Marathons and MARP in general
Posted: Sat Jul 15, 2000 12:30 pm
Have yourself a seat (as if you weren't sitting already), this could get long.
<p>
In light of the recent discussions about doing things with marathonable games and some conversations that took place in #marp, I have to wonder what all this is going towards. We could sit here, quit our jobs, and spend all day every day talking about how to determine who is really the best at game X, or why a high score in game Y doesn't matter because you can play forever. Every game is a different situation, and every person has their own take on just what constitutes skill in a game. Is it getting as far as you can? Milking points all along the way? Playing until you drop dead? Who can say?
<p>
What we have here in each case is a granulation of a game (and its clones) into potentially several different variations, one where you're playing on hardest settings possible, one on TG, one on defaults for 'nostalgia's sake', et cetera. What comes of this, really? Do we actually need to add more entries to the big classics just so we can show skill in different ways? What we're accomplishing is stirring up a ~large~ can of worms that's bound to cause a great deal of discussion on what the best way to play a game is, some arguments, and the pointless transformation of MARP from the place it is into a site that praises the weak but prolific, rather than the individual talents of the specialists who excel within their own genres (apologies to those on the leaderboard who are top 10 material and maintain high percentages).
<p>
I propose something different entirely. After some thought I feel that the leaderboard is now something that holds MARP back. Yes, it's nice to see your name on a webpage with your percentages totaled up. But it attracts pointsmongers who see that as the end all-be all of their existence on this site. With that in mind, I think the site could do away with the leaderboard with all due respect to the top players, simplifying the process a great deal. The high scores on defaults (or TG, as the case may be) would be untouched, and the long-disused 'interesting' page could be used for games played under different circumstances. Some tweaking would definitely need to be done with that, but it's a workable solution.
<p>
Bring on the flames.
<p>
Brian McLean
--
bmclean84@hotmail.com
<p>
In light of the recent discussions about doing things with marathonable games and some conversations that took place in #marp, I have to wonder what all this is going towards. We could sit here, quit our jobs, and spend all day every day talking about how to determine who is really the best at game X, or why a high score in game Y doesn't matter because you can play forever. Every game is a different situation, and every person has their own take on just what constitutes skill in a game. Is it getting as far as you can? Milking points all along the way? Playing until you drop dead? Who can say?
<p>
What we have here in each case is a granulation of a game (and its clones) into potentially several different variations, one where you're playing on hardest settings possible, one on TG, one on defaults for 'nostalgia's sake', et cetera. What comes of this, really? Do we actually need to add more entries to the big classics just so we can show skill in different ways? What we're accomplishing is stirring up a ~large~ can of worms that's bound to cause a great deal of discussion on what the best way to play a game is, some arguments, and the pointless transformation of MARP from the place it is into a site that praises the weak but prolific, rather than the individual talents of the specialists who excel within their own genres (apologies to those on the leaderboard who are top 10 material and maintain high percentages).
<p>
I propose something different entirely. After some thought I feel that the leaderboard is now something that holds MARP back. Yes, it's nice to see your name on a webpage with your percentages totaled up. But it attracts pointsmongers who see that as the end all-be all of their existence on this site. With that in mind, I think the site could do away with the leaderboard with all due respect to the top players, simplifying the process a great deal. The high scores on defaults (or TG, as the case may be) would be untouched, and the long-disused 'interesting' page could be used for games played under different circumstances. Some tweaking would definitely need to be done with that, but it's a workable solution.
<p>
Bring on the flames.
<p>
Brian McLean
--
bmclean84@hotmail.com