Ok, I think you are all familiar to the one-on-one system we are using for the best MSX1 game ever mega-poll. However, we have received some remarks about this system and I think it's best to discuss things over here.

One of the nice edges of this system is that it can be a very tough system. Even with differences of one vote, it can be in or out. Furthermore the randomization of the pairs makes it possible to get very tough choices in the first rounds already.

We decided to soften things up a little by letting more games through to the next round, looking at the total scores received in previous rounds. This only happened when games were in - or close to - a draw.

I have been thinking and one way of getting the tough part back in the system is to give everyone 3 points a pair, which can be divided as you wish.

So

Nemesis 2 - Kings valley 2 (one of the tough choices in this round)
can become

3 - 0
2 - 1
1 - 2
0 - 3

This gives every voter a much stronger voice, and gives a better foundation to leave games out, even if they are only one point behind.

Another option could be using two randomized lists a round, letting each title battle against two different titles. Although this is quite fair, it doubles the amount of work. And it's a hell of a lot more work for the one keeping scores.

I'd like to know if you have other suggestions, or if you think the one-on-one system is tough, but just fine. Keep in mind that the next mega-poll, we will probably be less kind in moving 'semi-losers' on to the next rounds.

Then there is the final frontpage battle. When three to eight games end up in this battle, there is a chance an underdog wins because people are too divided to vote on the 'real' winner. I personally think this is a non-argument. Lets look at a clear underdog vs. titans poll:

A - Yab Yum
B - Eggerland
C - Goonies
D - Hype

BCD all moved on upto round #3, A was already lost in round 1. Most people will choose either B, C, or D - the one they actually like the most, while only little people will vote for the underdog -A-.

Suppose C gets 40% of the votes and wins. This means 60% did not think of C as the best game for MSX. But still, the most people did prefer C over the other games. So it is still a rightfull winner. Yup, statistics can be confusing sometimes (although I admit it would be very cool if the winner received more than 50% of the votes, this will be very unlikely)

One way of decreasing the 'risk' of an underdog winning is to keep on voting in the forums until only two games are left. However, since a lot more people vote on the frontpage it would decrease the amount of people involved in the final result.

I think the final round of a mega-poll should end up with no more than 6 'winners' that can do the final battle on the frontpage. And I think the results of this frontpage poll are representative for the opinion of all our frontpage visitors.

Just a question : how many options can you have at maximum for the poll on the front page ?

that maximum is currently set to 12 but can be changed quite easily. However, such long polls are not very resolution-friendly

Nice idea for the next mega-poll: the best MSX1 non-cartridge game ever. Let's give Feud, Vampire and Survivors a chance they deserve but obviously don't have against all those Mega-ROM games.

The best MSX1 game ever will be, without any doubt, Hydlide 3, although it isn't battling at the front page currently Probably too busy being played

The most accurate mega-poll system would last only 1 round:

- construct a list (eg. MSX1 games), can be done in the same way MSX1 games were nominated
- users sort the list in order of preference. if the list is too big, they can give a top-50

each item is given points, from top to bottom, eg #1 gets 50 points, #2 49, #3 48. or another system: #1 gets 100, #2 gets 98, #3 gets 95, #4 91, etc


Maybe you should try this with 'the best msx1 game' and you'll notice that Penguin Adventure actually isn't the collective favourite.

jonemaan - first of all I do think Penguin Adventure, Maze of Galious and Zanac are the favorite games of many MSX users. The current system could use some improvements, but it is not completely inaccurate at all.

Letting people make a top 10 of even a top 50 out of a list of over a 100 games (234 in the case of the MSX1 poll) will probably be less accurate and lead to fewer people voting on the poll. Letting people submit a top 10 without giving a list of 'nominated games' will make many people forget many titles.

So, yes, I do like a polling system in which several rounds of voting decide the final winner.

Quote:

first of all I do think Penguin Adventure, Maze of Galious and Zanac are the favorite games of many MSX users.

I agree, although I personally like Knightmare I the best....

Maybe choices of 2 out of 4 in the first rounds is a reasonable option?

JKT - I thought giving 3 points to each pair could have about the same effect. (see initial post of this thread). Choosing 2 out of 4 makes changes of 'draws' even higher.

To all visitors:

Which method do you prefer?

Quote:

JKT - I thought giving 3 points to each pair could have about the same effect. (see initial post of this thread). Choosing 2 out of 4 makes changes of 'draws' even higher.

true

I choose the one-on-one-method, with the condition that the winner has to have 60 percent or more or else both games go through.

Quote:

Letting people submit a top 10 without giving a list of 'nominated games' will make many people forget many titles.

I think most people won't forget the best games.

Quote:

To all visitors: Which method do you prefer?

If I'd had to vote, I'd prefer the 3-points-for-a-pair system. But why don't we have a mega-poll about this ?

In the MSX2 poll we will try the 3 point per pair system.

For the first round I think it's better to let people choose which games they want to see in the next round. Let say they choose 20 games from the nominated ones. This way we get rid of lots of games that aren't going to win anyway, and we don't eliminate a good game just because it's paired with metal gear 2, while some crappy game can go to the next round because it's paired with <insert your favourite worst msx2 game>.
It also means less work and that means more people will vote.

No, the system as it is now really is the most fun. I hope that it works so that all the points a game gained will be added up and that say the fifty games with the least points won't go on to the next round. That seems fairer to me than to just look at the total scores per pair (that the game with the most points of the two proceeds). In this way, it's less likely for a game like Guido's Lost in Plantinus to defeat a game like Hydlide 3.