Pyggy Awards Format

gcewing on 2011/04/26 01:41

Well, Pyggy Awards participation hit an all-time low last time, with a grand total of zero entries. :-( On the good side, at least it's verified that the web site doesn't crash under those conditions. :-)

Hopefully there will be a slightly higher turnout this time, but having two divisions will probably be overkill. So I'm thinking about a single division that is open to both new and existing games, based on any previous PyWeek theme, whether chosen or not.

What do people think about that?

(log in to comment)

Comments

akira44 on 2011/04/26 02:42:

It seems to me that it would probably be better if the Pyggy Awards were closer to the end of Pyweek - otherwise teams disband, people forgets about their work, and all that. Other than that, I'm cool with the idea of a single division, or at least at first - if you have too many entries, you can always divide them in two, but doing it the other way around is more likely to make people angry.

mauve on 2011/04/26 13:53:

I don't really know when the Pyggy awards run. Perhaps it needs to be better publicised.

I'd suggest scrapping the divisions altogether so that people can enter if they just happen to have a random idea.

I'd also suggest having one winner when there are so few entries. This might already be the case, but the later challenge pages don't work (they say "sys.stdout access restricted by mod_wsgi").

john on 2011/04/26 19:14:

When is the pyggy awards? I have a feeling that it will be during my GCSEs, and obviously they are more important ;)

superjoe on 2011/04/26 22:39:

@john: Or are they...?

gcewing on 2011/04/27 06:23:

When is the pyggy awards?

I haven't decided on an exact date for the next one yet. I try to position the judging period about half way between PyWeeks, which usually means about 2-3 months after the preceding PyWeek. But you can spend the whole time up until then coding.

I'd suggest scrapping the divisions altogether so that people can enter if they just happen to have a random idea.

You mean not necessarily tied to a PyWeek theme? I've been thinking about that as well -- just making it open to any Python-based game. What are people's thoughts on that? Anyone out there that would be encouraged to enter by such a relaxation?

mauve on 2011/04/27 08:06:

I couldn't say it would encourage me, but if there are too few entries under the restricted entry conditions I would have thought one response is to broaden them.

Maybe the coding period should be shorter to avoid daunting people with the suggestion that they will have to code for 2-3 months in order to compete.

Cosmologicon on 2011/04/27 13:23:

I agree, the less restrictions the better. (Although, I would keep the python requirement, as that's sort of the whole point.) I think 2-3 months is pretty good. IMHO, the danger is not so much people getting daunted, but people having more chance to lose interest and drop out. But for people who actually participate, 2-3 months is a good amount of time to spend on a project.

mauve on 2011/04/27 14:19:

Spending 2-3 months programming is fine if you are sure there is an audience for your game. I'm not sure the audience for any of our Pyweek/Pyggy games is that big. Perhaps that's where we should really be focusing out activities - on promoting Pyggy/Pyweek and the games, particularly the most complete and highly-rated ones.

Cosmologicon on 2011/04/27 16:33:

Well what do you have in mind as far as promotion? Facebook ads?

I think a lot of people use pyweek to learn and practice, and not primarily as an opportunity to create a game they'd want to publicize. On the other hand, some of the games that come out of it are good enough for publicity. Just something to keep in mind for any promotion strategy.

gcewing on 2011/04/28 05:16:

Maybe the coding period should be shorter to avoid daunting people with the suggestion that they will have to code for 2-3 months in order to compete.

The idea is to allow plenty of time for people to complete the game in their spare time. Not just coding, but playtesting and getting feedback. If it were too much shorter, it would just end up being another crunch like PyWeek.

Also, if I relax the entry conditions as much as I'm thinking of, there won't really be a defined coding period, just a deadline for submissions. There will be nothing to stop you from submitting a game you've been working on previously.

There never really was an intention to prevent that. The Pyggy Awards isn't meant to be an exercise in coming up with a game in X amount of time -- we already have PyWeek for that. Rather it's meant to be an occasion for people to show off neat stuff they've been working on. Opening it up to any and all Python-based games would bring it closer to that ideal.

mauve on 2011/04/28 16:53:

That would be cool. You'd probably have to have a rule about games that have been entered before.

Cosmo: promotion-wise I was thinking blogs, forums, etc, not advertising.

gcewing on 2011/04/29 02:45:

You'd probably have to have a rule about games that have been entered before.

What would you suggest? Disallowing previously entered games completely might be a bit too harsh -- if someone has made substantial additions to a previous entry, I wouldn't want to deny them the opportunity to show them off.

mauve on 2011/04/29 10:00:

I would say it can't previously have won, and substantial changes must have been made since it was last entered. How you measure substantial is tricky though. Lines of code?

mauve on 2011/04/29 10:02:

Or perhaps you just leave that to the judges' discretion.

gummbum on 2011/04/29 14:27:

old milktoast version -> download here
new -+=Gravy N TrimminS=+- version -> download here

That should be enough qualification for an entry. Pyggy should be fat and juicy, not lean and dried up. :) The huge leap in fun/innovation/productivity is the sign I'd look for: what can you accomplish in 3 months, with plenty of time to beef up the weak areas?

If you tout your game as "from scratch" or "based on PyWeek game or theme" or "wearing an eye patch and a 16 oz. boxing glove" or "using my 5 yo child's art", I would be inclined to boost your score (esp. if your game's hero wears an eye patch and a 16 oz. boxing glove). I find self-imposed restrictions, when two or more agree to abide by them for sport, way more quirky and fun, opposed to an objective rule set which usually becomes a bone of contention as well as quickly becoming stale.

ServalKatze on 2011/04/29 16:19:

I'd leave it to the judges and harass encourage the entrants to post about what's new in their submitted version, which features were added or which big, ugly bugs have been fixed.

mauve on 2011/05/04 00:09:

I have started a blog for promoting Python games and to encourage people to participate in the Pyggys. However, I will almost certainly get bored and give up unless people subscribe, share and possibly contribute.

richard on 2011/05/04 02:52:

Nice idea mauve! Please email planet at python.org and get the blog aggregated at planet.python.org :-)

I'd love to contribute, but at the moment I'm snowed under working on the program for this year's PyCon AU.

richard on 2011/05/04 02:53:

Oh, if you're not already doing so you might want to keep an eye on the pygame.org projects feed...

mauve on 2011/05/04 09:14:

Ok, thanks.

Any contributions, however small, would be appreciated: any projects you're working on that you'd like to plug; any games you think should be reviewed; any techniques, tools, libraries or experiments. Or just news. I'd also like to do some Q&As with people to help shed light on people's creative thought processes.

Cosmologicon on 2011/05/05 02:04:

What do I need to do to be able to contribute?

mauve on 2011/05/05 07:31:

You can send content or suggestions to me at mauve at mauvesoft co uk or I believe I can add other users to be able to edit posts. Want an account?

Cosmologicon on 2011/05/05 15:32:

I'll send you an idea for a post and you can decide if you think it would be appropriate for the blog. If not, no problem. :)