Adding some to the discussion. I don't totally disagree with anything you're saying, but I would advocate that there has to be some line drawn for what is and isn't tracked. We might disagree with what that line is.
You specifically mention: "If people want to compete in something and our system can facilitate that, we should facilitate them"
- This is decently far off the current juncture, but I'm reminded of the SRL days when we raced IRL races of "Get Food"and "Take a shower", which they put a stop to a few months after it started for getting out of hand
- I also recall this run: https://recordsetter.com/world-record/complete-super-mario-land-2-6-golden-coins-while-sticking-tongue-out/27225
- And then there's a million quizzes online on sporcle if one wants to speedrun those.
- Then there's the really gray area of "Me and my brother made this flash game and it takes 30 seconds and we both run it"
- As far as google maps style things, this article shows some: http://geoawesomeness.com/10-top-google-maps-games-of-all-times/
I'm an advocate of "Just because we can, doesn't necessarily mean we should"
More towards your point, I think there are things we could definitely do better to isolate the search bar and the front page from putting things in everyone's face. For example, what if a game existed that was better deprioritized in the search bar and not on the front page? In my mind some of the site limitations are imposing on this at least a little bit. Along these lines though, I definitely do not want the million quiz games.
We added the webgame, mobile, and rom hack type tags a couple years ago to help alleviate user concerns. I still find the results when typing "Super Mario" in the search bar to be quite annoying.
What are the worst games on Cyberscore right now?
I think the worst game on Cyberscore is probably https://cyberscore.me.uk/game/2048 this one, which is a mobile phone game in which you throw various items down the pants of a working plumber (using the same action as throwing a pokeball in pokemon go).
"More towards your point, I think there are things we could definitely do better to isolate the search bar and the front page from putting things in everyone's face. For example, what if a game existed that was better deprioritized in the search bar and not on the front page? In my mind some of the site limitations are imposing on this at least a little bit. Along these lines though, I definitely do not want the million quiz games."
I think this idea is great on paper, but my intuition leads me to think it probably wouldn't work all that well in practice. Can't hide these things completely, can you?
Anyway, I'm done raising issues, I thought it might be interesting to weigh in and provide another viewpoint on this situation.
It seems silly to reject everything on Google Maps right away. The Flight Simulator that I submitted has all of the functions of a regular game- specific starting and ending points, no change in gameplay based on real world events, all that. I don't see how it's unfit to be on the site. True, due to it's open endedness the rules need to be specific, but other than that I don't see the problem with adding it to the site besides the fact that it's on Google Earth.
"I do not think the site should add something solely because it has a larger than average amount of people that want it added." If most people want it added, what's the problem? It's not like it's going to bother people by existing on the site, especially if most people want it there. Whether or not one person thinks it counts as a speedgame doesn't really matter. If it's a video game, it has runs, it has a community of speedrunners, and those runners want it added, I see no reason why it shouldn't be added. It's not going to cause any harm. Whether or not it's a good speedgame, GeoGuessr is a speedgame, and it has a community. It should be allowed on the site.
Because the site demands a set quality for the games it adds now and the game doesn't reach it. Kirkq already said so, there's nothing you can do to really change that and it's annoying to see this topic keep coming up despite the fact that the rejection reason is very clear.
I know that the rejection reason is very clear. I disagree with it, though. A set quality for games to be added isn't necessary if it already has a decent sized community, like GeoGuessr. And what "set quality" does it not meet exactly? Is it the fact that it's RNG based? I really don't even see what makes this game such an abhorrent piece of garbage to run that it can't be represented on the site. It's not like it's going to collapse the site instantly. The benefits strongly outweigh the (almost nonexistent) costs. As for the part about how nothing can be done, this is a forum. It's meant for discussing things. I understand that there need to be limitations on what things can be added to the site. A random flash game no one cares about is questionable. Virtual books have no strategy to them, they're just dumb memes, adding them isn't necessary. Something not even related to a video game at all, like Super Mario Land 2 but while sticking out your tongue, or taking a shower, are obvious "no"s. But GeoGuessr? It's a game, with speed strategies, plenty of runners... It's a perfectly fine speedgame on all counts, and keeping it off the site makes no sense to me.
Also, the argument that it's a very gray line and accepting it would cause more games to be accepted which cross that line is ridiculous. What really matters is whether or not this game crosses that line. Apply that logic to each case, and you don't have any problem.
And to clarify- when I say virtual books have no strategy to them, I mean that there is no opportunity for timesave besides button mashing, which I think most would agree is hardly a speedrun. Games like Mario Party have plenty of opportunities to save time, even if that means getting lucky, just increasing your odds or barely saving any time at all.
"What really matters is whether or not this game crosses that line, and it doesn't"
Considering the line is currently "no Google Maps games", it very much does cross that line. But if we made an exception to that just because it's popular, then you could also make exceptions for other games that also don't necessarily belong on the site just because they're also popular. Therein lies the problem.
So, as I said nearly a month ago now, "the question here needs to be, should games based on Google Maps be allowed on the site?" I said no then, and I'd still say no now.
Visual novels are explicitly ineligible. I'm not sure why you're bringing them up tbh.
"But GeoGuessr? It's a game, with speed strategies, plenty of runners... It's a perfectly fine speedgame on all counts, and keeping it off the site makes no sense to me" Yeah me neither. I think it was dismissed much too quickly. The rule should not be an arbitrary "no map games", it should be "no low-quality browser games".
So here's the plan, ok? Listen up.
- Join the Geoguessr Speedruns discord.
- Help foster the community.
- Contribute to the existing parallel process for verifying runs on a leaderboard.
- Show your support when the game is resubmitted at a later date.
See you there! :)
(If you're referring to another game that was rejected for similar reasons and you don't actually care about Geoguessr, you should say so.)
@ShikenNuggets What is it about games on google maps that makes them inherently wrong to add to the site? It's not just the fact that they are on Google Maps, it's a quality usually shared by games on google maps. My point is that it's not a good idea to reject a game just because it's based on google maps, the game's qualities should be the deciding factor. It doesn't cross the line of "is it a real speedgame worth adding to the site", it just crosses a line made to replicate the other line that I don't think is accurate, which is that no google maps related games are allowed.
@6oliath my first post was about something seperate, but everything after is mostly about GeoGuessr while also partially applying to the game I was trying to submit. I have no interest in running GeoGuessr, but I see that others do, which is part of why I think there should be a leaderboard. I was bringing up visual novels to show that there obviously need to be some limitations on what can be on the site.
Kirk has pretty much made it clear at this point that games based on Google Maps / Google Earth aren't gonna be accepted on the site, pretty much, regardless of the popularity of said game. Whether or not a game is popular also has no baring on its quality as a game fullstop. There has to be some form of quality control, and those games just happen to fall below the line in terms of that quality control.
Now, compare GeoGuessr with other actual games on consoles like Mario Odyssey, Zelda OoT, Celeste, Monster Hunter etc, or even more "low quality" games like Getting Over It or something which have many mechanics and everything, you'll notice quickly that GeoGuessr or any other Google Maps/Earth "game" just aren't even comparable to the quality of the others. The other games have actual mechanics and gameplay aspects you could improve (like better movement), in Google Maps based games theres no mechanics or gameplay, just a map and the ability to change the location. Mechanics and Gameplay is what videogames are all about and it creates good speedgames, both of them just aren't there in Google Maps based games.
These reasons are likely why it doesn't meet the quality standards and why it didn't get accepted.
An already existing community is not the entire reason the speedgame should be accepted, just an important part of it, because that's already part of what makes a good speedgame. I know that there has to be some form of quality control, my point is that rejecting all games based on google maps is not a very accurate form of quality control, because whether or not a game is based on google maps says nothing about the game's quality.
@blueYOSHI Not all google maps games lack mechanics and gameplay. The flight simulator I submitted had movement strategies and gameplay. GeoGuessr has mechanics and gameplay, you see a location and based on its appearance you look through a map to find it. The mechanics and gameplay are there. Just because it doesn't fit the typical mold of a platform/adventure game, which focus heavily on movement, doesn't mean it's not a speedgame.
It can be run, a decent amount of input is required to improve time, people run it already... It's a speedgame. The game may look low quality and uninteresting to you, but those who run the game would probably disagree. It's not a very good indicator to use imo
Everybody’s opinion on what is a low quality game will differ - that is why this site doesn’t get everyone’s viewpoint on the matter.
What is considered below the quality standard is up to the admins to set. Unfortunately, this means many games won’t get on here despite the fact they have a community behind them. It’s up to the admin’s discretion because they are the ones who are maintaining this site.
Would just like to add that after watching my first GeoGuessr speedrun at ESASummer18 I immediately googled it looking for a srcom leaderboard to binge watch, but only found this thread.. Pretty disappointing that the committee doesn't see the potential in this game but I'm hoping that the runners will keep requesting to add leaderboards to show how cool of a speed game it is.
Why did you even bother necro a 4 months thread @Trr1ppy also read kirkq's message