Community RPG Codex 2014 Role-Playing Game of the Year Awards

[hiver]

hiver, bro, where were you? The shitslurpers have grown to dangerous numbers since you left.

You slurp what you splurge bro...

(i mean in general, of course, not you personally. ill leave it to you to judge your own contribution or lack of)

You're back! :D

Bigger, better and meaner


oh, to celebrate ill finally remove TwinkieGorilla from ignore hell.

The only brave soul who dared register at my super awesome forums and ask a normal question.

 

[felipepepe]

Still no new thread about W2. You've gone soft.

 

[hiver]

Codex already has too many of my posts about that crap and nothing changed about any of it.

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

The only brave soul who dared register at my super awesome forums and ask a normal question.

How are the forums going?

 

[hiver]

Super excellent. There isnt any of you there.

 

[coffeetable]

Never guess ... especially with numbers.

By the way, let me show you how incompetent you are.

I'm waiting for you witty and retarded reply. Can you admit that you fucked up?

felipe didn't implement the IMDB formula, but what he did is certainly acceptable from a mathematical standpoint. the "Bayesian average" is a (poor) approximation to Bayesian inference over a conjugate prior, and if you knew anything of the theory behind it, you'd know that the prior mean (C) and pseudocount (m) should reflect your prior beliefs. now while it's common to use a data-dependent prior (as in the IMDB formula), using a very weak (m = 5) prior with a mean in the middle of the available values (C = 3) is perfectly reasonable.

 

[toro]

And this is a game with 7 votes, clearly an outlier. The problem is not the Bayesian Av., but including those games in the results (not that they were included, but they could have been). We should simply had established previously a minimum % for a game to be eligible for an award, such as 5% or 10% of the total votes.

1% of the votes is 102,4 which means that the survey results are different. In fact for m= 50, Wasteland 2 is already on place 3 as you said.

The problem is that the results depend on this number and there is no way to correctly identify this number. The method can be perfect but selecting this number is subjective.

I agree 100%. That's why I kept m as the smallest amount of votes, like in the IMDB formula. Choosing any other value during or after the voting would mean changing the results arbitrarily.

Here you are misleading:
1) IMDB formula is not using the smallest amount of votes. They used 1300 votes and now they are using something like 25000 votes.
2) IMDB formula did change this value during the years and they are using certain artifacts to compute the scores for blockbusters.

There is no problem in changing this number after the survey as long as the number is actually more close to the reality.

For normal voters, this number is useless before the vote. For cheaters, this number would be important.

 

[toro]

felipe didn't implement the IMDB formula, but what he did is certainly acceptable from a mathematical standpoint. the "Bayesian average" is a (poor) approximation to Bayesian inference over a conjugate prior, and if you knew anything of the theory behind it, you'd know that the prior mean (C) and pseudocount (m) should reflect your prior beliefs. now while it's common to use a data-dependent prior (as in the IMDB formula), using a very weak (m = 5) prior with a mean in the middle of the available values (C = 3) is perfectly reasonable.

Maybe in your world, the opinion of 7 people has the same weight as the opinion of 906 people.

I'm not saying is not possible but what are the odds?

 

[coffeetable]

Maybe in your world, the opinion of 7 people has the same weight as the opinion of 906 people.

what

 

[Viata]

It's a majority system, now.

 

[felipepepe]

The problem is that the results depend on this number and there is no way to correctly identify this number. The method can be perfect but selecting this number is subjective.

True, but honestly I know of no better alternative. Popularity votes punish obscure games and simple average scores mean 1 5/5 vote is better than 5000 4/5. I still think that the Bayesian Av. is the most interesting methodology, even with its downfalls.

And as I said, I'm open to alternatives. So that next year we either use an agreeable m, or we have a better methodology.

Here you are misleading:
1) IMDB formula is not using the smallest amount of votes. They used 1300 votes and now they are using something like 25000 votes.
2) IMDB formula did change this value during the years and they are using certain artifacts to compute the scores for blockbusters.

Well, they chose a minimum number of votes for their poll (25000 according to you), take all movies that meet that number, calculate the Bayesian Av. and them publish the Top 250. You only see the Top 250, but the full list had way more movies, and the one with fewer votes had to have at least 25000. So their m = 25000 = lowest vote count among the entries.

That was my thinking.

There is no problem in changing this number after the survey as long as the number is actually more close to the reality.

Now that "reality" is something no one will agree on, ever...

 

[toro]

Here is one idea (probably the last idea).

I would propose to eliminate Bayesian average from the equation. The thing is: anyone can complain about m and there are no contra-arguments.

Based on the simple average (points/votes) the top would look like this:
1. Divinity: Original Sin 4,267108168
2. Shadowrun: Dragonfall – Director's Cut 4,184818482
3. NEO Scavenger 4,121212121
4. Heroine's Quest: The Herald of Ragnarok 4,060606061
5. Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky 4,050359712
6. Legend of Grimrock II 4,037463977
7. Wasteland 2 4,03198032
8. Valkyria Chronicles 4,025925926
9. Tales of Maj'Eyal : Ashes of Uhr'Rohk 4,023622047
10. Lords of Xulima 3,881918819

However this ranking is done under the assumption that all votes are positive.

In reality one voter which ranks D:OS with 5 and W2 with 3 means that he actually voted negatively for W2 with -2 points.

From the data set it is possible to identify how many votes and points were negative.

Then the average score formula for each game can be written like this (positive points + negative points)/(positive votes + negative votes).

Based on this formula, the top would look like this:
1. Divinity: Original Sin 2,714630225
2. Shadowrun: Dragonfall – Director's Cut 2,397306397
3. NEO Scavenger 2,246621622
4. Wasteland 2 2,102318145
5. Legend of Grimrock II 2,059590317
6. Valkyria Chronicles 2,028436019
7. Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky 2,01369863
8. Heroine's Quest: The Herald of Ragnarok 1,996254682
9. Tales of Maj'Eyal : Ashes of Uhr'Rohk 1,96097561

And you know what: This actually looks good. No fucking m values and shit.

Other option would be to profile voters (assign weight factor to them) but that's simply not possible on codex.

 

[Snorkack]

If u want to make the next vote more accurate then heres one for you: Don't make the information whether 5 is bestest or worst rating terribly obscure like you just did. I'm not sure if I got it right back when i voted, and I'm sure I wasn't the only moron to falsify the results. Once u get that straight, feel free to talk about bayesian averages for more accuracy.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Just make people vote for one game instead of doing such convoluted bullshit. There is a lot of bullshit there and the only number I care about which is how many people considered every game their game of the year is not there. If I wanted to know "which RPG of the 2014 people generally hated the least" I'd check on /v/.

 

[hiver]

How about the reality that W2 is far worse game in truth then the place on the poll shows? It really should be down below 20th place.
What number do we need to tweak to show that?

The game only got to the place it did because some small minority voted 5/5 for it and 1/5 for DoS, which distorted the results. The same ones that were screeching rubbish in the wasteland part of the forums, creating a fake sense that the support for w2 is big and that it may actually be a good game,which it isnt by any objective standard. And since other people knew its going to be like that they did the same in reverse. While the majority of voters most probably kept it in some normal range and just voted how they felt.
Felipepepe removed the most blatant trolling of that kind but enough remained.

The thing is: anyone can complain about m and there are no contra-arguments.

Didnt you get plenty of counter arguments in reality, over the last few pages?

In reality one voter which ranks D:OS with 5 and W2 with 3 means that he actually voted negatively for W2 with -2 points.

Good luck that you are around to tall everyone what they were thinking. Great idea.

What if they just didnt think its worth any more? How many gave it more then they honestly thought it was worth?
How many glasses are half empty according to toro, the genius ? What a nonsense idea....

Just leave it the fuck alone. You got some cheap kudos point for admitting you were wrong and you should have let it stay like that. Youre just spinning into greater and greater nonsense with every post.

 

[toro]

The game only got to the place it did because some small minority voted 5/5 for it and 1/5 for DoS, which distorted the results. The same ones that were screeching rubbish in the wasteland part of the forums, creating a fake sense that the support for w2 is big and that it may actually be a good game,which it isnt by any objective standard. And since other people knew its going to be like that they did the same in reverse. While the majority of voters most probably kept it in some normal range and just voted how they felt. Felipepepe removed the most blatant trolling of that kind but enough remained.

D:OS voters have rated 281 times W2 negatively (374 points).
W2 voters have rated 136 times D:OS negatively (136 points)

As you can see above (371 > 136), you are full of shit. felipepepe did not remove anything.

Didnt you get plenty of counter arguments in reality, over the last few pages?

As long as the methodology is subjective, you can fuck off.

Good luck that you are around to tall everyone what they were thinking. Great idea.

You are kind of irrational at this point.

What if they just didnt think its worth any more? How many gave it more then they honestly thought it was worth?
How many glasses are half empty according to toro, the genius ? What a nonsense idea....

Give me something else than your whining and I will listen.

Just leave it the fuck alone. You got some cheap kudos point for admitting you were wrong and you should have let it stay like that. Youre just spinning into greater and greater nonsense with every post.

But you see, I cannot leave it alone if you keep on quoting me. Like a late-to-party fucking retard.

Bottom line: Those results that are still in the article are misleading. Now you can suck felipepepe's balls and you can flame me but nothing will not change that. Except a re-vote.

 

[Lady_Error]

m=400 makes the most sense.

Spoiler

 

[Goral]

Meanwhile, CD-Action - the biggest Polish gaming magazine has assembled its own list of best games. Here's the list:

1. Alien: Isolation
2. Herthstone: Heroes of Warcraft
3. Southpark: Stick of the Truth (lol)
4. Bayonetta 2
5. Dark Souls II
6. Far Cry 4
7. DOS and Dragon Age ex aequo :D :D :D
9. Wasteland 2
10. Lords of The Fallen

Wasteland 2 would be higher if not for the bugs. They even compared it to vanilla Fallout 2.
Plus there are fags in W2 and everyone vomits when they see fags.

They've also made a list of biggest disappointments (Destiny, Watchdogs, AssCreed: Unity, Thief, Fifa 15, The Elder Scrolls: Online, Driveclub, Shadow of Mordor, WildStar, GoT: Iron from Ice).

They've also published games of the year according to readers:

1. Dragon Age
2. GTA 5
3. Far Cry 4
4.Dark Souls II
5. South Park

 

[Konjad]

CD-Action has been flushed down the toilet into sewers so many years ago that I don't even remember it (not that they ever had high standards, but as a kid I couldn't tell), their every year's best games are totally arbitrary.

 

[t]

Toro vs hiver: the great battle of a deathclaw against a glabrezu is about to commence!

 

[Stelcio]

Give me something else than your whining and I will listen.

Funny, look who's talking.

Meanwhile, CD-Action (...)

It's a mainstream magazine. Comparing the results is meaningless, because some titles from our may appeal to mainstream crowd, but still not deserve the applause of Codex. Other titles cater to Codex reader-base but are too niche to appear in mainstream media. That's why Codex has its own list in the first place.

 

[hiver]

Well, thats what you get when you try to be nice to a laughable subhuman turd like toro.

At this point he doesnt even understand whats falling out of that raging butthurt in his head.
Im not late to the party, btw, ive been watching those contortions of any sense, reason and good taste since the thread was made.

Not that toro ever had any good taste in anything, or that he could ever explain anything in any way that makes sense except screaming like a lowest common denominator retard. He is nothing but stupid empty poser
and if you never believed me, or thought i was too rough when talking to that shite, now you have plenty of proof.

D:OS voters have rated 281 times W2 negatively (374 points).
W2 voters have rated 136 times D:OS negatively (136 points)

As you can see above (371 > 136), you are full of shit. felipepepe did not remove anything.

 

[coffeetable]

As long as the methodology is subjective, you can fuck off.

bad statistician, would not employ, 1/5

 

[coffeetable]

"statistical inference is subjective, dwi" - tommy bayes, 1763

 

[toro]

Well, thats what you get when you try to be nice to a laughable subhuman turd like toro.

At this point he doesnt even understand whats falling out of that raging butthurt in his head.
Im not late to the party, btw, ive been watching those contortions of any sense, reason and good taste since the thread was made.

Not that toro ever had any good taste in anything, or that he could ever explain anything in any way that makes sense except screaming like a lowest common denominator retard. He is nothing but stupid empty poser
and if you never believed me, or thought i was too rough when talking to that shite, now you have plenty of proof.

So much nothing. At least your tag is appropriate.

 

[hiver]

ofcurse, the tags - the last resource of any imbecile who looses an argument based on logic and common sense.