break. But I've noticed that Popularity Tournament participation is down and Survivor seems to be the new big thing.

So . . . I'm looking for some feedback.

Which would you prefer stick around? Survivor or Popularity Tournament?

[Expletive Deleted]

I'm adding a poll, here, but this isn't a vote. It's just another thing I'll take into consideration.

Anyone want to start us off?

[Starkicker]

Is it worth adding a games forum?
A Marvel games forum...DC games, etc.?

[Expletive Deleted]

I don't see that happening.

[Siddon]

The last Contest of the Champions had less then 10 participants, some rounds less then 5, it should be one of the noms. Their where more threads created for Contest then their were people that voted, so I really don't think the Pop tourni (which always brings in more voters) should be up there and Contest not.

[Expletive Deleted]

It's not up there mainly because Matt changes it up. Different themes, different games (like the alphabet thing), that sort of thing. And, frankly, it has the longest track record of any of the games we're talking about. That carries some weight.

Popularity Tournament and Survivor are, to my mind, very similar. That's why I'm asking this question.

[Ivan Isaacs]

Where's the option "Get rid of it"?
Nothing against some games like "Who am I" but these Survivor games that keep flooding the boards are beginning to be annoying for me.

[chicainery]

I like both. I do give the slight edge to the survivor game though -- perhaps because it's newer to the board.

[streator]

what's the difference in having 3 threads? i personally don't participate in them (aside from the last alphabet game), but i don't really see them as a problem. so there's 3 game threads instead of 2. who cares?
if you don't like the thread or don't plan on playing, then don't go in the thread. obviously some people are enjoying it, so let them enjoy. that's why most posters come here. it would be different if these game threads were overtaking the boards, but i don't see them doing that. having 3 game threads doesn't seem like a problem to me.

[dingo]

I honestly dont see the problem with allowing 3 games to live..not really hurting anyone

[Expletive Deleted]

I like to keep the numbers down because I think it does hurt the board. It chokes off the front page with too many non-discussion topics and you're more likely to see a game as the first thread on the main page than anything else.

So . . c'mon, people. Don't just vote in the poll. Give me some reasons.

[thik_3rd]

survivor is wack. way too much work. popularity contests are where it's at. just vote once a week and forget about it.

besides...after we do x-men, avengers, defenders, fantastic four, villains, etc. survivors what's left? FAVORITE CHAMPIONS VILLAIN SURVIVOR? please.

[Daniel]

I was planning for the tournament to continue for few more years and now I'm being threatened away. In the beginning I had been thinking of a grand finale in the future if I would ever get tired of this, but instead this game gives me a lot of joy every week and I love it when the voters make it unpredictable (there's always 128 characters in the start of each tounament). You want to take one of three games away, because the 27 other threads on the first page isn't enough? There are many people who vote every week and they are having fun like me otherwise they wouldn't bother.

You want to take away one game, because you want to add one tiny row about something, which feels like a regular Marvel Universe thread and I have used hundred of Marvel Universe characters in my game and all the long research time could now go through the toilet. I'm addicted to Marvel comics and games and last year I created a combination of these two. This is my ultimate fun you're threatening away. When I have had rough days (which I have had many of) then I can fall back on this game and plan for the next tournament or count votes and create the next round.

When I found out about this decision to vote away my tournament. I was speechless. Now I'm sad and mad. It's like putting through a bullet through my child's skull. This is how much this means to me in my heart. Please, don't take my baby away. In about a couple of weeks the Holidays are coming and there would be not much celebrating for me if my favorite game would be gone.

Sorry for the long rant, but I got a gigantic passion for this. :(

Daniel

[Expletive Deleted]

Daniel,

No decision has been made, and this is NOT a vote. I'm just asking for feedback.

Thank you for your impassioned defense of your game.

[Shellhead]

The Survivor Game seems like a fun idea, but the actual execution is very slow and very dull. Maybe if people posted a brief statement justifying each vote of + or - it would be better.

[dazzler_slave]

I don't enjoy the Popularity Tournaments or Contest of Champions. I do enjoy Survivor, so it gets my vote. My question is, why does it matter if there are three games going on? Sorry if this was asked before, I didn't bother reading any other replies.

[Jack Flash]

I play the games occassionally. I like all 3. If I had to choose, I'd say do away with the Survivor thread, since the others have been more fun for longer periods of time. I really miss the "Name that Marvel" game.

[Core]

The Survivor games really are just glorified popularity tournaments, and I was going to say that it wouldn't matter to me which one was kept around and which one was marginalized. But after reading Daniel's unexpectedly emotional plea to keep his game around, I'll put my vote behind the popularity tournament. I wouldn't want to put a bullet in his child's skull.

Baby killers ;)

[Bearpod91]

I like the Survivor games but things have a way of passing away through time...

[Daniel]

The Survivor games really are just glorified popularity tournaments, and I was going to say that it wouldn't matter to me which one was kept around and which one was marginalized. But after reading Daniel's unexpectedly emotional plea to keep his game around, I'll put my vote behind the popularity tournament. I wouldn't want to put a bullet in his child's skull.

Baby killers ;)

I have to clarify that I don't really have a child, but the tournament feels like a baby for me, which I take care of every week. E.D., I'm sorry for my outburst, because I was very emotional. This game means a lot to me.

Daniel

[malephoenix]

I haven't even seen the other games besides Survivor. Being newer to the boards, it's one of the things I look forward to most when I visit. I gotta admit, it doesn't make sense to me why all three can't stay around; I was unaware of a "no-more-than-two-games" mandate or somesuch. Instead of cutting off those of us who enjoy Survivor, what about creating a system in which we have to submit a game concept to have it in line for when whatever game's going on right now ends? That way, new games are allowed and not discouraged, allowing everyone a chance. And not only that, but as thik_3rd mentioned, we're gonna eventually run out of Survivor concepts, so they'll pass away naturally in time.

Not sure how certain e-etiquette works on this site, but I would be pretty disappointed if one of my favorite parts of the board was shut down all of the sudden. Hopefully, as a beginner of one of the Survivor games, *at least* the current games would be allowed to finish, and not be locked up without letting the posters complete their turns.

Point: I've gotten to know a few posters here through those Survivor games that I wouldn't have otherwise gotten to know. It's been grood for mixing, and for conversation material; it's not just a "waste of space."

[Doom Hammer]

I occasionally participate in the Popularity tournaments, and never in the Survivor game.

That, coupled with the fact that Daniel's game has been running longer and it seems like taking it away is a bit unfair, I'd vote for ditching Survivor.

[Expletive Deleted]

I haven't even seen the other games besides Survivor. Being newer to the boards, it's one of the things I look forward to most when I visit. I gotta admit, it doesn't make sense to me why all three can't stay around; I was unaware of a "no-more-than-two-games" mandate or somesuch.It's only been a rule since I started modding this board two months ago. And consider yourselves lucky, since I didn't allow any games on my last board.

Like I said above, I'm okay with a certain number of games, but I think too many (especially too many of the same type) chokes off a board. It clogs the page and I think it leaves the wrong impression if all anybody sees of this board on the main forums is a list-game thread.

This is a discussion forum. That's its primary purpose. Games where you post a list of characters can be fun, but they're horribly repetitive, there's very little actual content, and there's next to no back and forth among participants. Survivor, Popularity, and the normal Contest all have elements of gamesmanship (well . . . Survivor and Contest do) and they all have elements of Marvel on-topic-ness, but they still boil down to the same thing. So I set a limit, and I'm currently figuring out how best to enforce it.Instead of cutting off those of us who enjoy Survivor, what about creating a system in which we have to submit a game concept to have it in line for when whatever game's going on right now ends? That way, new games are allowed and not discouraged, allowing everyone a chance. And not only that, but as thik_3rd mentioned, we're gonna eventually run out of Survivor concepts, so they'll pass away naturally in time.That's an interesting thought. My first thought is that it'd be a pain to regulate, but I'll mull it over.

[Expletive Deleted]

And, incidentally, would it kill most of you who voted in the poll to tell me why you voted the way you did?

[Eumenide No 2]

I like the Survivor game.
I don't care about the others, but who am I to say "Yeah, just shoot them down", just because I don't care for them ? if other people enjoy it, fine with me...

[Indigo Al]

Let Survivor be

[tangentman]

One thing that HASN'T been brought up is that the "Popularity Contest" and "Contest of Champions" threads are primarily controlled by two members. It seems to me that setting a rigid limit to the games puts a lot of control in their hands. An attractive feature of a message board is the give and take between members. Expletive, you feel that there should be lengthy discussion and debate on Marvel topics. That's your personal bias.

However, not everyone always wants to come and draft multiple paragraph posts that quibble over Marvel trivia or which character sucks, etc. Keep in mind that many so-called "discussions" frequently degenerate into things of little substance: flames, pissing contests, thread drifts because certain members have the attention spans of mayflies on crack. The games have a certain degree of structure and don't drift off-topic nearly as much as the "discussions".

A more important point is that people come to these boards to enjoy themselves. Not all of us are necessarily trying to break into the industry or write a thesis on motifs in sequential art. Some of us want to have fun. The games are a means to that end; so what if there's 3 versus a preferred 2? I would understand if there was 13 game threads tying up the board, but there are only 3. One of which I just created tonight and am enjoying. Let's lighten up and keep things in perspective here--we're here for fun. If we lose that element on a comic book message board, what's the point?

Expletive, I'm sorry if that seems disrespectful, but there are too many incidents where mods get so full of their power that they overlook the reasons why members come here in the first place. We're not here to appease mods; we're here because we love comic books and we want to talk about them, or have other fun that revolves around them. Shutting down a thread that I and other members enjoy and ISN'T harming anyone seems too over the top to me.

[Expletive Deleted]

Expletive, you feel that there should be lengthy discussion and debate on Marvel topics. That's your personal bias.

However, not everyone always wants to come and draft multiple paragraph posts that quibble over Marvel trivia or which character sucks, etc. Keep in mind that many so-called "discussions" frequently degenerate into things of little substance: flames, pissing contests, thread drifts because certain members have the attention spans of mayflies on crack. The games have a certain degree of structure and don't drift off-topic nearly as much as the "discussions".Who said lengthy?

I said discussion. That can mean anything from in-depth analysis to just plain 'ol "I really liked that comic."

Posting lists of characters is not discussion. It's not conversation. It's barely communication. It can be fun, and I'm willing to allow some of it here because people seem to like it, but that's not why this board is here.

As for the bias thing . . . look, if I wanted to be a jackass, I'd ban all the games, period. This is a compromise, for me.A more important point is that people come to these boards to enjoy themselves. Not all of us are necessarily trying to break into the industry or write a thesis on motifs in sequential art. Some of us want to have fun. The games are a means to that end; so what if there's 3 versus a preferred 2? I would understand if there was 13 game threads tying up the board, but there are only 3. One of which I just created tonight and am enjoying. Let's lighten up and keep things in perspective here--we're here for fun. If we lose that element on a comic book message board, what's the point?Sure, fun's great. I'm all for fun.

But there have to be rules, and restricting list games is one of mine. So if you want one or the other, convince me.

[Expletive Deleted]

Expletive, I'm sorry if that seems disrespectful, but there are too many incidents where mods get so full of their power that they overlook the reasons why members come here in the first place. We're not here to appease mods; we're here because we love comic books and we want to talk about them, or have other fun that revolves around them. Shutting down a thread that I and other members enjoy and ISN'T harming anyone seems too over the top to me.Disrespectful? I don't ask that people genuflect, or anything. You've been nothing if not civil, and I respect that.

Thing is, your definition of harm and mine don't exactly coincide. A flood of repetive games and threads is, in my opinion, bad for the board. And even a handful isn't all that great. So I'm taking steps.

I'm not trying to go on a power trip, here. I've asked for feedback, and I'm going to allow some form of these games to continue instead of getting rid of them outright. I'm compromising, within limits.

[tangentman]

I counted 23 discussion threads on Page 1 alone; how are three contest threads (not counting the Defenders themed one, which is actually concluded) "harming" the board? The discussions haven't stopped because I posted another Survivor thread. I could understand you feeling that way if there were 13 games taking up space on the first page; there were only three active games. There are hardly any glutting of games, not the way you're making it sound. My thread had more active responses than the latest Contest, and would have taken less time to finish. Again, where is the harm you're talking about? I'm not seeing it.

That was also the first game I've posted on the Marvel board. From what I'm seeing, that privilege only goes to Daniel or mattbib. Where's the "give and take" there? You're courting cliqueish behaviors there.

[Expletive Deleted]

Cliqueish? Matt and Daniel get to run their games because I allow two, and they were the only ones here when I started out. And this thread is all about letting the community give feedback over whether or not to end one of those games and allow a new one. You're blowing smoke.

As for harm . . . I'm sorry, but that's the way I see it. Gaming threads congregate at the top of the page, are the first things new passersby on the main forum see, and are virtually content-free in terms of discussion or even interaction. This is not a gaming forum. I'm compromising and letting a few stick around. Be happy with that.

[tangentman]

Are they the only two who'll get to post their games? Will they be giving space to allow others to try their hand at a game or two? That's a potential set-up for them to monopolize your "Two Game Rule". As for the lack of interaction, that's your perception. There have been PMs in the games, comments exchanged during and after they finish, there's been competition. Maybe it's lost on you, but competition IS a form of interaction. I guess it's hard for me "to be happy with that" when I'm the person currently getting the [expletive] end of the stick with your decision.

[Expletive Deleted]

Of course they're not the only two. Did you miss the point of this thread? If Popularity Tournament ends, there's a slot open for Survivor for whoever wants it.

As for the PMs, no I didn't know about those. How could I? All I see is what's on the board, and that's 99% lists. Thanks for letting me know.

And no swearing.

[tangentman]

You're missing the point that there's not always a window to post between the Popularity Contests. The Contest of Champions is a different story, and I'm not the only person who posted a Survivor thread. I guess that was part of the appeal to me--participating by posting an installment of a game that wasn't controlled by one particular member. Yes, there were PMs--Indigo Al and I traded to discuss which characters we preferred of the entire list; I also gave him an invitation to participate in another game. There aren't just "endless lists"--there WAS conversation, usually after the games ended.


BTW, I also noticed that a significant number of folks who voted for the Popularity Contest didn't refrain from voting in the Survivor contests. ;)

[Expletive Deleted]

You're missing the point that there's not always a window to post between the Popularity Contests.Yeah, I'm talking about if the Popularity thing ends ends. As in does not restart.Yes, there were PMs--Indigo Al and I traded to discuss which characters we preferred of the entire list; I also gave him an invitation to participate in another game. There aren't just "endless lists"--there WAS conversation, usually after the games ended.There were a page of posts after two weeks and page after page after page of lists.

It's good to know that there's something going on there, though, even if it is behind the scenes. Is there anything similar that happens with the Popularity Tournament, as far as anyone knows? I get the sense that there isn't.

[tangentman]

Let me add that while I've enjoyed both the Contest and Popularity games, I like the Survivor game better because there's more thought to the game. You don't merely write out a list (Contest) or pick from an either/or option (Popularity). Participants play by adding or subtracting a point from a starting score. IMO, there's a little more strategy to the Survivor game than the other two. You either build up a character or tear him/her down with a vote. Players need to look at the long-term game to guarantee the "survival" of their chosen character. That's fun to me!

[Expletive Deleted]

That is something I've been considering. The Survivor and Contest games have a significant element of gamesmanship that's missing from the Tournament. And if people are really coordinating behind the scenes . . . well that just seals it for me.

Sorry to all the folks that like the PT style of game, and sorry to Daniel, but I think Survivor is going to be the game for a while. At least until the next one comes along. And, remember, other CBR forums still have those games running if that's really your thing. Once the current game of PT is over, it's over.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback. If you have further concerns, please PM or e-mail me.