Yeah, the scoring system is horribly broken. Namely, the review system is, in my mind, terribly flawed, because if a game is more well-known, it will probably be reviewed more. The game getting 10 5-star and 4-star reviews might be great and worth the 5-star reviews it's getting, but it might not be necessarily better than a less popular game that only has 2 5-star reviews. But the way this event was scored, the one with 10 reviews gets tons more points than the one with only 2 reviews.

The solution I would propose in the next NCFC is to give more points for a higher average rating, rather than for being rated by more people.

EDIT: I've changed my position, so I edited this post to cut out the stuff I don't stand by any more (to make the part about reviews, which I still stand by, more visible). This is what it said before:

Quote:Yeah, the scoring system is horribly broken.

First off, the simple "likes" rating system is flawed. For example, a game could get 50 likes, while another gets only 10 likes, but what exactly this means depends on so many factors. It could be that the one with 50 likes is liked by 5 times as many people proportionally, but the one with 10 likes could have been played by only 20 people, while the one with 50 likes could have been played by 200 people. In this case, it seems more people, proportionally, like the one with 10 likes, even though it has only 1/5 the number of likes the other one has. Another problem, though, is that not liking a game doesn't necessarily mean that the person thinks the game is bad. It could also mean that the person thinks the game is OK, but not enough for a "like" (i.e. he/she would rate the game ~3 stars out of 5), or it could mean that the player liked the game, but simply didn't bother clicking the "like" button.

The review system is also, in my mind, terribly flawed, because if a game is more well-known, it will probably be reviewed more. The game getting 10 5-star and 4-star reviews might be great and worth the 5-star reviews it's getting, but it might not be necessarily better than a less popular game that only has 2 5-star reviews. But the way this event was scored, the one with 10 reviews gets tons more points than the one with only 2 reviews.

The solution I would propose in the next NCFC is to:

1. Replace the "Likes" system with either a "Likes/Dislikes" system or a 5-star rating system (I myself would prefer a 5-star rating system, but "likes/dislikes" would be fine).
2. Give more points for a higher average rating, rather than for being rated by more people.
3. Sort the booths by average rating, so that ones with an average of 4.5 stars will be closer to the top of the page than ones with an average of 3.5 stars.
4. Have the staff periodically scan for, play, and rate any games that have not been rated, to prevent good games from being left unnoticed due to the sorting, or give extra attention to games that haven't been rated much (say, less than 10 ratings).

These changes would make the event much more fair.