Feel free to discuss ideas about the Reputation system, known to some users as the "karma system", although "reputation" is what we'll be calling it on AG3.
The Reputation System may not be present at AG3 launch, but is a high priority post-launch. It will allow other users to participate in ranking your community involvement, to a degree.
We're still open to ideas on it, so feel free to share your thoughts and ideas, and ask any questions.
I've also suggested rewarding 1 point per rating instead of 2.
Last time I checked, the admins won't award any points for ratings in the new AP system.
Anyway, I think the discussion of ratings is somewhat off-topic to this thread since I don't think Reputation will be awarded to ratings. I just wanted to clarify the probable value of ratings.
I've suggested several times adding a limit on how many games you can rate per day
It's 50 per day on Kong, I believe.
Last time I checked, the admins won't award any points for ratings in the new AP system.
I think that's a better idea. There isn't much point to getting AP for rating a game. That way people might actually rate the game based on their personal opinion and not whatever number they can click first in order to get AP.
I also think creators of games with more "lays" should get more AP than ones with less.
As Matrix pointed out, Kongregate does use a system similar to this, but personally I don't approve of this system. I'm not entirely sure how the Kong point system works in regards to game developers, but you will notice if you look at the top players there that an unnerving amount of them are game developers. I'm not sure if Kong did it on purpose, but their point system seems to be somewhat in favor of people who submit games.
I've suggested several times adding a limit on how many games you can rate per day, somewhere around 30-50.
Unfortunately, people will still spam-rate, but now it will be spam-rating in favor of longtime users. That's why severely limiting things to unrealistic amounts is generally a mistake: it gives an unfair advantage to the users who have been there the longest.
There's really no reason to give out points for rating a game. If points won't be awarded for posting in the forums, which actually requires effort, it doesn't make sense to give anything just for thoughtlessly clicking on something that doesn't have much of an impact on anybody.
No, I wouldn't like the "more AP per plays"- thing. It would discourage new/bad game developers, and we would get less games here on AG.
The idea proposed was to reward for reaching a certain amount of plays, nobody mentioned anything negative happening to developers that do not get a lot of plays.
