Say *THAT* 5 times fast...
Meta-galactic Llamas Battle at the Edge of Time
Get it at: http://retrospec.sgn.net/game-links.php?link=llama
Synopsis: You're a llama. You spit at things to kill them. 'nuff said! The great side is super low system reqs, it's FREE, and a wopping 1 MB in size.
Writes settings to: Application Folder. Anybody able to see if it writes to the registry?
How to extract: Unzip it, run Meta.exe
License: Freeware
System Requirements: Win98 / WinME / WinNT / Win2K / WinXP
Meta-galactic Llamas Battle at the Edge of Time
Admittedly, forgotten. Not sure if it was portable or not, though I get the itching suspicion that I didn't find it interesting or fun at all. I try to keep my additions limited to games that fit the following criteria:
1 : High Quality
2 : High Replayability (really, what's the point in keeping a game with you wherever you go unless it's worth playing more than once or twice?)
I think these are fair standards for adding games, since other software must also perform reasonably well or else it won't get added at all. I'll take another look at the game and check it for portability.
[EDIT] Indeed this game is portable, but there are a few things that give me pause concerning adding it to the database. Firstly, the zip file contains a subfolder, then another zip file, then another subfolder, and finally the game. This strikes me as very amateurish, though I admit it's more of a pet peeve. Secondly there is no high score function, which this game could greatly benefit from. Thirdly, the gameplay got repetitive very quickly and I honestly couldn't see loading this game again even out of sheer boredom.
Again, these are all my personal opinions but I think they are at least somewhat valid in determining whether or not a game gets added. In fairness, though, we'll see what Andrew has to say about adding it and if he wishes me to, I will. Thanks for your time and understanding.
1 : High Quality
2 : High Replayability (really, what's the point in keeping a game with you wherever you go unless it's worth playing more than once or twice?)
I think these are fair standards for adding games, since other software must also perform reasonably well or else it won't get added at all. I'll take another look at the game and check it for portability.
[EDIT] Indeed this game is portable, but there are a few things that give me pause concerning adding it to the database. Firstly, the zip file contains a subfolder, then another zip file, then another subfolder, and finally the game. This strikes me as very amateurish, though I admit it's more of a pet peeve. Secondly there is no high score function, which this game could greatly benefit from. Thirdly, the gameplay got repetitive very quickly and I honestly couldn't see loading this game again even out of sheer boredom.
Again, these are all my personal opinions but I think they are at least somewhat valid in determining whether or not a game gets added. In fairness, though, we'll see what Andrew has to say about adding it and if he wishes me to, I will. Thanks for your time and understanding.
-
Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3064
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
How about for apps/games that both of us are reluctant to post, we create a poll and ask if it should be posted to the database. To be generous, we let the poll run for 7 days so that everyone has a chance to participate.
When the poll closes, if the result is above a certain threshold eg. >10 votes AND >70% support, we post it to the database.
That way, we have a legitimate reason for doing the grunt work if the poll is successful. Otherwise, it will just feel like real work, which stops being fun after a while.
There is a inverse precedent case for this. Browzar was voted away although it is portable.
When the poll closes, if the result is above a certain threshold eg. >10 votes AND >70% support, we post it to the database.
That way, we have a legitimate reason for doing the grunt work if the poll is successful. Otherwise, it will just feel like real work, which stops being fun after a while.
There is a inverse precedent case for this. Browzar was voted away although it is portable.
Again, I realize that it creates more donkey work but it would be good if most (if not all) apps found to be suitably portable were added to the database. Simply for the reason that, people will search the database in the future and not find "mutant flying camels with death-rays destroy earth" and so submit another request to add it to the database (I doubt people search the forums AND the website). These unaccepted apps could be highlighted in much the same way as known non-portable apps are now.
However, I certainly concede that some apps/games are so poor that to acknowledge their existence is probably a waste of keyboard buffer space.
The Poll idea certainly seems like a democratic and fair step in the right direction, it's just the action that results from the poll that concerns me.
However, I certainly concede that some apps/games are so poor that to acknowledge their existence is probably a waste of keyboard buffer space.
The Poll idea certainly seems like a democratic and fair step in the right direction, it's just the action that results from the poll that concerns me.
-
Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3064
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Hmmm, then a lower number maybe? The number 10 is merely suggested to filter out proggies that nobody is interested in anyway.Fluffy wrote:though I'm not sure if the games are popular enough to get 10 votes
Good idea. Fluffy, the [Reject] button at the DB admin interface is your friend here.Darkbee wrote:These unaccepted apps could be highlighted in much the same way as known non-portable apps are now.
Indeed, I've started using it a lot more lately. The problem in this scenario is what to write for the rejection terms. I'm beginning to think that I should just buckle down and add it since it is portable, as "poor quality" seems a bit flaky. That, compounded with the fact that one man's trash is another man's treasure, makes me think I really should add it anyways. The only other solution I can think of is rejecting it with the reason being "Portable, but not of suitable quality."Andrew Lee wrote:Good idea. Fluffy, the [Reject] button at the DB admin interface is your friend here.
And thanks again Andrew and Darkbee for all your help and input. To be perfectly honest with you guys, if I was to add every single portable game I come across I'd have hundreds on my plate, which is why I'm trying to adhere to certain standards.
For example, right now I'm going through Lyle in Cube Sector, Plasma Pong, Warsow (though I'm waiting on this one for their next version to come out, which should be soon - plus I don't know how to handle the symbol in their name), Toribash, Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory (still extensively testing this one, as I've had some problems with mods acting the same on all test machines), Cho Ren Sha 68k (game is in english, but ClamWin reported some files as having an exploit though this has never caused me any problems whatsoever), and that's just the tip of the iceberg. I like adding games and all, but if I was to really buckle down and add them as I come across them I fear I'd upset some of the users like I did when I added all the puzzles at once.
I wouldn't mind going on another "rampage" but I'm more afraid of upsetting the regulars. After all, they've probably been around this place longer than me! However, I will be updating the Rejection list a lot more often now.
This is the crux of the problem that I've been trying to get at. Tis a real problem to be sure, and it opens up a can of worms. As you've suggested, it's a real grey area when you start trying to apply subjective criteria in an objective way. I would like to suggest the reason for rejection as being, "Portable but of limited value", which could be applied to apps and games alike. IF, you find that there is massive protest and many users feel that an app or game has been discriminated against unfairly, then it seems to make sense to fall back on good old fashioned democracy and our friend the Poll.Fluffy wrote:... That, compounded with the fact that one man's trash is another man's treasure, makes me think I really should add it anyways. The only other solution I can think of is rejecting it with the reason being "Portable, but not of suitable quality."
However, the absolute very bottom line is this; the database is Andrew's and he is perfectly at liberty to add or reject whatever the hell he wants to. As it stands today, PF.com is probably the single most useful resource for portable applications (and games) on the Net. It's hard to argue against that. In otherwords, I think that an excellent job has been done so far, producing a database of good quality. A database half filled with junk doesn't really help anybody.