Forum Info: Changes to Forum Games - A Roundtable Discussion

Hi everyone! The Forum Games mods have been considering changes to how the section operates, and we want to hear from you! Before we make any major changes, we wanted to know how you guys feel overall about how the section is doing, as well as how you would feel to some of the changes we are looking to make.

One of the changes we are considering at this time include changing how counting games work. Those are games such as The Gender Race and The Count to Infinity. Per the rules, only three are allowed at any given time. We want to know how you guys feel about adding conversation to these games versus just counting and leaving at that.

Additionally, we are looking to cut back on the amount of games that do not account for any thought into posting, or are games that are too similar to another existing game.

Finally, we want to begin enforcing the rule on monopolizing games. What this means is when you are posting in a thread and you wind up being every other poster at a given time in a thread. This has been in the section's rules, but we have let it slip through the cracks over time. We are also considering adding an exception to this rule, in that if a thread has died after 2-3 days, then you may bump it up if you were the poster above the last. The rule would also only apply to counting games (TCTI/TGR), rating games (rate the X above you), and choice games (This or That?).

Before implementing these changes, we want to know if you guys are okay with these changes, or if you have some comments regarding the changes, or maybe you think Forum Games is fine the way it is!

Please let us know in the thread here, or if you would rather send your thoughts in private, you can send a PM to either myself or donavannj. :)

I suggest removing The Gender Race, it just doesn't work very well anymore because there are more than 2 genders.

Honestly, the reason I never post in forum games is because of its spammy, no discussion nature, so I am all for implamenting a rule there must be a discussion happening in the counting games. It's frustrating seeing just counting and nothing else, kind of always annoyed me.

As for a rule against monopolizing games, how would that be implamented?

Definitely requests specificity on the monopolizing rule. Held back at times in the Two Word Chain thread. Never knew what qualified as "monopolizing". How much is too much?

In regards to counting games: they should remain as such, a counting game and not a conversion thread. If people feel inclined or want to post a comment or what not, they can but, to make it a hard rule is not the way to go about it. Due to the nature of the counting games, it's hard to have a conversion with the pacing of the posting. By the time someone has typed a response or comment their number would be passed and thus messing up the count. There are already gaming threads that exist that allow people to converse. Also, a 'chit-chat' thread could be created where people can go to just talk.

Isn't the other sections of the forum more geared toward discussions anyway? Forum Games is for Games. If you add conversion to these counting games with the other conversation threads than you'll have more than three and be breaking your own rules:


A suggestion to MEWTWOLOVER point is instead of 'Genders' we could have 'Red vs Blue', 'Blastoise vs Charizard', 'Ash vs Gary' or something of the like. One team counts up, the other down like before. If one side gets too lopsided than the players can facilitate fair numbers.



In regards to cutting back on games that do not account much thought into posting: From my observation, people aren't interested in thought provoking games. They are just interested in getting their post counts. I personally have tried creating such a game 'The Emoji Game' and it didn't take that well and appears to be a 'dead thread' now.

I agree that games that are too similar or duplicates should be removed.



The problem with enforcing the rule on monopolizing games is like what Palamon mentioned, how do you enforce it? Are you mods going to 'police' the threads and keep a close eye on people's posting habits? If someone breaks that rule, will they get an infraction? Banned? Doesn't sound like a fun place anymore and isn't that what the Game section is suppose to be, Fun?

Also, according to this rule, if a thread doesn't have more than two people posting/interested in it then that thread 'dies' and then one has to wait until someone new posts to revive it and keep the game going? That would interrupt the flow of the game. Could be days or weeks before someone new posts!

The main problem is there's not enough interest from other forum members to keep this in check. If more people were actively posting in this section than this wouldn't be an issue. There's only really a handful of dedicated people that post there with a few others that post from time to time.

Squirtlenator said:

In regards to cutting back on games that do not account much thought into posting: From my observation, people aren't interested in thought provoking games. They are just interested in getting their post counts.

Click to expand...

Raises a question: what if posts in Forum Games did not increase post count?

Devalue said:

Raises a question: what if posts in Forum Games did not increase post count?

Click to expand...

I think that would kill the Forum Games section altogether. There's not that many that post there now and if that were to happen, I think most if not all of those people would leave the FGs and they're the ones keeping it a float.

Edit: Also, it would affect other sections as well. VPP for sure would be negatively effected

my 002c is that just because it is "forum games" does not mean it should be a spam forum. i feel like a lot of newer regulars have this misconception about the nature of the forum because of the relatively laissez-faire atmosphere the forum gives off because of some games.

not to sound all "old person with cane/get off my lawn"-esque, but a lot of older regulars have made precious memories and lasting friendships through some forum games, so it's definitely possible to have some conversation while still participating in some games. the two are not mutually exclusive, nor should they be.

I've never seen an issue with "monopolizing", sometimes it seems like two people bouncing back and fourth is the sole reason the forum keeps it's activity. Anybody and everybody is welcome to join in. Most of the time activity is so low, it ends up just being two regulars responding to each other. Nobody is doing this with intent to hog the forum.

I just hope out of anything, the forum is never strictly policed. The relaxed nature is incredibly appealing, if it loses that I would probably silently depart as a regular. Sometimes I don't want to try and uphold or attempt to join a conversation for every single game I post in.

I'll just drop my thoughts here as a former regular that just lost all interest in the section cause of how spammy it has become.

I think the monopolizing rule is great, depending on the thread. I do not mind a little back and forth banter, but a full page of just two people jist don't feel right to me, nor does it really make sense in some threads (AKA rating threads, why would you rate the same thing over and over again?)

Everytime I look at The Gender Race... or TCTI I just lose motivation to post. The whole argument of getting ninja'd while making conversation is also less of a possibility when there is less numberspam, especially for TCTI which has mainly been a "chit chat" game with some counting on the side.

And I'm fairly sure there's more like me who just have lost all motivation to post in there and with this change would probably start posting again.

Squirtlenator said:

A suggestion to MEWTWOLOVER point is instead of 'Genders' we could have 'Red vs Blue', 'Blastoise vs Charizard', 'Ash vs Gary' or something of the like. One team counts up, the other down like before. If one side gets too lopsided than the players can facilitate fair numbers.

Click to expand...

Really good suggestion, I think 'Blastoise vs Charizard' or 'Ash vs Gary' would be good.

As staff, I really want to keep out of this, and let everyone have their say!

However, there are a couple of things here that I feel I should address, both as VPP staff, and as a heavy FG user.

Squirtlenator said:

If more people were actively posting in this section than this wouldn't be an issue. There's only really a handful of dedicated people that post there with a few others that post from time to time.

Click to expand...

I would say that is the point of the discussion. A lot of members are put off from participating by the current nature of the forum :)

Squirtlenator said:

Also, it would affect other sections as well. VPP for sure would be negatively effected

Click to expand...

I do not speak for other VPP staff, or VPP as a whole, but I feel there are some misunderstandings about VPP here.

VPP is about raising Pokémon alongside your posts, not posting only to raise VPP. It is most definitely not a race. As long as the forum has posts, then VPP will thrive with it :)

Squirtlenator said:

A suggestion to MEWTWOLOVER point is instead of 'Genders' we could have 'Red vs Blue', 'Blastoise vs Charizard', 'Ash vs Gary' or something of the like. One team counts up, the other down like before. If one side gets too lopsided than the players can facilitate fair numbers.

Click to expand...

I have often thought about this exact same thing, but I'm not sure how feasible managing teams would be. Might be worth a shot! 😊

Squirtlenator said:

From my observation, people aren't interested in thought provoking games. They are just interested in getting their post counts.

Click to expand...

Then we are coming from very different places here. My best times in FG have been when there has been clever, and thought provoking word and game play between members, including with your good self! The forum seems to have slipped away from that lately, into merely being a post farm.

Squirtlenator said:

Doesn't sound like a fun place anymore and isn't that what the Game section is suppose to be, Fun?

Click to expand...

Again that's just it, a lot of former posters aren't having fun in there right now, myself included. I'm sure you have noticed my reduced FG activity of late. I can still have fun of course, but it's becoming very difficult to find. I have long supported and defended FG unconditionally, even when I was the only poster sometimes in the past. When I'm not even having fun anymore, then something is going wrong.

Ash Ketchup said:

I would say that is the point of the discussion. A lot of members are put off from participating by the current nature of the forum :)

Click to expand...

Ash Ketchup said:

Again that's just it, a lot of former posters aren't having fun in there right now, myself included. I'm sure you have noticed my reduced FG activity of late. I can still have fun of course, but it's becoming very difficult to find. I have long supported and defended FG unconditionally, even when I was the only poster sometimes in the past. When I'm not even having fun anymore, then something is going wrong.

Click to expand...

So, how does making GR (or whatever it's called) and TCTI conversion threads and enforcing the rule on monopolizing games correct this exactly? Is there going to be a sudden inflex of new people into the section? If anything, it will decrease the number of posts posted in that section.

Is that an issue? Is the current number of posts effecting the server of something?

I too am not having fun anymore so, I understand that point. It's become more of a 'grind' than anything.

Ash Ketchup said:

I do not speak for other VPP staff, or VPP as a whole, but I feel there are some misunderstandings about VPP here.

VPP is about raising Pokémon alongside your posts, not posting only to raise VPP. It is most definitely not a race. As long as the forum has posts, then VPP will thrive with it :)

Click to expand...

I do feel VPP will be impacted. People will look at the challenges and be turned off from how daunting it will be to complete them. On average, how many posts does the average member post in a day? Maybe 10? So, you're looking at roughly 16-18 days to complete one VPP! Roughly one month to complete two and roughly three months to complete one challenge. I think people's participation will significantly diminish but, that's just my personal opinion.

Ash Ketchup said:

Then we are coming from very different places here. My best times in FG have been when there has been clever, and thought provoking word and game play between members, including with your good self! The forum seems to have slipped away from that lately, into merely being a post farm.

Click to expand...

I understood this as the actual game rules and structure of the game as oppose to the banter that is carried on within the thread. Games such as 20 questions as oppose to games like rating games.






Whether the above changes are made or not, I think it's paramount to up hold people's choice on whether they want to post a comment/conversion or not and not force them to. I also don't understand the need to have every single thread a conversation or discussion thread. That's what the designated 'chit-chat' threads are for, no?

Squirtlenator said:

Whether the above changes are made or not, I think it's paramount to up hold people's choice on whether they want to post a comment/conversion or not and not force them to.

Click to expand...

This is the very reason why I have opened this roundtable discussion. We do not want to implement changes that would not be welcomed by our regulars.

Later on, I will go through the thread and dissect all that you guys have brought up. :)

There's a neat variation of the "Count to Infinity" thread where users have to find a photo of an object with the number on it. I saw it on another forum, and found it infinitely more fun than simple counting.

Squirtlenator said:

So, how does making GR (or whatever it's called) and TCTI conversion threads and enforcing the rule on monopolizing games correct this exactly? Is there going to be a sudden inflex of new people into the section? If anything, it will decrease the number of posts posted in that section.

Click to expand...

Hopefully the ones that are put off at the moment I guess! There is also a lot more to the success of a section than post numbers. If I could choose to have 15 different people posting slowly, but regularly and meaningfully, in my section, or just two that spam heavily to raise their post count, I know which I'd personally consider more successful :)

Squirtlenator said:

I do feel VPP will be impacted. People will look at the challenges and be turned off from how daunting it will be to complete them. On average, how many posts does the average member post in a day? Maybe 10? So, you're looking at roughly 16-18 days to complete one VPP! Roughly one month to complete two and roughly three months to complete one challenge. I think people's participation will significantly diminish but, that's just my personal opinion.

Click to expand...

The goals you mention are long term options, and you don't have to do all of them, or any of them at all in fact! They are merely there if you want something to go for. Also, this is not about VPP, so this is off topic to this particular roundtable discussion. Please don't assume that either section is dependent on the other, because that isn't the case :)

I also think it's extremely important to recognise that FG is not a VPP tool, and the happiness of its own section should come before how quickly we can raise our virtual pets.

It is perfectly possible to make plenty of posts, while still being respectful of the section your in, we used to do it before! I think we all need to take a look at our posts, and think to ourselves "am I making a genuine contribution here, or am I posting just to gain post count?" If it's the latter, then we are really not being fair to other users of the section. Does it really matter if our VPPs take an extra hour or two to raise?

Squirtlenator said:

Whether the above changes are made or not, I think it's paramount to up hold people's choice on whether they want to post a comment/conversion or not and not force them to. I also don't understand the need to have every single thread a conversation or discussion thread. That's what the designated 'chit-chat' threads are for, no?

Click to expand...

I am personally not a fan of minimum word policies either. I'm autistic and struggle badly with conversation, so it would impact me severely, but my opinion, or yours, or anyone else's, does not a concensus make, and I'm confident that the excellent section staff will make the best decisions for everyone as a whole :)

A monopolisation rule in things like the gender race thread has been talked about since long before I was staff, and even long before you were a member btw! We are not the only users that are impacted by the situation in FG, and I cannot argue that it would make the game(s) far more desirable to take part in for quite a few members, many of which used to take part regularly before, but have since been put off from doing so.

Squirtlenator said:

I too am not having fun anymore so, I understand that point. It's become more of a 'grind' than anything.

Click to expand...

Then let's try to make it fun again!!! 😊

Squirtlenator said:

I do feel VPP will be impacted. People will look at the challenges and be turned off from how daunting it will be to complete them. On average, how many posts does the average member post in a day? Maybe 10? So, you're looking at roughly 16-18 days to complete one VPP! Roughly one month to complete two and roughly three months to complete one challenge. I think people's participation will significantly diminish but, that's just my personal opinion.

Click to expand...

I mean that's why they are called challenges and not freebies. VPP isn't meant to have people fly through it like it's a cake walk. It's just another reason to give people to post and have fun doing it. If it takes you longer to complete one that's cool. It's not like they are used for anything other than collecting.

I'm going to go ahead and clarify on the topic of monopolizing threads.

First, this has been in the rulebook forever, even since before I was officially promoted to moderator of Forum Games. I do not know why the rule has gone unenforced for so long, but it was not something I ever really enforced. It is not a rule I am looking to drop either, but instead actually enforce it more. This keeps it fair for other players to come in and carry on games.

Now, you might be asking: what is meant by thread monopolization? Basically, it's when you are making every other post in a given thread. Take for example, the Gender Race: if I were counting, and my counts led to be 499, 497, and 495 (with other gentlemen having 498 and 496), then that's monopolizing. You are not giving other users a chance to post, and are essentially "taking over" a thread. We are trying to move away from this, simply because it's not only unwelcoming, but it's flat out spam.

I'm a bit of hit and miss with F&G (with PC in general because college is a black hole from which no free time can escape) but for what it's worth here are my two cents:

I avoid spammy games a lot, because in my opinion, they aren't fun. They don't have any effort, they don't have any strategy, they don't even have to have any conversation, they're just "Post here and move on". Maybe some people enjoy it, but that's not for me, and I do think their presence make the section feel like "personally approved spamming".

So for what it's worth, I'd suggest benching the current counting games and if we really need to, have a couple of official games. Maybe have forum wide clans too and have that play a part in this kind of game so it isn't "Pick whatever number you wanna pick?", I've seen it done in a couple of other forums and I think it's a fun idea, although I'm not sure how applicable it'd be to PC.

Key point to take away from this:

please remember that this shouldn't just be tailored towards one type of poster etc.

I think perhaps a TL;DR to try and well get things back on track a little bit:

- VPP was something designed as a slow-burner to encourage people to try out more sections etc. NOT something where you aim to blitz through as much as you can. If you use Forum Games as a platform for that, to be honest these changes don't even really affect you that much.
- Forum Games will categorically NEVER die.
- These changes are long overdue, the section just conveniently got to a point now where it's a good time to review everything and revitalise the section.

Therefore:

- These countless duplicate threads (mostly the ones where you're asking questions for the above user) can go, so many bloatware threads as a result.
- 'Counting' threads I think just need to be cut down but otherwise could mostly stay the same, other than encouraging [key] conversation in them.
- Threads like the create-a-story one to be actually moderated to make sure it doesn't devolve into mush.
- Soft-cap of 250 pages in threads to stop lagging and just bring some form of order to the threads themselves.
- I like the clans idea, add another NEW dynamic to a very old and tired section.

Thanks for coming to my Rab Talk:tm: