itch.io

That is objectively false. itch.io's final score calculation takes into account the number of ratings and the median number of ratings from the submissions. If your submission got less ratings than the median, your final score is less than the raw score, which is done to prevent rating manipulation. "Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam." You can even verify this by looking at the results.

Edit: I've said this before, but I did not care at all about winning. I just wanted to make my game idea and have people play it. Hopefully they would enjoy it, but at the very least I wanted to get some feedback. I could then take that external feedback as well as my personal learnings into future projects. My main point is that everyone should at least be supportive enough of their fellow submitters by playing their game.

Main thing I've learned is that a browser version is essentially a must in order to get as many ratings as possible. Seeing my adjusted score drop me about ten places cause I assume people did not want to download a game feels bad. Also, pestering people for ratings seems to work as far as getting ratings goes, although I feel that probably has a negative impact on the actual rating.

If anyone actually still is reading these discussions even though the jam is over, please play other people's games when you enter a game jam. Every one that submitted took the time to make a game and you would want them to play and rate yours,  so why not do the same for them? This was a small game jam and playing every submission only took a few hours. To everyone that played my game, thanks and I hope you enjoyed, and to those that didn't, I still invite you to give it a try.

Out of curiosity, how are we going to be verifying that people are only submitting bug-fix updates after the deadline? I know this has been controversial, but I feel like any updates are kinda against the "spirit of game jams," as scuffed games and bugs are part of the experience. This also effectively adds two weeks to an already really long jam in the first place, and as having to limit scope and cut ideas to get it done on time is another part of game jams, it doesn't make the most sense to me. The argument of "the rules don't say it's not allowed" is kinda just reaching for technicalities, even though it's pretty clear that post-jam updates were not intended. I will not be making any changes, bug fixes included, to my submission, but with the "beautifying" of my game done by the initial submission date, I very easily could double or triple the scale of my game in two weeks, assuming I'm even in the top 20 anyway. I'm not looking for opinions to change at this stage, but just wanted to put my opinion out.

No worries. I played and rated every submission earlier this week.

Thanks for playing. Glad you enjoyed.

Thanks for playing.

I ran everything with the assumption that nobody would try to do anything malicious in a game jam, but I probably at the very least should have used a vm. Has anyone actually been scanning games before running them to make sure they are safe? I have no reason to think there was anything malicious in the submitted games but am now realizing I was dumb and hope someone else was a bit more careful and can confirm all is good.

I appreciate the input. Thanks.

Thanks for playing.

Thanks for playing.

oug? oug oug!

Thanks for playing.

I appreciate the input, thanks.

Thanks for playing. Can you tell me which part of the controls gave you trouble at first so I can remember that for the future? Thanks.

Thank you for playing. oug.

Thanks. I will be playing and rating every submission.

Very cute.

I assume you are talking about the controls when you say "took a bit to get used to." Can you tell me what specifically was off so I know for the future? Thanks for playing.