2007 *UNOFFICIAL* Ranking of competition entries

[moogie]

http://unlimited.woogley.net/hosted/moogie/Page.htm

I have collated the current scores from ulfjack, Morre and hclower and have ranked them.

I actually have two rankings:

1. "Using ALL Scores" uses every score including the 'other' score adjustment while:
2. "Not using 'Other' score" ignores the 'other' score adjustment.

It is interesting to see the differences in rankings between the two

the excel spread sheet can be found here http://unlimited.woogley.net/hosted/moogie/2007%204k%20unofficial%20rankings4.xls
If you want to see how the calculations were performed.

EDIT: now only using scores for games that worked for the reviewers
EDIT: added more ulfjack's result to the ranking, fixed some erroneous scores.

[nullterm]

Very very cool.  Thanks for putting all that work into it, moogie.  Much appreciated.

[moogie]

no problems

If anyone else wants to provide scores and comments for the entries let me know so i can add them into this spread sheet.

Games published by our own members! Go get 'em!

[Morre]

Great work!

Uhm, I can't see why Bullets would come in last :/ In my opinion, it was my best game. The problem here is that one of us couldn't run it (OSX) and one of us (me) didn't rate it, as I made it. Thus, something of an inconclusive statistics and precisely the reason this should be kept inofficial, I think. Sure, I didn't expect it to win, but was it really that bad?

EDIT: Further, I think the score is wrong on Bullets; I did not rate it, ulfjack gave it a 6 (and he's promised to look over that and try it again), and hclower gave it a 2. Wouldn't that give it a total of 4 points? As it is, it has 3. This sort of reasoning goes for several games, especially all the ones that UlfJack has yet to comment on (he's only done a third or so of them). My suggestion would be to only give the games that all of us have commented on a rating, and say the rest have too little data to be included in the statistics.

[moogie]

hmm. it should be doing that automatically....

if there is no score (i.e. a negative value) then it is not included... I will double check.

[moogie]

There was an error in the calculations... I have also removed the scores for games from each reviewer which could not get the game to work.

[Morre]

Now I believe UlfJack's score is wrong for Bullets. It's 6 in his thread (4 without other), but it's 5 on your list. It doesn't matter much, I'm just pointing it out. I believe similar things might also be the case with a few of the others, but I cannot say for certain because I haven't checked and rechecked as many times

Thanks for taking the time to look it through, and keep up the good work

[moogie]

hehe, no doubt there are transcription problems... i did it during my lunch break at work

if anyone else spots errors let me know!

[woogley]

awesome work. I'm curious to see how close it matches with the final results!

thanks for contributing everyone

[ulfjack]

moogie: is there a way to get my feedback directly into your database?

Games published by our own members! Go get 'em!

[moogie]

sure, the file is hosted on woogley's webserver so anyone can add to the excel sheet. simply login to the ftp (see the sticky thread) and update the spread sheet. (you might want to save as a webpage as well and update the html version).

If you do update it i suggest that you save a copy of the original.

[moogie]

Added more results from ulfjack to the ranking.