Quote: "I’m curious to know whether that will effect scoring as well. I remember a lot of text adventures using abbreviated command sets, and they didn’t detract from the play value."
It would have a positive effect on the score because it would present the player with options. If you let the players type in a variety of words or phrases and they get the same end-result, I'd say it would provide a better technical score because you're allowing a higher level of functionality than demanding they type exact phrases. IE, the player isn't going to struggle through trying to learn a long list of commands because they could type north, go north, walk north, head north, etc. and end up in the same place.
Quote: "Exactly, just put a separate map with the exe. I think not allowing media is better than saying somethings are okay, because then people could start questioning where the gui ends and other images begin."
I agree fully here. If you put an image file in with the EXE and name it "map" or something to that effect, then we'll more than likely open it up and use it, but I think we're going to be extremely firm this year about not using media. If you're planning to release the game after the competition, and that release would require media, then you could rem out the media portions and whatnot. The only area that's still sort of "gray" for me is ASCII inclusion, if we'd allow a contestant to use ASCII-drawn maps and images... I'm sort of 50/50 on that still.
Quote: "Matt, could you elaborate on the scoring, ie what are the parts that make up the score, the percents of the total score, ect?"
Sure thing
.
There are four portions of the score (same as last year): originality, story development, writing ability, and technical design. Each of these four qualities is worth up to ten points. They rate as follows:
*
Originality rates the game's uniqueness. In other words, you'll score higher here if your game genuinely "stands out," both in the concept of the story and the layout of your technical design. Basically we're looking for original stories, unique command designs, etc.
*
Story Development rates how well you've developed the characters and plot of your game. You'd earn higher marks here for having detailed descriptions of the player's environment, for providing a vivid account of what the player is doing, why they're doing it, how they're doing it, etc.
*
Writing Ability rates your overall command of the English language when applied to the game. This aspect of the score is entirely effected by spelling, grammar, and writing structure.
*
Technical Design rates the game's functionality. You'd score well here for a lack of bugs/ glitches, a fluid and highly-functional command interface, and high levels of playability.
And again, because we're allowing IF creation utilities to be used this year, source inclusion will not be mandatory. But if you use one of those programs, your technical design scoring will depend entirely on the quality of the tool you've used, and if three people are using that same program, with those same exact capabilities, then none would really stand out, especially against someone who created a completely unique engine from scratch.
Quote: "how do we know the capabilities of a particular judge in a particular language for basically QA'ing someone's code?"
That's a very good point. I know my way around DBP, but I'm by no means an expert, and if you set me down in front of Ruby or something, my head might just implode. And on that note...
Quote: "if it works then it works. What difference does it make? You could have the most complicated amazing code in the world, but if it crashes half the time then hardly any good."
That's pretty much how I look at judging source code as well. What seems incredibly efficient and simple to one person might be rediculously complicated and obnoxious to the person sitting next to them... that's one thing I can definitely say I've learned from working with other people on projects over the years. And just because there happens to be "a book" on how to do something, doesn't mean that something needs to always be done "by the book." So for that, it's somewhat pointless to sit there and read through each and every line of an entrant's source code. Oh, and doing that? It's really, really boring, lol.
"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
