Reddit
Ludum Dare “Technology” rating?
This is not my first ludum dare (its my 3rd one) and so as far as i can see there are a lot of grate minds for the future on computers, not only in videogame but software technology in general. There are many people here that deals with math problems , making complex coding to make an AI , to make a new way of drawing things, doing things, etc. What i don’t see here is a some kind of Technology ratting here, yes there should be some kind of grade to see which game does deserve some reward even if the game is not that entertaining but we know the making of the game has some core that can be extract to use it in other things and has some impressive and complex engine. Like the AI could be so smart but the game is not that fun to play but the AI is impressive and deserves a reward for that. That is in my opinion/petition for Ludum dare, making some kind of technology rating but just for does who use programming not games that were made by “Making games sofwares” that there are already tools to do all the work and the math for us.
What you’re describing can already be fit into the “Innovation” category, I think. That’s one of the ways I’ve been treating it, anyhow.
Isn’t innovation more about someone doing something that hasn’t been done before? Anyway I agree that if nothing else it should be clearer that impressive tech falls under one of the categories.
I think a separate technology category has its merits. A non-innovative but technically well executed game should have a chance of being rated highly in some category. While Ludum Dare is not about game technology, but rather about creativity, not having any technology rating gives less incentive to those game developers who are primarily interested in honing their technical skills. I often wish I could rate a particular game for its technological aspects.
I believe that in the early days there was a tech category?
This idea has been suggested in recent months — but the reply was that players couldn’t really tell what tech was beneath the surface, which made the act of choosing a rating for it quite random and useless.
Interesting.. it makes me think a lot of things: I agree with sorceress, you can’t really tell about inner technology, so instead of tech I would say a “Execution” category, I think it would be easier to recognize well executed mechanics. I also agree with bvanschooten that LD is about creativity and I add that one of the main problem that developers/engineers have, including myself, is that we focus too much in technology: if technology doesn’t help to make the game interesting or fun to play, why are you implementing it in the first place.