Should We Create Specialized Landmark Game Threads Based on UNESCO Categories?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Games
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on improving the Landmark game by proposing specialized threads based on UNESCO's heritage categories: Cultural, Natural, and Mixed. A suggestion is made for a "speed thread" where landmarks would only last 24 hours, aimed at increasing engagement and reducing irrelevant posts. However, concerns are raised about the 24-hour limit being too short, potentially discouraging participation. Instead, a compromise of designated hint intervals is suggested to maintain interest and ensure the game remains active. The idea of separating the game into "junior" and "expert" versions is also discussed to cater to different player skill levels, while cautioning against creating too many divisions that could fragment the player base. Overall, the emphasis is on fostering collaboration and maintaining a fun, engaging experience for all participants.
Andre
Messages
4,310
Reaction score
73
Seeing discussions about what people like and what turns off at the landmark game, perhaps it's an idea to have several specalistic Landmark threads, each suiting the individual wishes best. A criterium for threads could be the three categories of the UNESCO heritage list, namely Cultural, Natural and Mixed. In addition, I also propose a speed thread in which landmarks live only 24:00 hours maximum. so no more insignificant island weeks. As after 24:00 hrs after posting, it dies automatically and the first one there can post a new one.

Any thoughts? With some support I would proceed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My primary thought is that it is better to have 1 ok landmark games then 4 landmark games where some people like some, and others don't like them.

This concentrates everyone's effort onto the same problem, making it a more active and interesting thread...the more people are collaborating together the more fun it is. If there were 3 or 4 of these threads in here tomorrow, I would probably stop participating.

With that said, I don't see anything wrong with retiring the old contest and modifying the rules for a new one...I just think that people should try to come to a moderate consensus first.

Personally, I don't have any problem with the present set of rules. I did mention that I think the most fair way to choose hints is to just have the hint-giver give hints whenever it is convenient for them, but I don't think that sort of thing needs to be mandated as a rule.

I think that 24 hours is way too short. This isn't the only thing to do on the internet, and if they got automatically killed in that very short period of time...it would just make it easier to say "nah..dont know it, I'll just wait for it to die" and pretty quickly nobody is even taking the contest seriously anymore.

However it does make sense to have a worst-case resolution strategy. Worst case: someone posts a picture that is impossible, then wanders off and never gives hints anymore. So it's my suggestion that there be designated hint-intervals. You must give a hint within the first 2 days, then 1 hint per day until completion. If you go 24 hrs without posting a hint, then your landmark is forfeited. This would keep the game from dying.
 
Last edited:
the problem is that more people left the game than were attracted. hey it's not a duty. If you don't like it you go, as did many. The trick of four games is to keep the people interested. And currently I'm not interested anymore either.
 
I personally like the totally random variety. If it's something I can't be bothered with (such as apparently anonymous landscapes) then I don't have to try that one.

It would however be helpful to establish a guideline that at least one hint every 24 hours or so would be useful when no-one is getting it.
 
then with any next insignificant island week you lose people
 
Andre said:
the problem is that more people left the game than were attracted. hey it's not a duty. If you don't like it you go, as did many. The trick of four games is to keep the people interested. An currently I'm not either.

note -- I just added a bunch of comments in an edit while you were replying.

The thing about this type of game is that it's not for everyone. This is a game of detective work, patience, and world knowledge. If you try to reduce the game to the lowest common denominator player, then you end up with a game that is no longer fun to the people who would take it seriously.

Perhaps there could be a a single separation between a "junior" version and an "expert" version. The junior version could have some additional rules to make it going at a fast pace, and the expert version would be basically like what we've already got...which caters more to the people who enjoy the challenge. Any more divisions than this, and it would really risk dividing the player-base too much.
 
well I tried and I pass

Have a good game
 

Similar threads

  • Sticky
Physics Forums Global Guidelines
Replies
2
Views
502K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top