RPG Codex Game of the Year 2015 - VOTING HAS BEGUN [AUTISM ALERT]

[FeelTheRads]

So, to avoid DRAMA (lol, like it's possible), does toro , agris, coffeetable and other math heads haev a better system they would like to purpose?

Metro tickets for Styg, teleporter tickets for VD. They meet and have a fight to the death to decide this. Real upper-class gentlemen have their workers do the hard work for them.

My bet:
VD fails his stealth check, but Styg is still cooling down from the trip to take advantage. Ashamed they both go their own way.

Cries of disappointment, money wasted on tickets, small but hard dicks going flaccid, just another Codexian day.

 

[CryptRat]

This reminds me that Artifact Adventure could be added to the list (it's not like if the JPRGs with a lot of C&C were so numerous that we could ignore some of them).

 

[V_K]

This reminds me that Artifact Adventure could be added to the list (it's not like if the JPRGs with a lot of C&C were so numerous that we could ignore some of them).

The description seems nice but how good is it in terms of character development and level design? Is it just combat and choices or there are other things to do?

Also, we really need a thread for obscure indies, they're so easy to miss...

 

[CryptRat]

The description seems nice but how good is it in terms of character development and level design?

Also, we really need a thread for obscure indies, they're so easy to miss...

Character development is poor (you choose 4 classes between 6 but it's not important, then you gain skills via exploration and choose who get the skill but they are very basic and the combat system is very basic too), the level design is OK with a small compact open world. There's a thread (mostly me babbling ) in the JRPG forum.

 

[Xzylvador]

Why bother when everyone already knows Fallout 4 is impossible to beat?

 

[The Nameless Pun]

Fallout 4 is the best crpg ever made, IMO.

 

[V_K]

The description seems nice but how good is it in terms of character development and level design?

Also, we really need a thread for obscure indies, they're so easy to miss...

Character development is poor (you choose 4 classes between 6 but it's not important, then you gain skills via exploration and choose who get the skill but they are very basic and the combat system is very basic too), the level design is OK with a small compact open world. There's a thread (mostly me babbling ) in the JRPG forum.

Hmmm... still on the verge.
Are combats random or fixed? I see that there are no puzzles, but are there any traps or other environmental interactions and skills that support that? Or is it basically an 8-bit AoD? :D

 

[toro]

Ok, we do dis now. The hype for AoD & Underrail already died down a bit, so we should get some decent results.

But before I even begin, let's get this out of the way: I intend to do a bayesian average, just like last time.

So, to avoid DRAMA (lol, like it's possible), does toro , agris, coffeetable and other math heads haev a better system they would like to purpose? or at least what "m" should be this time?

Damn. I have to remember shit.

Imho the voting methodology is pretty solid but it has two problems:
1. Multiple voting - last time some morons decided to vote multiple times and brag about it. Unfortunately this cannot be proved with the current voting system but the negative bias towards W2 was real.
2. The value of m can greatly impact the results - I still think m=7 was a major fuck up but I don't want to open the discussion again.

So, a better methodology means that you either solve the issues above or you try to mitigate their negative influences.

Multiple voting solution - I'm not sure if is possible but the voting should be open only for the codex users with accounts created in 2015.
There is no solution for alts but at least the shitting on specific games will be contained.

The value of m solution - This is a little more complicated but almost anything is better than manually selecting the value of m.

Possible solution 1: Last year I actually proposed a solution which doesn't require manual selection of m value (see http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?posts/3701664)
The thing is, there is no way I can convince you that my solution is better unless I invest a lot of time in finding some mathematical/stochastic proof. I don't have the time or the abilities to do it.
The method is unorthodox (more like intuitive) but the results were quite "reasonable" and at least you can use it to verify that your results are not completely bonkers.

Possible solution 2: Real_M cannot be calculated but we know that (1) if m < Real_M then games with less votes will be advantaged and (2) if m > Real_M then games with more votes will be advantaged.
My proposal is to do the following iterative process:
step 1. Select m as being the minimal number of votes and calculate final scores,
step 2. Remove bottom 50% of the games,
step 3. Repeat from step 1 until you only have 5 games.

Possible solution 3. You sample results for multiple m and then you average the results:
Sample 1: m is equal to 0.10 * maximum number of votes a game received (10%)
Sample 2: m is equal to 0.20 * maximum number of votes a game received (20%)
Sample 3: m is equal to 0.30 * maximum number of votes a game received (30%) -----> with approximation Real_M can be anywhere from 20% to 40%
Sample 4: m is equal to 0.40 * maximum number of votes a game received (40%)
Sample 5: m is equal to 0.50 * maximum number of votes a game received (50%)
The problem is that in this case you replace manually selecting m with the selection of multiple intervals. However my hunch is that even this solution would provide better results than what you used before.

Now, I feel like say something along the lines "I might be retarded but I'm not stupid"

Bottom line is this: resolving both problems would be awesome but maybe it's not possible. However anything is better than selecting m = minimal number of votes. Anything.

So, what do you think? Please take your time for a decision. Or we could vote? :D

 

[Joni Odin von Hassenstein]

Multiple voting solution - I'm not sure if is possible but the voting should be open only for the codex users with accounts created in 2015.

You mean, "...Codex users with accounts created up until 2015", right?
Apart from that, I concur in solving Problem 1 somehow, and I have no fucking clue what "m" even is.

 

[toro]

Multiple voting solution - I'm not sure if is possible but the voting should be open only for the codex users with accounts created in 2015.

You mean, "...Codex users with accounts created up until 2015", right?
Apart from that, I concur in solving Problem 1 somehow, and I have no fucking clue what "m" even is.

"up until 2015" sounds a little bit too restrictive. What I had in mind is something more like "up until the end of 2015".

Edit: My engrish is rusty, perhaps the expressions are equivalent?

 

[V_K]

Nah, m should be kept as low as possible so that Voidspire Tactics could rightfully win.

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Ok, we do dis now. The hype for AoD & Underrail already died down a bit, so we should get some decent results.

But has the hype for Undertale died down?

 

[felipepepe]

toro

Limiting votes by reg date would require us to make people vote by posting on a thread, then manually input the results into excel. This is absolutely impractical - for reference, last year we had almost 1300 votes.
And I do think it's nice to have such a large number of voters, including our armies of lurkers, instead of just the ~100 characters of our little RPG sitcom.

The m issue is more complicated. I'd rather have a system that's simple & declared upfront. This year we'll also have +50 games being voted, so I'd say something like m = minimum number of votes in the top most voted 25 games. For reference, in the last edition that would have been 133.

Any issues with that?

Or we could vote? :D

We could do a voting, but then we would have to debate which m to use when calculating the results.

But has the hype for Undertale died down?

I doesn't need hype while I'm the one counting the votes. :3

 

[The Nameless Pun]

No one cares about undertale on the codex, apart from that strange Brazilian guy.

 

[Perkel]

We can do a fundraiser - send monies to my paypal account with the GOTY of your choice. The game with most monies win.

How about small fundraiser for swag RPGcodex GOTY statuette ? I think proper quality one shouldn't cost too much and it is not like we need to send it right away. Or maybe even DarkUnderlord official seal of approval fundrising for no-ads dex.
We can run show now and send statuette later this year.

 

[toro]

toro

Limiting votes by reg date would require us to make people vote by posting on a thread, then manually input the results into excel. This is absolutely impractical - for reference, last year we had almost 1300 votes.
And I do think it's nice to have such a large number of voters, including our armies of lurkers, instead of just the ~100 characters of our little RPG sitcom.

It's a major risk to base your voting method on the good faith of the voters. Maybe it "worked" the last time but maybe it will not work this time. I'm just saying.

The m issue is more complicated. I'd rather have a system that's simple & declared upfront. This year we'll also have +50 games being voted, so I'd say something like m = minimum number of votes in the top most voted 25 games. For reference, in the last edition that would have been 133.

Any issues with that?

Three reasons why is not a good idea:
m = 133 last year would mean that Wasteland 2 was on 3rd place which is wrong (despite my bias towards Wasteland 2).
m = minimum number of votes in the top most voted 25 games means that the top 25 most voted games will be "favored" regardless of the fact that they deserve to be in top 25 or not.
m = minimum number of votes in the top most voted 25 games means that the scores will be more precise around that specific game instead of being more precise around the top 10 games.

However if you decide to go with the solution above then a slight improvement looks like this:
Step 1. m = minimum number of votes, compute game scores.
Step 2. m = minimum number of votes for the 25th game from the previous calculation, compute new game scores.
Step 3. codex drama

Please do understand that I don't complain just for the sake of it.
There is no way to compute an exact top25 or top50 but we should try to get what is important for us - the best approximation for top 10 (cause nobody gives a shit about the game placed on 10+ positions). The criteria defined above doesn't do that.

 

[toro]

@felipepe

Another proposal which would actually avoid defining a "specific" m:
1. For each game you compute the bayesian average where m is equal to the number of votes for each game. Basically if you have votes for N games then you will have N game scores for each game.
2. Then for each game you select the max bayesian average and make the final ranking.

This method will make sure that each game will have its opportunity to star and get the best possible score. Of course, some games will rank higher than others and this is why we need the final ranking.

I did not test this but it might work. The changes to your computation effort is trivial, you just have to add N rows to the excel table and one more for max score.

 

[Tigranes]

We just need VD and STyg to post, and then post with most brofists wins

 

[V_K]

Another proposal which would actually avoid defining a "specific" m:
1. For each game you compute the bayesian average where m is equal to the number of votes for each game. Basically if you have votes for N games then you will have N game scores for each game.
2. Then for each game you select the max bayesian average and make the final ranking.

This method will make sure that each game will have its opportunity to star and get the best possible score. Of course, some games will rank higher than others and this is why we need the final ranking.

This would essentially amount to picking the lowest possible m for games with above-average scores and highest possible m for games with below-average scores.

 

[felipepepe]

However if you decide to go with the solution above then a slight improvement looks like this:
Step 1. m = minimum number of votes, compute game scores.
Step 2. m = minimum number of votes for the 25th game from the previous calculation, compute new game scores.
Step 3. codex drama

Ok, this sounds autistic yet doable.

 

[toro]

Another proposal which would actually avoid defining a "specific" m:
1. For each game you compute the bayesian average where m is equal to the number of votes for each game. Basically if you have votes for N games then you will have N game scores for each game.
2. Then for each game you select the max bayesian average and make the final ranking.

This method will make sure that each game will have its opportunity to star and get the best possible score. Of course, some games will rank higher than others and this is why we need the final ranking.

This would essentially amount to picking the lowest possible m for games with above-average scores and highest possible m for games with below-average scores.

No. This amounts to picking the highest possible score for all games considering that the best of the best will remain on top.

And below is the example for 2014 - bayesian average is calculated for each game in the set for each number of votes.

I guess that if you sort the bayesian average versus the number of votes, the score graph for each game will follow gaussian distribution:

Anyway, the final ranking for 2014 would look like this:

These results look pretty good and no specific m is necessary.

So basically I get the same results using 2 different methods which also match @felipepe's method for m between 15 and 40.

 

[toro]

However if you decide to go with the solution above then a slight improvement looks like this:
Step 1. m = minimum number of votes, compute game scores.
Step 2. m = minimum number of votes for the 25th game from the previous calculation, compute new game scores.
Step 3. codex drama

Ok, this sounds autistic yet doable.

Yes, autistic shit is the best shit there is.

Please consider the method above and I will shut my fucking mouth. A specific m is no longer needed and you just have to copy rows in the excel and the results look quite good

EDIT: I actually did a mistake in the previous excel files and after corrections I get the same results as you had last year:

So, this proposal is useless.

Edit 2: Well, fuck. I don't know what to say.

 

[Joni Odin von Hassenstein]

 

[agris]

Ok, we do dis now. The hype for AoD & Underrail already died down a bit, so we should get some decent results.

But before I even begin, let's get this out of the way: I intend to do a bayesian average, just like last time.

So, to avoid DRAMA (lol, like it's possible), does toro , agris, coffeetable and other math heads haev a better system they would like to purpose? or at least what "m" should be this time?

I'm not a stats guy, but I looked into it and bayesian average came up. What did you search when you were looking into how to do numerical analysis of this type of poll? Most scientific sources I could find were talking about the phrasing of questions, etc etc and not discussing the numerical treatment of analyzing straw poll data. Is there another name for this type of poll other than straw poll?

 

[AwesomeButton]

Are votes being collected in this thread? If so, my top 5:
RPG Codex 2015 GOTY
1. Age of Decadence
2. Underrail
3. N/A
4. Serpent in the Staglands
5. PoE

Top Tacticool
N/A

Best Remaster / Translation / Console Port
Divinity: Original Sin - Enhanced Editon