Cody123100 wrote:
Toadfish wrote: That's the point. A hub is almost useless if it isn't listed somewhere. One of BYOND's appeals is a shared playerbase, which is only possible because of the hub (listing) system. | |
Toadfish wrote:
What I support is a variant of this. The old published/unpublished thing didn't work too well because it wasn't efficiently handled. We need a more streamlined interface for submitting games to be "published" (perhaps an automated ticket system, or a "published candidate" checkbox in the hub management page), and also more volunteers to evaluate games. I'm for whatever produces the same results that were produced in 05: a list of all the quality games worth playing and a list of all the ripped games "built" by narutards and pokefags. Bunching them together makes trying to find quality games more annoying. | |
looks great
| |
Matt3151 wrote:
Is anyone else...slightly worried by this? No. They didn't mention creating an application in Objective-C to run through the app store but a web application which could simply be run through the iOS Safari. | |
Toadfish wrote:
A hub is almost useless if it isn't listed somewhere. One of BYOND's appeals is a shared playerbase, which is only possible because of the hub (listing) system. There's no reason that people can't advertise their hub entries to the outside world; in fact, we need this for BYOND to grow. Also, a player on an unlisted hub still broadcasts his location to his friends. Judging by our traffic numbers, it seems that most users don't even go through the website to play games (which actually hurts us since that is where our revenue is derived). The problem with the current situation is that it is self-perpetuating; Anime developers have no problem getting players because they can just broadcast their game to the existing base. Other developers thus get lost in the mix, and we never bring in any new kinds of gamers. The idea here is to promote original games and try to give BYOND a more mainstream appeal. The new site currently doesn't have a mechanism to search unlisted games, but that's something we can consider. I'm on the fence because I think that it may negate some of the benefits of the proposed system. | |
We'll tone down the huge "DOWNLOAD NOW!" button.
| |
Already one of my interview questions have been answered...
I'm going to throw this one question out here now, just to see your reply. It seems that with this new hub creating, only members will be able to submit them for listing(but still need approval), is this a ploy to make people buy memberships to give their games more publicity or do you find making it a membership only thing is for the better? | |
EnigmaticGallivanter wrote:
It seems that with this new hub creating, only members will be able to submit them for listing(but still need approval), is this a ploy to make people buy memberships to give their games more publicity or do you find making it a membership only thing is for the better? I don't expect it to have a significant impact on memberships, since most of our audience is players. The purpose of this system is to provide a means to easily regulate submissions; without it, anyone could spam the system. Also, almost every quality game in the current system is member-owned. A good game takes weeks to months to develop; an $18 investment to advertise it should be negligible. | |
Cody123100 wrote:
Limiting submission to members was a good decision to cut down on this, but I still believe it will lead to an overflow of submitted games. We've been monitoring creation of member hub entries since this development, and it's not anything we can't currently maintain (I'm talking three or four games a week). Obviously we'd like it to be a problem-- it would imply that we're growing. I have an idea to involve the community in pre-filtering games for us for when that day comes, but it's overkill at the moment. | |
Might sound abit complaining but are the Ads still removed for members cause at the preview there all there?
| |
Yes, members can still disable ads.
| |
This whole hub system sounds nice, but what about the ripped hubs that have already been made? Are you just going to look the other direction? There's thousands of hubs out there that are home to a ripped game, and some of them managed to push their way up to the top of the rankings. While they're not going to be featured, they'll be right there behind the featured games.
| |
Hubs are not being removed; only the search & listings are changed. We've seeded the listings with stuff from the top guilds and other popular games. Members will have the option to resubmit games we've delisted. Obvious rips will not be accepted.
| |
I'd like to believe that, but for the past couple months rips have been sprouted from two source codes that were stolen and spread, and not a single thing has been done to stop it.
To be more specific, nothing will be done to the hubs of games which use GOA or Naruto Next Generation source codes? (two sources that were spread without the owners consent) | |
Gotta agree with Darke on this one... I just went in the hub and looked theres 6 hub entrys of paid link full game sources of a bunch of different games. Cbgames told me in chatters just now to look at http://www.byond.com/support and report em.. So i guess I'll do that :P
EDIT: Sent a message to the support team with the links :) | |
It is very difficult for us to moderate rips, but delisting anything obvious for "quality" reasons (ie; even if it isn't a rip, if it's just a clone of something we have 20 copies of, we don't want it) is a start. Keep in mind that it is impossible for us to regulate stolen games completely since anyone can host without even having a hub entry.
| |
Woo! I'm a friend of Tom! (Check the web pager.)
| |
Jamckell wrote:
Well, I believe that if you show confidence as in: We don't need no ads for money, we GOT money! Confidence doesn't put food on the table. | |
DarkeWarrior wrote:
Jamckell wrote: But it gives you confidence | |
This can be done along with the deviate system, or instead of it. I think both options work.