I also think there should be more mods. I often notice things that should be locked right away but don't get locked for hours.
1. there's locking, there's deleting...and then there's ignoring the thread and letting it die. Now THAT takes TRUE leadership. Let the mods take care of the threads that really DO need to be taken care of, like hate and flame/spam threads.
2. How many more do we need? Gantic and Cenere were modded very recently on top of the handful that are still here....
i thimk you should get points for playing the game not just commenting i know some people who want ap so bad they go and comment and rate without playing the game.
Yes and No: I have mixed feelings about this. Would this spur new, excited people wanting to be a member? Would this just be a waste of time? If so, how can we make it so that it won't? Would it have the ability to prevent "napping"
**? If so, let's do it! But would would the right amount of AP per time period be?
Problems: It defines true "gaming" if you have a high amount of AP by just playing a game. However, AP also defines just how much you've contributed to AG, good ways or bad. Getting AP by playing games show that you love the games on AG, but it really doesn't do anything for the site itself, you know? AG adds a new post in the forums, and in turn, you get 1 AP. It's a trade-off. You get AP by playing a game, but what does the site get? Zippo.
Theory to Help Make it Work: Adding a timer to the games based off how many hours a game has been played. It's a stretch, but very useful in decided what really is a good game to play.
Reason #1 : Parts of a game's popularity is based off its rating, how many people faved it, and by how many times its been played. what constitutes a '
lay' is just by clicking '
lay', maybe even by just clicking the link to the page, I'm not sure which. Sonny II has nearly 11.5 million plays. You can imagine that if Sonny II is so popular, it would have at least 2-4 times the amount of hours logged into it, not just because its an RPG, but because people really do enjoy playing it. Let's compare that to a game called "RPG X". It got 1 million plays, a 8.1, but only 1.4 million hours logged? It's probably not as popular as people think, because they played for a little bit, then quit. the hours logged could define just how enjoyable the game is and how much people really liked it.
Reason #2: We all know that rating a game gives you AP. 2 even. Just as much as typing out 2 forum posts, or one comment. Just for clicking a button. Now, how accurate is THIS system? Obviously, some light bulbs went off in many peoples' heads that you could make points for just rating a game. For all we know, Creekwood Forest could have a 5 and Sonny II could have an 8 if it were not for points. Low hours would mean the game is not as popular as a game with a high amount of hours. Sounds more accurate than the rating system to me.
