4 ms·
It's something I would like to do - but requires a large manual labour invest. Not to mention it changes over time. Something that's on the TODO list definitel
by GeneralTspoon 11y ago
It's something I would like to do - but requires a large manual labour invest. Not to mention it changes over time. Something that's on the TODO list definitely.
I don't think it's really 'penalising demos' though - since there's also a 'Free' filter, which the game will show up under. Of course I understand it would be better to separate IAP & IAC, but I'm only one guy :)
I'll be categorising the 'demos' and 'lite' versions soon though (since they'll show up under both 'Free' and 'No-IAP' sometimes, which isn't really fair).
- Mithaldu 11y ago> since there's also a 'Free' filter Which then would also show games with consumable IAPs, which for the majority of problematic games are the actual issue, since that's what drives abusive game design. > I'm only one guy :) Are you truly intending to remain the only arbiter of what is in there? If it was crowd-sourced with moderator control this could become something great, but if it remains only you, then (and this is only my personal opinion) this seems like it's dead before it started.
- GeneralTspoon 11y agoTrue indeed. I agree that differentiation between IAP & IAC would be a good improvement. No, but as of now, I am. Designing a quantifiable system for ranking a game is one of the problems that needs to be solved if moderation is to work.
- Mithaldu 11y agoStrongly recommending you find some people who're interested in curating and whom you trust to make good decisions. There are many ways to automate and quantify such things, but sometimes the uman factor cannot be avoided. Letting people tag things privately, and then contacting the ones who seem to be doing prolific and/or high quality tagging would seem to be an easy selection process.