Been a member of moddb.com since v1. Self and professionally taught games designer/digital artist. Currently working as an Environment Artist at Jagex on Transformers Universe. Recently graduated from university with a First Class Honours degree in Computer Games Design, also having over 12 years experience working on successful game modifications and small independent projects. A strong and versatile games modeller being expert in both Max and Maya for a variety of target game platforms and a keen focus on hard-surface modelling.

Report RSS MOTY

Posted by on

Voting over.

/waits with great anticipation but knows the fanboy mods (Black Mesa, I'm looking at you) will probably win it)!

Speaking of which, I must rant. The ModDB "top mods" system is completely flawed. The top 5 most clicked-on mods are displayed on the main page - the problem is, that results in more clicks, way, way more than the mod at #6, or #7. Almost the same 5 mods are on there daily, for no other reason than they're there. That in itself results is a massive wave of votes. Renegade-X posted some 3 updates during the voting process, peaking at over 1,100 hits in one day, but that wasn't even enough to break into the top 5 -some of which did not update ONCE during the voting process.

Just isn't fair.

Top 5 should be removed during MOTY in my opinion. /rage.

Comments
mikejkelley
mikejkelley

MOTY is a farce. For many reasons.

1. In 2006, DCD placed third in the standalone category according to total number of votes. After voting was finalized, and after winners were announced, NEW rules regarding eligibility were announced and DCD was DQed, only to be replaced by a licensing rip-off (whose creator is a personal friend of the staff). Which brings me to #2.

2. Licensing rip-offs. In 2007, 5 of 10 mods were licensing rip-offs. Of those 5, 4 broke copyright law, and incidentally, moddb's own TOS. But nothing rakes in eyes and ads like SW and Half-Life remakes.

3. Arbitrary rules. In addition to rewriting rules after voting has closed, this year's MOTY introduces the clause that to be eligible mods "must have made significant progress since last year" with the staff determining what constitutes "significant". Another example would be extending the voting deadline for MOTY 2008. Elsewhere you can cite the example of awarding top honors to recent remakes in a "nostalgia" category. The list goes on...

4. General lack of originality. This is the least of my gripes, but it is worth mentioning that of the 2007 MOTY mods, 4 of the 5 mods that weren't licensing rip-offs were of the guns and planes and tanks variety, with the "odd mod out" being a zombie shooter. Note that since I'd been harping on the fact that the moddb slogan of "make something different" was a laughable irony, they substituted it with "change the game".

Moddb is a great site, but MOTY is a joke. The staff likes to play king-maker.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+3 votes
AlCool
AlCool

I'm raging right beside you. Down with the system!

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
mikejkelley
mikejkelley

Thnx! For MOTY 2008 I should add a fifth complaint;

5. Money-backed "indie" games slumming it for the street cred and free advertising.
Any game, no matter how "indie" should be DQed if they are being funded through the development stages.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
AlCool
AlCool

Light Spire isn't being funded, but they have been signed to use the FULL crytek 2 engine without Crysis or anything. That alone can make games 10X bter which imo makes it unfair against a lot of mods of a modding site competing against a full game that will cost us money. Compare Dark Messiah Might and Magic or Zeno Clash to every Sourcemod out there. They are full SOURCE GAMES and have been given the blank source engine from valve to make which is why their quality is so much higher then anything else on the engine. I believe light spire should have been DQ'ed for the fact that it wasn't a mod anymore, but hey, whats dev biasm for?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
M@ty Author
M@ty

Getting access to a full license is unfair for everyone, its counter-productive, and I have no issues if such a project was DQ'ed. Unless of course Crytek released the full SDK for non-commercial purposes! But I can't see that happening!

Reply Good karma+2 votes
AlCool
AlCool

No engine ever releases the full SKD. If you want it you goto get it signed off to you, and that's usually only for making commercial games (Something to sell basically). They can go so much further then conventional modders with the full untouched engine then engine run-off.

An indie game should either be a standalone of a mod, or a custom-engine. Not a professional engine as signed off to make and sell from the company themselves, that just gets unfair to the other participants in this contest.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
mikejkelley
mikejkelley

How'd they get use of the source? Was it lent to them for a cut of potential profits or smthng? If so, I'd say that's the same as funding... curious.

nm, just read their page. Yeah, having access to the source code certainly "changes the game"!

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Post a comment
Sign in or join with:

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.

Level
Avatar
Avatar
Last Online
Country
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Friends
Become friends
Member watch
Follow
Blog
Browse
Blogs
Report
Report
Share
Got it!

We have recently updated our privacy policy and terms of use in-line with GDPR requirements. More Info?