example: a new profile look so when you turn on your profile it says welcome and when you go on your homepage profile it shows which of your friends are online and what their playing.
I'd like to see most of the things mentioned in the stickied threads in AG3, which will probably happen (and hopefully they take most of the ideas that users mentioned). I'd also like if they changed some things around; such as changing how many games you can rate a day to about 30 or 40, changing how the profiles look so you can read mostly everything on the about without having to scroll down every few seconds, changing the front page so it's more like how it is now - so you can see more new games. That's about it I guess.
I'm just really hoping the forums don't get erased. It's entertaining sometimes just to go back a couple dozen pages and read some old locked threads.
And frankly, my post count makes me look cool.
such as changing how many games you can rate a day to about 30 or 40
I don't think any sort of points should be awarded at all for rating games. What is the purpose of awarding points just for giving a game a rating?
And even if they did limit the amount of games one could rate, there would be those ne'er-do-wells who would rate however many games they could every day and rack up rating points.
So no, I do not think there is a reason to limit the amount of games one can rate when it makes more sense just to remove the points awarded for it altogether.
I'm just really hoping the forums don't get erased. It's entertaining sometimes just to go back a couple dozen pages and read some old locked threads.
Not to mention having to restart all these threads...
I don't think any sort of points should be awarded at all for rating games. What is the purpose of awarding points just for giving a game a rating?
And even if they did limit the amount of games one could rate, there would be those ne'er-do-wells who would rate however many games they could every day and rack up rating points.
So no, I do not think there is a reason to limit the amount of games one can rate when it makes more sense just to remove the points awarded for it altogether.
You would expect them rewarding points for rating games if they are going to be more game focused with AG3. That's why they're introducing achievements after all and taking away points from community activity.
Well, exactly why they'd give points for achievements: So we have something to do on the site and so it's another way to get points and rank up. If they have the current rank system or something similar where you need 20k or so points to reach the highest level/rank, then I don't think achievements will cut it. If they do put achievements on most games and reward 5-60 points for certain achievements then I think that could get around there, but rating games will help.
Yes, there will always be people like that, but it'll restrict them and if I were one of them I wouldn't want to check in on this site every day just to rate a few games. It'd take weeks to get all those games rated and it's just a waste of time. I don't think they should take points away from rating games just because a few people will spam-rate. To me that's like deleting the forums because there will be spammers.
You would expect them rewarding points for rating games if they are going to be more game focused with AG3.
One would expect that, because AG3 is already mimicking Kongregate's point system in many other ways.
then I don't think achievements will cut it
but rating games will help.
Rating games would not significantly "help" you reach a higher level, especially if it's limited to only about 30-40 rateable games in a day. If you do find yourself in a situation where you need 20k or so points to advance, rating that amount of games is going to boost you about as much as 1 forum post would here in the current AG point system.
if I were one of them I wouldn't want to check in on this site every day just to rate a few games
You'd also think that people would find it silly to create an account here, rate 2000 games in a couple of days, and then leave as though they've accomplished something; but it's been done so many times it's almost unbelievable.
I don't think they should take points away from rating games just because a few people will spam-rate. To me that's like deleting the forums because there will be spammers.
It's more like taking away the points gained from posting in the forums, as they wouldn't be deleting the rating feature; they'd just be exposing of the points being awarded for it. Since they're already taking the points out of forum posts, and game-rating is a much quicker and less-stimulating way to gain AP, I don't see why it makes sense to continue to award points just for rating a game.
Rating games would not significantly "help" you reach a higher level, especially if it's limited to only about 30-40 rateable games in a day. If you do find yourself in a situation where you need 20k or so points to advance, rating that amount of games is going to boost you about as much as 1 forum post would here in the current AG point system.
Over time it would considering there's about 2,400 games on AG and that number will grow. So if they reward 1 point for rating 1 game and people playing games to get achievements and rating all the games they've played then that would help somewhat, at least to reach another level/rank, but probably not to reach the highest level/rank. Dunno what they plan on doing with these ranks or even if they have levels. There's a thread about those, but none of the admins post in this subforum nowadays.
But whatever they'll do with AG3 will be to please most users and keep them active on this site (from what I've seen, and it's pretty much common sense since most sites seem to do the same thing). Getting armor points solely from achievements sounds rather boring.
Over time it would considering there's about 2,400 games on AG and that number will grow.
Limit that to 40 games a day and it will take you a minimum of 60 days just to rate every game. By that time, you'd probably have thousands more points worth of achievements; so much so that the 2,400 extra points gained over a period of 60 days would hardly make a difference compared to the points you'd have amassed over that same length of time.
And even then, it wouldn't be a consistent enough way of gaining points after those 60 days; it would just be a small boost that may effortlessly bump you a few spaces up the leaderboard, but it wouldn't significantly increase your total points.
Getting armor points solely from achievements sounds rather boring.
This I agree completely with, which is why I personally don't see myself having very many points when AG3 rolls around. However, I don't think getting one point for rating a game is going to spice up the point system; if anything, it would just be a fallback for users who are just too lazy to play the more intricate games but still want to gain some points around the site.
I guess they could introduce challenges or something like shields you gain for your profile page where you gain a certain amount of achievements then you get rewarded a shield on your profile and it gives you an extra amount of points. Say you get a new shield after achieving 50 achievements and it's worth about 100 points. And the shields would be of different designs so it isn't boring and ugly. I dunno, not much else you could do with the point system with AG3.
That sounds eerily similar to how Kong does challenges, but I do agree that there should be some kind of challenges in AG3. It would certainly keep people more active, and it would allow some users to explore games that they otherwise wouldn't normally play.
Kind of, but their challenges include giving away prizes like Xbox 360's, PS3's, video games, etc. Could be because they are owned by GameStop and have those resources, but I don't see AG doing things like that. Which is why we'll have to settle with points as prizes. Also, with their challenges it's very game specific, like they recently had a Skyrim challenge and included a bunch of games in that category of gaming. I'd want AG3 to be different, though, since they probably won't do things like that. Instead giving extra point bonuses for giving your time to get a lot of achievements.
An idea if they have that would be completing some medieval games to get a medieval shield, like Crush the Castle and whatever kind of games they have similar to those. Another would be to give a bronze shield with a design for getting a quarter of the achievements on the site, iron for getting half, and gold for getting all with point bonuses increasing for each. Something to give more motivation for playing games and keeping people interested in the site.
An idea if they have that would be completing some medieval games to get a medieval shield, like Crush the Castle and whatever kind of games they have similar to those.
Would you get the same medieval shield for completing different games, or would each game award a separate shield?
Another would be to give a bronze shield with a design for getting a quarter of the achievements on the site, iron for getting half, and gold for getting all with point bonuses increasing for each
If someone were to get exactly 1/4 of the achievements, and then a bunch more games were added, would they lose the bronze medal, or would it be a permanent thing?
Something to give more motivation for playing games and keeping people interested in the site.
One thing I think they should do is create challenges for older games that most people have forgotten about. That way, the older games are brought back into the scene, and more people will get a chance to experience games that they otherwise wouldn't have necessarily known about.
Something else that hasn't really been brought up at all in the entire discussion of AG3 is user-created content. Perhaps there could be some user-generated levels, picked by admins, in certain games that award some amount of points if you complete them? It would keep people creating and sharing their own levels and playing those of others in games that otherwise wouldn't necessarily have an active level-sharing community.
Would you get the same medieval shield for completing different games, or would each game award a separate shield?
If they use my idea then I'd say no. I think it should only be used for those specific games to keep it organized at least. And yeah, separate shields for different challenges. Like you'd get a neon type shield for completing all the neon rider games, and a shield with a cat on it for beating all the Sushi Cat games. Something like that.
If someone were to get exactly 1/4 of the achievements, and then a bunch more games were added, would they lose the bronze medal, or would it be a permanent thing?
I say permanent, but it can't be earned by the person who already got it early on if they decide to add more achievements. That's why if they add this I think they should wait some time before adding this so it gives a fair chance to everyone, instead of starting off with a few achievements and a lot of people earning these.
One thing I think they should do is create challenges for older games that most people have forgotten about. That way, the older games are brought back into the scene, and more people will get a chance to experience games that they otherwise wouldn't have necessarily known about.
Yeah, there are a handful of older games that deserve some recognition.
Something else that hasn't really been brought up at all in the entire discussion of AG3 is user-created content. Perhaps there could be some user-generated levels, picked by admins, in certain games that award some amount of points if you complete them? It would keep people creating and sharing their own levels and playing those of others in games that otherwise wouldn't necessarily have an active level-sharing community.
That would require a community active admin... someone like Carlie or Cormyn, but from what I can tell none of them are like that.
