Thread Rating:

buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
May 5th, 2012 at 8:54:04 PM permalink
Dan Lubin " I have a very strong sense of decency, and it is also represented in my very plain-speaking, truthful, and honest opinions. "

Then state opinion and not wrap them as facts.

" " ALL the other independent developers felt burned because the SHFL games all had positive scores, "inflicting" a very heavy curve on the results in some people's eyes."

ALL does not include me or DJteddybear. Why is that so hard for you to understand ???
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
May 5th, 2012 at 9:13:14 PM permalink
Aw, geez, Charles, this is a useless pissing match.

1. For the record, people were stunned and surprised at the results of the voting; even the winners were very surprised (and pleased).

2. Having a legend and a leader in the industry pitch some of the games had an effect; it could not...not have an effect. It applied a curve to the results, and it's now known for the next go around.

3. I was four feet from DJTeddybear during the vote tally, and three feet from Gary. He was stunned - flummoxed - by the results, - as and when they were posted. So were you, Charles, at the time. I stress: "at the time." the fact that you are now fine with things now is great, really. But you were not there horraying, "Yesss! I got a minus xxx% score! - near the bottom of the pack! YESSSS!!" Trust me, you were not. This is like saying in Blackjack, "Yes!!! I got a 15 against a dealer's ACE - AND he flip over a blackjack! YESSS!" This did not happen. The fact that it's no big now is fine.

I am happy that most bounced back very quickly indeed, and that it was a learning experience for ALL involved. Yes, a learning experience for ALL.
The fact that we are all past the stun of the results, and are accepting and happy with it in hindsight does not change the impact of the vote tally at the time.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
May 5th, 2012 at 9:37:21 PM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, Buzz, as a matter of fact I do. I stood in the front of the room so that I could see people's reaction. People were stunned and perplexed, dumbfounded. I looked at you too, Buzz. You were frozen.
...
Buzz, I stood in the front of the room gauging people's reaction. You were near the back, close to the table where Mike demo-ed his Mulligan Poker game. You looked frozen and stunned. I felt bad for all.
...
I described the reactions of everybody in the room, including you. At that time, you were indeed surprised, stunned, and saddened, as were just about everyone...


Dan, for the record, I didn't discern a meaningful shift in Buzz's demeanor from the night prior. You don't really know him that well, and I'd guess he's the sort who prefers to stand back and quietly observe. There's nothing wrong with that, but don't confuse that demeanor with stunned surprise. It's sort of bizarre that you keep insisting you're right and he's wrong about how he was feeling.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
May 5th, 2012 at 9:51:05 PM permalink
" ALL the other independent developers felt burned because the SHFL games all had positive scores,"

That was the farthest thing from my mind, Mr Lubn.

Or should I use your childhood name " Eddie Haskell "
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7236
May 5th, 2012 at 9:56:57 PM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan


2. Having a legend and a leader in the industry pitch some of the games had an effect; it could not...not have an effect. It applied a curve to the results, and it's now known for the next go around.



I've been thinking about the effect of the "curve" in this case. I think it might be more apt to say that Roger broke the curve (hey, someone's gotta be "that guy"...). It seems to me that just being in a position to make it into this room said a lot about these games and their quality. It also seems to me like this wasn't a scoring system that suffered from an inflationary effect. Keeping with the curved test analogy, this is the ass-kicking undergrad advanced math test where a 30% is still a B.

Normally, a big part of the problem coding responses from a focus group is adjusting for the wishy-washy human nature of the respondents. On a 10 point scale, most people heavily center on 5-8. Things are "OK" or "good" but never "poor" or "great". The difference between an average score of 7 and an average score of 7.5 is a HUGE swing, and the art of analyzing the data is to re-scale the responses to blow out the spread between those responses. I'm sure it's proprietary, but as a survey research geek, I'd be pretty interested to see the scoring metrics and question wordings from this event. Seems like SHFL did a good job at getting a spread across entrants, which I assume means that some form of forced ranking was used.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
ceb
ceb
Joined: Apr 24, 2011
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 13
May 6th, 2012 at 7:58:51 AM permalink
Alright, it's been four days since the event. Can we please move the complaints to the "Gripes" forum and off of here or at least back onto the original focus group thread. This thread is supposed to be about the second focus group on June 12.

With that in mind, is there anything that game developers/presenters from the first focus group learned that could be shared with the second focus group, other future focus groups, or just inventors/game developers in general. This entire forum is designed to assist each other.

For instance, were there problems with:

1 - the ease or difficulty of the game? (Did it take too long to learn; would it scare away the average, nonsophisticated gambler; did it take too long to play each hand; did game developers remember to keep the games simple, etc.)
2 - the math behind the game? (too large or too small of a house edge)
3 - the fun of the game? (were the games fun to play or did they seem boring and draggin on?)
4 - the hit frequency for the players? (did people win at the games or did it end up being a lot of losses for the players sampling the game?)
5 - the name of the game? (anyone question the names? Was this discussed at all or was it just focused on the play of the game, house edge, fun factor, etc.?)
6 - too many side bets?
7 - the difficulty for a dealer to deal and handle the game? (essentially, would a dealer like to deal your game?)
8 - the layout of the game? (any comments on this issue?)
9 - anything else?

Was there a common problem among all of the new games?

I like the idea of only a handful of games at one focus group. Trying to learn too many games would be very difficult for anyone. I also like the idea that the people who are testing each game MUST PLAY the game for 20 minutes each. I was concerned after reading the other posts from the first focus group that many of the judges simply walked away and never played or, at least, only played for a shortened time frame. Perhaps a delayed payment to the judges until after they perform their duties at the focus group (playing the games and providing feedback) would help them evaluate each game better and give greater feedback to the inventor.

WITHOUT CONDEMING the judges from the first focus group, what else could they have done to ensure that they are not wore out from the overwhelming number of games and still make an honest and accurate assessment of each game, and make sure that they give the game developer the courtesy of getting involved with and playing the game so that they understand the ins and outs of the game PRIOR to critiquing it?

Did anyone have a problem with the signed waivers before presenting at the first focus group? As I understand it, the attendees sign waivers - there are no Non-Disclosure Agreements. How did everyone feel about that?

Also, what is meant by emergency math for those that need it for the second focus group? I have all of my numbers except a couple. (I think I am right on them - I know I am close on them - but I think I need a couple checked out for sure) However, to get the emergency math offered by Roger in this post would require me to disclose my game prior to the event in order to get that. Anyone have any ideas on this issue?

No COMPLAINERS need reply. I am looking at moving my game forward and the incessant complaints distract from what is otherwise a very valuable forum, thread post, and event by Shuffle Master.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
May 6th, 2012 at 8:17:31 AM permalink
Gripes are over and done with.

I think the the second event should be very fine, if not exemplary.

The first go-around was a learning experience, - a field trial; in fact a very nobel experiment, and kind offering, that simply had its growing pains. We're all past it. Wounds have been licked, adjustments made, and notes taken on it. This may be a case where the internal industry had moved faster than residual forum griping and boxing. A lot was learned. It's already been moved onwards from there. It's been four days, and the net is behind the curve on this as to the real deal, - kinda like a facebook IPO. Been over.

If anyone can make perfect a game or a presentation from the result of a field trial, it's SHFL.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
May 6th, 2012 at 8:29:45 AM permalink
" With that in mind, is there anything that game developers/presenters from the first focus group learned that could be shared with the second focus group or other future focus groups. This entire forum is designed to assist each other. "

Well said, sir. Heading to church now. Will hopefully post my experience at both the dinner and focus group later today.
Had my presentation been videod, it would have made an excellent Uube presentation on how not to do a presentation.
As for the gripes I sometimes forget Dan suffers from Barney Fife syndrome. LOL
AceCrAAckers
AceCrAAckers
Joined: Jul 12, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 377
May 6th, 2012 at 9:00:52 AM permalink
To all forum members.

Stay focus!!! Paigowdan has made great suggestions to improve the next focus group. Pacman has listened. I believe 14 new game is way too much to handle in that short of a time. (He even took one of his game out.) Too much for the judges to digest all at once. This format is way better!

Let us all be civil in this tread. There is a gripe thread you can start if you want to air some dirty laundry but let's not do it here.

As for the scoring, can you start so that all member starts with 120 points so that no one ends with a negative number. My score was 10 sounds a lot less worse than I scored -110.

Pacman, I knew that you would have more than 10 game developers wanting to show of their gamse and by accomidating it backfired. This format should be much better. It is not first come first serve so you guys have time to submit what you want to show. Good luck to all.
Edward Snowden is not the criminal, the government is for violating the constitution!
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
May 6th, 2012 at 12:06:03 PM permalink
My own under-over line on me was -80. And I would have bet on the over LOL

  • Jump to: