Here's a sticky thread to put achievement-based ideas and discussion.
Our plan is to engage game developers to send us periodic information about your game play, such as how many castles you've toppled in Crush the Castle, or how many times your dinosaur jumped in Treadmillasaurus Rex, etc. and that these pieces of information would accumulate to award you 'achievements' on AG3.
We're actively designing and building the achievement system right now, so as we have information, we'll share it here, but we're welcome to listen to ideas and feedback along the way.
@GoM 1. Broken: How? (Yes, I saw your other post, but please elaborate as pertinent to this thread.) 2. Bad thing: Many people still like the current system. Also, the proposed new system seems overly complicated. "Karma" for site usage? Really? AG - something people like = people forsaking AG = Bad Thing. AG + something overcomplicated = people forsaking AG = Bad Thing.
However: AG + improvement (achievements) + something people like (see above) = people being happy/more people using AG = Good Thing.
Broken: AP system is easily abused and only rewards for community involvement. Improved: AP system for achievements in games will offer a challenge, and reputation rewarding for community involvement. Reputation is a simple up/down vote system that will be monitored so people don't abuse it. Look at a site like Imgur for reference. Bad thing: That's outdated information. The latest information on it was it'll be up/down vote system like Imgur. They have ranks for their system and stuff.
Hardly negative, only a few people truly care for armor points. It wouldn't affect the site, and people would replace them if you're worried about numbers.
[Checked out Imgur.] A reputation up/down voting system like that seems like it would offer a far greater opportunity for abuse. If someone decided to be a troll, they could just spam negative votes against their target until that person gets banned or ostracized from the community for no reason. And how exactly would this be monitored? It would be very difficult to tell whether a vote against a person was well-founded or malicious. Even having to give a description or reason for each vote would not solve the problem completely; it would be easy to just fake something. And in the event of malicious down-votes, what wold be the recourse? Even if an arbitrary number is adjusted, actual real-world reputation as perceived through the site would be damaged. And what would stop someone who was legitimately down-voted from crying foul and claiming wrongful marking? It seems to me that this new system would open the doors wide for a new type of flame war and abuse.
Also, while this is not directly an artifact of the rank/point system, under the current arrangement people's actions speak for themselves in the court of reputation. With the proposed new system, it seems like your reputation would be based not so much on your actions as on what people think of you and whether they feel like marking you as a negative for any or no reason.
Note that achievements and reputation will be different. Achievements will reward armor points and reputation will be a new system that will reward a different version of points, not having to do with achievements. This is getting off-topic.
A reputation up/down voting system like that seems like it would offer a far greater opportunity for abuse.
- Restrict how many up/down votes you can give a day. - If someone up/down votes a single person a lot it notifies the mods and they review it. Wouldn't be an issue if they were to up/down vote several as the amount would be restricted.
And what would stop someone who was legitimately down-voted from crying foul and claiming wrongful marking?
We are allowed to like/dislike anything. The person must realise not everyone agrees with them.
- Restrict how many up/down votes you can give a day. - If someone up/down votes a single person a lot it notifies the mods and they review it. Wouldn't be an issue if they were to up/down vote several as the amount would be restricted.
- If someone is caught abusing the system, ban them from being able to use it for X amount of time. Not a site ban, but banning from giving reputation. If they continue to abuse after their ban is lifted, ban from reputation use forever.
We could, but that probably won't happen. In the closed beta they displayed all the armatars and there was talk in the armatars sticky that they'll remain like that, instead of unlocking them. The only thing you'll be unlocking thus far will be ranks.
I don't think they're going to add achievements to every game.
No probably all the games AG has developed to begin with. I imagine. No knowledge on programming: Would they need the game maker to edit the game to include achievements? I can't imagine many wanting to do that.
Would they need the game maker to edit the game to include achievements?
Don't think so. Look at Kongregate, games submitted with their API have a chance to get achievements. If it gets a high enough rating/liked by many it'll most likely get achievements added. The staff handles it.
