coolness factor? 391 people are at 0%

Posted by (twitter: @jeffz4000)
January 4th, 2012 1:07 am

I stumbled upon the coolness factor when rating games, which indicates each LD participant’s % of games rated. LD48 is a community based effort and things don’t stop once you’ve submitted a game. There are games to be rated people!

I downloaded the rating page in html, used emacs to M-x replace-string RET Coolness’ RET Coolness’ C-q C-j RET, piped it through grep ‘0% Coolness’ | wc -l, which reports 391.

391 people out of 891 have not rated any games, which feels like a poor effort. I’ve rated 10% of the games so far. That’s 89 games, my game for the jam has received 31 votes.

According to the page,

  • the most votes received is Notch at 181 and he has rated no one in return.
  • Cell has rated an impressive 52% of submissions but only received 30 votes
  • Pierrec has rated 26% and has also only received 30 votes
  • Hazard has rated 25% but only received 18 votes

Be a good LD citizen and rate some games!

Post-edit suggestion: some sort of scoring penalty for not rating games?

36 Responses to “coolness factor? 391 people are at 0%”

  1. Kelly Thomas says:

    I’ve reviewed 91 a little over ten percent, I think people should be reviewing at least one a day.

    It’s not like it’s hard work or anything they are a lot of fun!

  2. DevMax says:

    Thats quite an interesting compilation, but not at all suprising as many people either rate games
    very late or choose to not at all for one or another reason. Personally I rate games kinda late in the
    whole event 😛

    About the suggestion of penalty for not scoring, I think it would be a very bad idea. It would cause people
    to rate games arbitrarily without even playing them, just so they would not be penalized.

  3. timotei says:

    It can now be seen how much web games win. If it’s online, no need to download anything, the game has 90% chances of being rated. Otherwise ppl don’t really bother :(

    • caranha says:

      I’m not sure how true that is. There is no way to know if your game is web based before actually entering your game homepage. Of course, it is more pleasant to jump right into the game than to wait for a 20Mb or so download, but I’m not sure the download/web based affects the number of ratings THAT much. I mean, the reviewer already decided they want to check the game out, I’m sure most of them would not mind the extra step.

      OTOH, if someone decides that they’ll publish to some arcane platform (iPhone-only devs, I’m looking at you), then I guess the game deserves to get fewer ratings.

  4. digital_sorceress says:

    Not quite correct.

    Coolness is a percentage, which is a rounded figure. So at least 8.91 games need to be rated before a person breaks into 1% coolness.

    Notch has in fact rated one game, which is below the threshold for 1% coolness.

    Many of those 391 you listed may be in a similar position, having rated upto 8 games, which is not such a bad effort, even though it maps to 0% coolness.

  5. digital_sorceress says:

    >>> Post-edit suggestion: some sort of scoring penalty for not rating games?

    There already is. It is called Coolness. People who don’t rate games will get a low rank on the Coolness scoreboard.

  6. SonnyBone says:

    Yeah, I’ve rated around 170 games or so and I still only have 13 ratings. It’s pretty much crap. There are SO MANY GREAT GAMES buried in here… it’s sad to see that people don’t seem to care as much about the community aspect of LD.

  7. caranha says:

    TBQH, as someone who has just rated 25%+ games (and now has a splitting headache because of that) this does not bother me that much.

    It’s called the power law, and we see it everywhere human effort is involved: 10% of people do 90% of wikipedia edits, 10% of people have 90% of the connections in a social network, 10% of people do 90% of the LD ratings. I don’t really think we can flee from that.

    If I were to guess, I’d say a majority of those with coolness 0% submitted the game and then forgot LD existed. While rating, I’ve seen many devs that didn’t even bother to respond to comments such as “your link is 404’ing” or “got a runtime error”.

    As Dev_Max and Digital_Sorceress said/suggested, we already have a reward system in place. I’d rather not see an obligation to rate, as that would probably result in many people giving arbitrary ratings to fulfill that obligation.

    One way I would suggest to get more rates from people would be to make “featured games of the day” posts/tweets, containing well finished games with low number of rates.

  8. digital_sorceress says:

    >>> … only received 30 votes
    >>> … only received 30 votes
    >>> … only received 18 votes

    The median is currently 12 votes per game. So you can’t really complain about what you have “only received” if you have more than 12, let alone 30!

  9. SonnyBone says:

    It’s just a bit crappy for some games to have 60 and 80 ratings while everyone else flounders around at 12. It was different back when LD struggled to bring in 100 games. It was a lot easier…

    Now with THIS many games… OH LAWD.

  10. MinerCraftGuy says:

    One of the things that I think might help is that ppl that entered the competition and had to “jump out” during the competition are not allowed to vote.

    Sadly my team had to stop working on the project, but are now “punished’ because we can’t vote for other games that all the others made.

  11. Cell says:

    I think, people should atleast vote to get a Minimum of 2%.
    Else, you’re a douchebag. Why should WE vote for YOUR game, if you’re doing nothing in favor.

    I also know that some people can’t rate other games, because of several reasons like System(OSx, Linux). or they maybe have a very tight timeline. Some may not even know that they CAN VOTE.

    Ludumdare is about getting included, and do what you like. making games.
    i think everybody shouldn’t make a big of an war of this 0% coolness thing. People don’t vote for several reasons. 😐


  12. SusanTheCat says:

    What about teams?

    I have a team of eager teenagers that are not in school currently. We have been judging some of the games by committee ‘cuz I’m a little burned out. It would be awesome if they could rate games independently. If they could have their own accounts, you would have three more raters.


    • Cell says:

      Hello Susan!

      One downside to making Teams able to vote indepently, is that people may cheat on the system. An team of 10 making an 2 hr sidescroller, for so to get 10 votes. when there’s really just one person.

      If PoV or Phillhassey decides to add some kind of “Colab/team” managment, where you join an team and get an vote per person, would work. But there you have the problem being miss using the system.

      The Ludumdare community is made up of honor, making no “Police” go to your house if you do something bad in any form. so, i guess we’d have to trust people for that kind of system to get added.


  13. SonnyBone says:

    Does the increase in games result in an increase in tie scores?

    • caranha says:

      It depends on the distribution of votes. Since people have different ideas of what is an “average” vote, it is hard to tell, but I would guess that ties will concentrate on the lower tier of games, where they don’t matter much anyway.

  14. dr_soda says:

    Does one’s coolness somehow factor into one’s final ratings? Part of me thinks this would be a good way to encourage participation, but the rest of me feels like it would just be seen as a way to game the system.

  15. Wompus says:

    Scumbag Notch not rating other games! :(

  16. SonnyBone says:

    He’s a busy man. He has to go make jillions of dollars. We’re the poor saps playing hundreds of games for free. Wait… playing games is supposed to be free. Or not. Wait. I’m confused.


  17. Rose says:

    If there was a way to sort games by platform, it would make it easier to rate games that I can play online/on my Mac, and avoid the many games that I can’t play. (Or is there a already a way to do this that I don’t know about?)

    • 7Soul says:

      When browsing the games, just go over the search box and type “Web” or “Linux” or any other platform and you will get only games that have that available

    • 7Soul says:

      Edit: that seems not to be working right now :/

    • Raptor85 says:

      god I wish i could rate a individual comment like this up… biggest problem in rating games so far has been downloading something only to learn it has a dependency that my system can’t run (that was NOT listed in the games info) The biggest offender so far has been XNA 4 stuff, the unity web stuff I know fairly quckly but the xna 4 stuff i go through the effort to download, unzip, and such only to learn I can’t run it. (and quite a few of them have been large, slow downloads, and my internet is pretty crappy and slow)

      I’ve had absolutely no time for rating though, I’ve been incredibly busy these past few weeks with christmas, newyears and such…but even having said that now that i see the page with the numbers i’ve rated more games than 95% of everyone else (i’m around 70 games rated, WAY below my goal of 200 :/ ). And this is even with me having been gone for a week and a half, there’s no real excuse to not rate at least 20-30 games in the course of a month. I’d be hesistant to say number of ratings you do should weight your games score, or have some sort of bearing (as that would be abused, people would rate games they hadn’t played to inflate it) but yeah, it shows pretty crappy community effort to just submit your game and leave the ratings to everyone else.

      Also, you’ve ONLY recieved 30 ratings? that puts you in the top 5% of games that have been rated, nearly all games are still under 15 ratings, mine only has 14 itself :/ Unfortunately a lot of ratings seems to feed back on itself and grow exponentially, it seems some raters only want to play the “good” games so they only pick already popular entries.

  18. Milo says:

    I don’t like the idea of there being a penalty for not voting. Some people might not have the time, and I’ll bet that a suggestion like this would increase the number of thoughtless votes given. I also somehow doubt someone will enjoy a game if their motivation for playing is to get an edge in the competition. It violates the fun nature of the competition to mandate that you must rate some number of games.

    I also think that a problem lies with the distribution of votes. Web-based games clearly get the most votes (according to the rigorous study of, “Are any of the top 5 lowest rated games web-based?”). It might make sense for someone to make a program to streamline the process of downloading (if applicable), playing, and rating games, since that would help downloaded games get more ratings. That also might increase overall ratings, since it’s a little frustrating to have to sift through all the games you can’t play because of your OS (and the search button doesn’t really help that since it doesn’t really work)

  19. Frib says:

    This LD the rate games page changed from random to lowest ratings received. Why not enhance it further, changing it to the difference between rated games by the creator, and ratings for the game. If I rated 30 games, and received 20 ratings on my game, I’d have a surplus on 10. If I have 50 ratings, but only rated 5, then I’d be at -45. Sort it on that, and there’s incentive to rate games as it will put you higher on the list of games to rate. Just an idea.

    As for me, I’ve rated only 4 games so far, but this weekend I’ll do a lot at once.

  20. Raptor85 says:

    more interesting statistics, 554 people(62%) have rated less than a dozen games, and only 71 (8%) people have rated over 45 (5%) of the entries, 231 (26%) of entries have rated 0 games, and 55 people (6%) have rated only one.

  21. caranha says:

    Great! 😀 If it is not too much work, you should do that for the number of votes given too!

  22. SusanTheCat says:

    What about a “ribbon” for coolness?

    Right now, you have to rate over 200 games to get a bronze medal in Coolness. We could have a “Participation Ribbon” for those who rate the minimum of 20 games?


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

[cache: storing page]