Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.
Registration is going up soon, sometime today. Have some last minute decisions to finalize.
Classic
SDA Forum
Hey All,
First, we’d like to apologize for the delays and announce that we’ll be releasing the SGDQ 2015 Games List on Monday, April 27th. We have been trying to form a more rigid timeline for SGDQ to improve upon past events that haven’t necessarily followed a strict schedule. Unfortunately, we have to adjust said timeline to avoid rushing through submissions.
Why is the games list delayed?
The games selection process for GDQs is a lengthy process. It involves research of the games, repeatedly looking at submitted video footage, checking the history of the games in GDQs, comparing game submissions, and having discussions. It’s time consuming, but it’s exhaustive and has led to great marathons in the past. The sacrifices in games selection quality would have been too great to release the schedule today. It would be unfair if some game submissions weren’t analyzed with the same care and effort other submissions were. It would have led to an unfair selection process, and would affect the marathon itself.
Rather than let the timeline affect SGDQ, we’ve decided to extend the selection process until the 27th. This allows the games list to be populated with less focus on the deadline, and more focus on the games themselves.
SGDQ 2015 registration will close on July 15th and the attendee cap is 1,200 people (AGDQ 2015’s cap was 1,000 people). Please keep that in mind when deciding when to register.
With that said I’d like to apologize one more time and say there should be no more delays in the release of the games list.
First, we’d like to apologize for the delays and announce that we’ll be releasing the SGDQ 2015 Games List on Monday, April 27th. We have been trying to form a more rigid timeline for SGDQ to improve upon past events that haven’t necessarily followed a strict schedule. Unfortunately, we have to adjust said timeline to avoid rushing through submissions.
Why is the games list delayed?
The games selection process for GDQs is a lengthy process. It involves research of the games, repeatedly looking at submitted video footage, checking the history of the games in GDQs, comparing game submissions, and having discussions. It’s time consuming, but it’s exhaustive and has led to great marathons in the past. The sacrifices in games selection quality would have been too great to release the schedule today. It would be unfair if some game submissions weren’t analyzed with the same care and effort other submissions were. It would have led to an unfair selection process, and would affect the marathon itself.
Rather than let the timeline affect SGDQ, we’ve decided to extend the selection process until the 27th. This allows the games list to be populated with less focus on the deadline, and more focus on the games themselves.
SGDQ 2015 registration will close on July 15th and the attendee cap is 1,200 people (AGDQ 2015’s cap was 1,000 people). Please keep that in mind when deciding when to register.
With that said I’d like to apologize one more time and say there should be no more delays in the release of the games list.
ㅋㅋㅋㅋ
The 4/27 release date is our new projected timeline given the circumstances that Studio described. We are not asking you to believe us, but rather, we would like to keep you informed of our plans so that you have a frame of reference. We understand your frustration with our delays and reasons why you need the games list for your own scheduling purposes, and we apologize for any inconvenience you have or will endure as a result.
We will continue to do our best and apply this to our event planning processes moving forward.
We will continue to do our best and apply this to our event planning processes moving forward.
If you're going to do the best you can to adhere to this schedule, can you please please please actually update the GDQ website with the dates? It's extremely frustrating to have to come to forums and comb through seemingly random posts just to find out that it's been delayed again. It took me ~4 hours to find something that would show whether or not the list was actually announced.
I definitely understand the delays and whatnot, especially at the rate the GDQ's have been growing. I just know that for me it would be great if the actual GDQ site would be updated.
Apologies if I'm rambling.
I definitely understand the delays and whatnot, especially at the rate the GDQ's have been growing. I just know that for me it would be great if the actual GDQ site would be updated.
Apologies if I'm rambling.
Edit history:
kirbymastah: 2015-04-22 12:39:34 pm
kirbymastah: 2015-04-21 09:25:18 pm
kirbymastah: 2015-04-21 09:13:13 pm
<(^_^)>
I accept the apology. What I'm wondering, though, (and could be improved upon), is the fact that you didn't make the announcements about the delays until the actual day of the current projected date.
You initially said the game list was going to be april 18th, but on april 17th, then changed the projected date to april 21st. That's not THAT big of an issue but...
Then when april 21st came around, the projected date was changed again, hours AFTER actual promised time.
I don't think the problem is delaying the game list itself, but rather, the fact that the committee made these changes so last minute, even past the current projected time. I do think it was irresponsible to not have expected the delay until AFTER the promised date, then make that announcement.
Regardless, these things do happen, and while this is disappointing, there's nothing to do except move on and hopefully things like this won't happen again. I know it's a lot more work that many people don't really realize, so good luck with the rest of the game selection!
EDIT: I guess the main point is, I think it's rather irresponsible to set a date, then not realize you'd need another week to figure it out until after the original date anyways. Wouldn't you know at least a day beforehand to see how much work with the game list is left? I'm not involved with it but that would seem to make sense to me. Tl;dr the problem wasn't the delay itself, the problem was not expecting the delay until after the original date.
You initially said the game list was going to be april 18th, but on april 17th, then changed the projected date to april 21st. That's not THAT big of an issue but...
Then when april 21st came around, the projected date was changed again, hours AFTER actual promised time.
I don't think the problem is delaying the game list itself, but rather, the fact that the committee made these changes so last minute, even past the current projected time. I do think it was irresponsible to not have expected the delay until AFTER the promised date, then make that announcement.
Regardless, these things do happen, and while this is disappointing, there's nothing to do except move on and hopefully things like this won't happen again. I know it's a lot more work that many people don't really realize, so good luck with the rest of the game selection!
EDIT: I guess the main point is, I think it's rather irresponsible to set a date, then not realize you'd need another week to figure it out until after the original date anyways. Wouldn't you know at least a day beforehand to see how much work with the game list is left? I'm not involved with it but that would seem to make sense to me. Tl;dr the problem wasn't the delay itself, the problem was not expecting the delay until after the original date.
#FailFish
I have to agree with the last two posts - it seems a little surprising to me that you would have so specific a time as 12 EST yesterday, but then you didn't realize until 7 hours past it that you would need almost another week? It's just a little disappointing that so many of us spent a lot of time refreshing and being excited, when a delay of this magnitude probably could've been reported sooner.
But ultimately yes, I do agree that the most important thing is that you give each submission the consideration it deserves, and that you get the right list out for this marathon.
Edit: Maybe a partial release would help people? Similarly to how Round 1 was done? I'm sure some games are confirmed accept or reject at this point.
But ultimately yes, I do agree that the most important thing is that you give each submission the consideration it deserves, and that you get the right list out for this marathon.
Edit: Maybe a partial release would help people? Similarly to how Round 1 was done? I'm sure some games are confirmed accept or reject at this point.
Very Thanks..!!
Quote from Graviton:
Is there also an update about registration? Because that also appears to be delayed. Obviously it's not a big deal, but I'm confused why after several delays of the game list and tweeting saying that at least registration will go live that day that it once again hasn't.
It's probably a safety thing to keep registration tied to the final games list, because I'm sure they don't want people to register for the event without knowing if they're running/when they're running.
Quote from PixelKaye:
It's probably a safety thing to keep registration tied to the final games list, because I'm sure they don't want people to register for the event without knowing if they're running/when they're running.
Nah, they definitely intended on registration being available long before the game list was, at least after the most recent delays. There are still a ton of people, including myself, who will go whether we have a game on the schedule or not.
@GamesDoneQuick
Registration for #SGDQ2015 will open tonight. The games list will be available by Monday, 4/27.
Very Thanks..!!
Quote from Graviton:
Nah, they definitely intended on registration being available long before the game list was, at least after the most recent delays. There are still a ton of people, including myself, who will go whether we have a game on the schedule or not.
@GamesDoneQuick
Registration for #SGDQ2015 will open tonight. The games list will be available by Monday, 4/27.
@GamesDoneQuick
Registration for #SGDQ2015 will open tonight. The games list will be available by Monday, 4/27.
That's what I get for trying to be logical on 3 hours of sleep.
Quote from PvtCb:
Something that might help is keeping a tally on games once they're submitted, then updating them once every three months or so. There's no reason to reevaluate each game with the same scrutiny if it's going to be submitted almost every marathon.
This may be the smartest thing ive heard about this topic should really be considered
All the things
I'm not really sure what you're saying with that. Are you suggesting that the selection committee should continuously evaluate submissions even during the off-season? That's just not sustainable when there are so many other parts of planning to finish off. If you're otherwise saying that individual submissions should carry forward to future events, I don't see how that would be better for planning. Schedules are very much an organic thing; different blocks can come and go over the years, and different groupings of games can make sense or not depending on what a given event's pool is. I also think it would be selling runners and runs short not to give them due diligence in consideration, no matter how many times they've been offered.
This is not the giant
Quote from Omnigamer:
I'm not really sure what you're saying with that. Are you suggesting that the selection committee should continuously evaluate submissions even during the off-season? That's just not sustainable when there are so many other parts of planning to finish off. If you're otherwise saying that individual submissions should carry forward to future events, I don't see how that would be better for planning. Schedules are very much an organic thing; different blocks can come and go over the years, and different groupings of games can make sense or not depending on what a given event's pool is. I also think it would be selling runners and runs short not to give them due diligence in consideration, no matter how many times they've been offered.
I'm not asking for in-depth coverage of each and every game. Just keep a running tab on things to look for in good submissions of various genres (does this RPG have too many cutscenes; is this platformer execution or glitch heavy; what are the movement tech, if any, in this FPS; etc.), a list runners who have been in previous marathons with no issues, a list of games that have been submitted previous marathons that were close to getting in but for various reasons didn't (basically a short list of candidates to look for before submissions even open), and games that have been in several marathons in a row that you might want to cycle out in favor of fresh runs. I know you said this process is organic, but I've been seeing a pattern based on past marathons. In very broad strokes, there's either blocks of similar games, games that took priority over similar games, runs of a few hot new speedgames, or marathon staple runs (a Final Fantasy, a Halo, a 3D Zelda, a 2D Zelda, etc.). I don't see how having guidelines set up in advance would make marathons more stale or ruin the selection process; if anything, they would help give consistent content and remove selector bias. If you're so worried about the way changes could affect how the games list is generated, look at the current situation. You've blown past several deadlines, held off until you've missed the deadlines to announce that you've blown past the deadlines, and angered a lot of people while doing so. I understand planning a week long marathon is hard (the 3 day marathons I've planned both took a day or so and that was with a small fraction of the scrutiny you guys are known for), but the current situation is untenable. Speaking personally, my next few months got way more complicated because the games list was late. I was supposed to have a job interview this week, and had a game of mine gotten in, I would have brought up that I might need to work part time in order to prepare for my run(s) or reconsidered the job altogether. I have medical issues, and I need to know how to balance my schedule around doctors appointments and therapy. I'm on leave from college, and if I didn't get a game in, I would have applied for Summer courses (I can't do this now with my top 3 local choices as their enrollment deadlines passed this week). If I'm working part time full time or going to school part time, should I save up money for travel and attendance or a PC upgrade? You can see why I'm more than a little miffed about the whole situation. Lots of runners say they're going regardless of getting a game in or not, but many more decide their attendance based on their runs getting in because they have to take a week off to work in the event, not to mention time spent practicing.
I'm not telling you to make set-in-stone rules for the scheduling process; I think I'm making a fairly reasonable request to reevaluate how selection is done to expedite the choosing. These events have gotten bigger and changed much over the years. Shouldn't the selection process keep up? If you call yourself speedrunners, you'll learn the optimal strats to do this fast, but right.
I look forward to a responses.
(user is banned)
Perhaps a list of each game that WAS at GDQs could be handy, which would be a lot easier than every game that isnt. EDIT: Or a list of all rejected games that have a reason why they were rejected. Might be tricky to compile but it would be useful data.
I'd like to offer a different idea though. Sort of a tier-ed submission list. So games that are definitely not in are rejected as usual, but games that definitely ARE in (like super metroid, other occasional 'locks' like shovel knight, etc) would be 'locked'. This would pretty much only serve to notify runners earlier than usual, which can be useful for people further away.
Currently I'm picturing the following tiers:
Accepted 100% in
Competing - judgement still underway
Rejected 100% not in
A simple 3 tier system like that wouldn't be too difficult (I think)
Trickier would be systems that have more
Accepted - 100% chance of getting in
Likely - >50% chance of getting in
Unlikely - <50% chance of getting in
Rejected - 0% chance of getting in
Either way, I think letting the 'locked' games have an accept that is final would be cool
I'd like to offer a different idea though. Sort of a tier-ed submission list. So games that are definitely not in are rejected as usual, but games that definitely ARE in (like super metroid, other occasional 'locks' like shovel knight, etc) would be 'locked'. This would pretty much only serve to notify runners earlier than usual, which can be useful for people further away.
Currently I'm picturing the following tiers:
Accepted 100% in
Competing - judgement still underway
Rejected 100% not in
A simple 3 tier system like that wouldn't be too difficult (I think)
Trickier would be systems that have more
Accepted - 100% chance of getting in
Likely - >50% chance of getting in
Unlikely - <50% chance of getting in
Rejected - 0% chance of getting in
Either way, I think letting the 'locked' games have an accept that is final would be cool