Introducing Delicious-Fruit.com!

[tehjman1993]

Just a friendly reminder - we do not accept inappropriate names on the site. Unfortunately I need to remind everyone that if you are trying to be offensive, you will be banned. We've had a few problems here and there with some "new" members posting troll reviews and creating inappropriate account names.

Also a reminder to report any review/account that is purposely being offensive, trolling, or otherwise not using the site for its intended use. We look into every report, and helps us review situations and take action in a short amount of time.

Thanks,
TJ&Klazen

[infern0man1]

Small little thing that is most likely unimportant:

[tehjman1993]

Hello everyone,

I just wanted to announce a few things that some of the more active members on delicious-fruit have been asking about. I'll give you our opinion/decisions topic-by-topic:

Regarding reviews of your own game

You are allowed to review your own game. We had many reports come in on multiple game makers stating that "they shouldn't review their own game." At delicious-fruit, we are not willing to ban anyone from reviewing any game, unless they have explicitly broken the Terms of Service (harassment is an example). In fact, game makers are typically harsher towards their own games than the majority of the community, with a few exceptions! All in all, game makers should not feel afraid to review their own game. Any report against that individual will not yield any consequences. For those that report game makers: please do not report them. You may not agree with it, but this is how we wish to run the site.

Exceedingly high/low reviews of certain games

There have been a number of reports towards individuals that have rated games as low as 0.5 and as high as a perfect 10, stating that it "must be" a troll review. Once again, similar to the previous topic, this is something that you may not agree with. However, these individuals that rate extremely high/low may have good reason to do so. Even if they do not have a good reason to do so, they are allowed to cast their vote any way they wish. This is not violating the ToS in any manner. We only intervene in these reviews if they personally attack others.

Compare it to this: You eat at a restaurant, and the food was absolutely terrible. The service was terrible. The atmosphere was atrocious. You are so offended, that you decide to head to a popular review site (such as Yelp) to review this restaurant as "0/5, wouldn't go there if it was the last place on Earth." But just the other day, another individual sat in the same spot you just did and ate a wonderful meal, had a great waiter/waitress, and enjoyed a lovely atmosphere. That individual liked it so much, they felt compelled to give the restaurant a "perfect 5/5, I love this place!" on the same review site. Looking at these two reviews, you would think these two guys/gals ate at completely different establishments! But they didn't, and it happens all the time. This is no different towards fangames, and we wish to embrace this.

Purposely boosting ratings

This ties in closely with the topic just covered, and I received a few complaints regarding certain individuals "boosting" games that they like/made. This is an extremely gray area for moderation, and we have decided that we are not taking action against those that are "suspicious" in boosting ratings (or, in the opposite effect, tanking a rating). Reading this, the average viewer may say "well I'm never using this site again, then!" These rating "boosters" are impossible to confirm as actually boosting (or tanking) anything. We, nor you, can completely determine if someone is purposely giving a game an extremely high/low rating to move it along our average ratings list.

Still worried? Don't be! The power of statistics saves this quite well. Let's take an example:
I make a game called F A T T E R B I R D S, and I give it a 10/10 stating that "it's the best bird game you will ever play."
Now my game is at the top of the review list! My evil plan is working!
But now Klazen comes in and says "I played through this game, and I didn't really like the visuals or any of stage 2 and 3. I'll give it a 5/10."
Uh-oh. Now my game is at a 7.5/10, and plummeted down the rating list. But it's still pretty high above what the "average" community member thinks about the game, right? Wrong.
A 3rd person comes in, World, and he says "I really did not like this game, but music = G O O D, so I give 4/10."
Now my average is a 6.3/10! This is already now much closer to the "majority" of opinions about my game, even though only 2 others have voted so far!
A 4th and 5th person come in and give the game a 5.5/10 and 6/10, respectively. Now the average is 6.1/10, and is incredibly accurate to the majority of voters.

What happens now? Well, my plan had failed. My 10/10 score has done next to nothing to the rating, and the majority will always prevail, no matter what. This is the very basics of statistical averages, and is in full-swing on delicious-fruit. If you truly disagree with someone giving a game a 0/10 or 10/10, you can accurately rate the game yourself to start balancing out the score. Even after 5 reviews, the average will be very close to the "overall" average that the community sees fit. This is just how reviews work! (Note: 5 reviews, on a larger scale, is extremely small. For a community of our size, 5 is sufficient. It is much better to take 15-20 reviews' averages before finding a 'true average' of something.)

Let me know if anyone has any questions about anything I have clarified here. Nothing has been changed, nothing has been updated. We are still the same review site that we have always been.

Thank you,
TJ&Klazen

[Kyir]

I think this is the most reasonable policy you could have given the situation.

[JGBMaster]

As you may have noticed, there are 2 games called I Wanna be the 2.5625 and I wanna be the Extra Jump that have been added recently in Delicious Fruit and they're both impossible (I'm not saying the jumps mentioned are impossible, but they aren't built in the correct way to make them possible in the game).

I had thought of giving them a proper rating but I've realized there's no point in giving them a 100/100 difficulty rating since other people have rated them around 80-90/100 in difficulty and the games won't have a 100/100 difficulty (which is the difficulty rating they MUST have since they're impossible) after I (and people who would also rate it 100/100 in difficulty) post my reviews.

Players who are trying to look for some hard challenge and find games like this will waste hours on a game that is basically impossible and I'm sure they will be really mad when they realize the game is actually impossible and they will shit on the site because the difficulty rating says it isn't impossible when it is.

So, here's what I'd do to prevent this from happening: delete all the impossible games. There's no point in having impossible games in a site made for people who want to have fun playing these games. This way we will also prevent wrong ratings (there's a guy complaining about the 2 corners on I Wanna be the Extra Jump when they don't change anything in difficulty) and dumb ratings in general (mainly from people known as "happil 2 kids" or from just dumb people). I wouldn't delete games like LoveTrap, I Wanna break the Sky Needle, I Wanna challenge the Needle Fight, etc., though, since the impossible parts are in the extra part (which are obviously not required to beat the games).

Also, talking about ratings. People in general will most likely read the rating from a "big guy" first, ignoring the other ones when the "big guy's" rating might be wrong or not appropiate (I won't say names but it's not the first time that this happens). I know there's a "Like this review" button to make a rating more trustworthy, but I suggest adding a "Dislike this review" button since there are lots of reviews which aren't really reviews and most of them are posted by people who clearly have no idea about the game or they haven't beaten or even played the game in some cases.

[Derf]

I don't think impossible games should be deleted but I do think that there should a difficulty setting that overrides the numerical value and simply says "Impossible". Or an optional disclaimer box that sits above reviews and lists things such as impossible jumps.

I'm kinda down for the dislike this review feature but I also feel like it might be abused somewhat. If there's one thing I've observed about the community at large it's that a large majority of people don't care enough to have their own opinions. There are always and have always been right from the early days, people who gain a following or a notoriety and then dictate opinions to the people who follow them. It's not exclusive to fangames of course. But yeah, I've seen people write some of the most ill-informed and contrived "reviews" lately. It's often a pretty transparent attempt to self-satisfy some calling in them where they want to be viewed as "discerning", but they just come across as if they're slamming games for no reason/in some cases bare-faced lying about features of the game to support their critical analysis. It works the other way too, people putting on rose-tinted glasses for critically acclaimed fangames + fangames their friends made is another issue. But honestly, I just feel like it's always going to happen. And it's more the responsibility of the person to look at the review and realise which ones are myopic and more for entertainment purposes than for the benefit of other people. People will always be their to defend themselves with the impenetrable shield of "but it's subjective, so I can say what I want" without realising that that doesn't mean other people have to take their words seriously or that their criticisms are themselves free from criticism.

[tehjman1993]

As you may have noticed, there are 2 games called I Wanna be the 2.5625 and I wanna be the Extra Jump that have been added recently in Delicious Fruit and they're both impossible (I'm not saying the jumps mentioned are impossible, but they aren't built in the correct way to make them possible in the game).

I had thought of giving them a proper rating but I've realized there's no point in giving them a 100/100 difficulty rating since other people have rated them around 80-90/100 in difficulty and the games won't have a 100/100 difficulty (which is the difficulty rating they MUST have since they're impossible) after I (and people who would also rate it 100/100 in difficulty) post my reviews.

Players who are trying to look for some hard challenge and find games like this will waste hours on a game that is basically impossible and I'm sure they will be really mad when they realize the game is actually impossible and they will shit on the site because the difficulty rating says it isn't impossible when it is.

So, here's what I'd do to prevent this from happening: delete all the impossible games. There's no point in having impossible games in a site made for people who want to have fun playing these games. This way we will also prevent wrong ratings (there's a guy complaining about the 2 corners on I Wanna be the Extra Jump when they don't change anything in difficulty) and dumb ratings in general (mainly from people known as "happil 2 kids" or from just dumb people). I wouldn't delete games like LoveTrap, I Wanna break the Sky Needle, I Wanna challenge the Needle Fight, etc., though, since the impossible parts are in the extra part (which are obviously not required to beat the games).

Also, talking about ratings. People in general will most likely read the rating from a "big guy" first, ignoring the other ones when the "big guy's" rating might be wrong or not appropiate (I won't say names but it's not the first time that this happens). I know there's a "Like this review" button to make a rating more trustworthy, but I suggest adding a "Dislike this review" button since there are lots of reviews which aren't really reviews and most of them are posted by people who clearly have no idea about the game or they haven't beaten or even played the game in some cases.

Hi JGB,

Klazen and I looked into your suggestion this morning, and we've come up with a solution of how we want to handle this.

Regarding literally IMPOSSIBLE games:

-We are not removing impossible games from the site.
-We are adding a special tag feature, "impossible", to the site. This tag is different colored than the rest.

Impossible games happen from time to time, but they still are games in some way. Because of this, we are not removing them from the site entirely. However, if you are 100% certain a game is impossible, here's what you can do:

-Give the game a 100/100 difficulty rating
-State why it is impossible in your review
-Add the 'impossible' tag to your review

These 3 simple things will help mark the game as impossible for the general community. Concern was raised about "well if someone rates the game 50/100, now the rating will never be 100/100." This is true, however, the average rating isn't necessarily the best one. Although this sounds contradictory to my previous posts, reading individual reviews is a great way to judge a game's content. If I look at this game and 2 out of 3 reviews say it is impossible despite its 90/100 difficulty average, I believe it is safe to assume the game is indeed impossible. The average rating is a good measure, but not perfect. We are not willing to remove the game unless it is by creator request, or for some other unforeseen circumstance.

Please note: Abusing this special "impossible" tag on games that are not impossible (example: Dark Blue) will result in a warning, then subsequently bans and restricted access to reviewing. We are taking this tag seriously.

Regarding a dislike feature:

We will never have a feature that berates someone's opinion. An unpopular opinion, even if it is 100% factual, will be disliked into oblivion. There's a reason Facebook has no dislike feature - to prevent bullying/ganging up on one individual who is not friends with the "popular" community. We do not want our users feeling afraid to post their honest thoughts on a game, so no dislike feature will be added, at any point.

Let me know if you have any questions regarding these decisions! Thanks!
-TJ&Klazen

[JGBMaster]

I'm happy with the decisions. And I understand why you don't wanna add a dislike feature, I was kinda mad only thinking about shit reviews.

Thanks TJ and Klazen! ( •ᴗ•)

[tehjman1993]

I'm happy with the decisions. And I understand why you don't wanna add a dislike feature, I was kinda mad only thinking about shit reviews.

Thanks TJ and Klazen! ( •ᴗ•)

You're very welcome! We're always looking for ways to improve the site, whether it's a policy change or a new feature! We appreciate all the feedback we've gotten, and hope the community continues to help us improve delicious-fruit!

[tehjman1993]

Hey everyone! Fresh update for you all!

Delicious-Fruit is now proud to host our monthly "Wannabe of the Month" spotlight! Every month, a randomly selected actively-streaming Wannabe will be given the spotlight for the whole month on the front page of Delicious-Fruit! The site will post a quick bio about you, your stream, and when you are live (real-time updating)! We will always try to ask permission beforehand if you are selected but do not want to be featured, of course.

This will hopefully help newer viewers/community members find some of the best © The Wannabes™® have to offer!

For the month of September, we are happy to announce that Sunbla is our featured Wannabe of the Month! Congratulations, Sun!

As always, we look for feedback about our site. If you think anything needs fixing, tell us! If you have any questions, comments, or even a suggestion for a future event, let us know in this thread!

Thanks,
TJ&Klazen

Stay fresh!

[lawatson]

The concept of this worries me. It has good intention, but to be honest, as of right now it just sounds like a slightly bigger version of a twitch host. It seems that a similar effect could come from just hosting someone through the fangame marathon channel. Plus, many people already knew about and watched sunbla beforehand, so I would simply like to know if your picks will range to the streamers with less viewers, such as Iginlaj and JGBMaster. Another thing I'd like to know is how well you think the concept will turn out. Most people come to delicious fruit just for the games and the reviews. To be honest, I can imagine that some people will come to the site and completely overlook this feature. I don't mean to make a big assumption, but it is a possible problem, even if occurring on a small scale. I would like to know how you feel about these problems and if you are thinking of a good way to fix them up a bit. I hope to see a more helpful and more practical idea in the future.

[klazen108]

The concept of this worries me. It has good intention, but to be honest, as of right now it just sounds like a slightly bigger version of a twitch host. It seems that a similar effect could come from just hosting someone through the fangame marathon channel.

The main reason that prompted this is because I got tired of looking at the FGM announcement on delfruit's home page for the past 4 months This isn't some brand new concept that we think will revolutionize the way you think about Hosts™ forever, it's just a fun little idea that we figured could give the news section some fresh content while taking a moment to show off the team members. 

Plus, many people already knew about and watched sunbla beforehand, so I would simply like to know if your picks will range to the streamers with less viewers, such as Iginlaj and JGBMaster.

There's not really a requirement to be picked, but right now we're prioritizing Wannabe team members. There's no official system or bureaucracy that decides how you get picked, we're just starting off easy and we'll work it out as we go along. Sunbla was kind enough to agree to be a sort of pilot test to try out the system, and we're thankful for that!

Another thing I'd like to know is how well you think the concept will turn out. Most people come to delicious fruit just for the games and the reviews. To be honest, I can imagine that some people will come to the site and completely overlook this feature. I don't mean to make a big assumption, but it is a possible problem, even if occurring on a small scale. I would like to know how you feel about these problems and if you are thinking of a good way to fix them up a bit.

Again, I'm not trying to make a big impact here, ya know? If not even one extra viewer shows up due to the spotlight, then was anything lost? The answer is no. Heck, as an example of the value this adds besides directing viewers to the stream, we included Sun & Zero's recommended fangame list, something that maybe not everyone is familiar with. I think that fits pretty dang well with the theme of delfruit. For future Wannabes we may show off some funny highlights, talk about games they've created, show off personal achievements, you name it.

I hope to see a more helpful and more practical idea in the future.

Sorry man, maybe next time.

[lawatson]

Alright, I see. Make sure to make the best of it!

[JGBMaster]

I agree with Lawatson. I'm sure people in this community already know players like Sunbla, Denferok, etc., but I think I'm ok with it as long as the channels (from The Wannabes Twitch team) are randomly selected.

Ok, and here goes my suggestion. I think the highlighted channel should be changed weekly, so we can give more oportunities to other streamers and make new people be better known. Also, there are lots of channels on our team and only 12 of them will be spotlighted every year, which, in my opinion, is kinda unfair.

By the way, should someone make a forum poll to decide if it should be monthly or weekly?

[lawatson]

I think weekly should be fine. It allows for faster coverage of all the users while still giving them a large amount of time in the spotlight.