Revisiting the build contest rubric

[Teccam]

We've had three contests so far on the site, with more planned for the near future. A point of discussion that's come up in various channels since before the first contest even began was how builds should be scored. The current rubric, for reference, is as follows:

• Gameplay: 10 points
• Roleplay: 10 points
• Lore: 10 points
• Presentation: 10 points
• Community Vote: 10 points

Now, everyone looks for different things when they are judging a build, but obviously, there needs to be some universal rubric that we use to score. There's no way to judge that will keep everyone completely happy. But having said this, I've always felt that the current rubric does not favor gameplay prominently enough, and is too focused on what I will call "characterization" (i.e., lore and roleplay). To me, the gameplay of a build is bar none the most critical element. I could read a build with amazing innovative gameplay, and no roleplay at all, and I'd be a lot more likely to remember it and to want to play it for myself, compared to a build with uninteresting gameplay but exceptional characterization.

Again, I know I do not speak for everyone here. Some people may genuinely feel that characterization is worth twice as much as gameplay. But perhaps the majority disagrees. To that end, after discussion with Curse, we'd like to get some input from the community. Are you happy with the current rubric, or would you be interested in shaking things up? On the one hand, we have not had any major complaints about the judging or scoring so far. But on the other, it might make for an interesting change of pace to use a new rubric, and to force builders to adjust accordingly.

Here is a proposal I have:

• Gameplay: 20 points - This would cover the skill set, perk selection, gear/spells, etc., with a specific focus on combining the elements together in an interesting and/or innovate manner, consistent with the build's characterization/theme. Stuff like special moves, recommended mods, potions, shouts, etc. would all fall under this umbrella as well.
• Characterization: 20 points - This would cover roleplay, lore integtation, and backstory. I think combining the elements this way helps allow someone with a top notch concept to have a bit of wiggle room. e.g., if you have an ace roleplay concept and a killer character backstory, but have to make some lore assumptions to sell it effectively, you might not take quite as big of a hit. But to get the full 20/20, you need to work all the harder.
• Presentation: 10 points - This is a bit of a tough one for me. On the one hand, truly transcendant presentation can often be the difference between a decent build and an unforgettable build. But at the same time, I don't think presentation is really worth quite as much as gameplay or characterization. I'll touch a bit more on this shortly.
• Community: 10 points - No need to change this IMO, I think it's working well.

So with my proposal, we have a 60 point rubric, of which 33% is gameplay, 33% is characterization, and 33% is community/presentation. For reference, the current rubric is 20% gameplay, 40% characterization, and 40% presentation/community.

So, that's the proposal. There's no plan as of now to change the rubric. However, if the community tends to agree with my philosophy here, the admin team is open to making changes.

One other thing I'd like to address: It's hard to strike a balance between an "objective" rubric and "subjective" judging. To me, the rebric approach we're currently using tends to lean a bit too hard on the objective side. Obviously the way a judge will score each field is influenced by their subjective preferences (e.g., maybe I care more about nitpicky design and writing elements than another judge, and so I give a 7 where the other gives a 9). But I'm wondering whether there's a place for a bit more judge subjectivity, or if that would risk stirring the pot too much?

My original proposal also included a 10 point "judge's choice" bucket, where each judge could select up to three builds to "favor". Basically, this would allow a judge to add just a tad more opinion to the scoring. Say one judge really thinks gameplay is the be-all, end-all, and there's a build with an incredible gameplay concept, but virtually no characterization. Well, that judge could "favor" this build, and give it just a small edge over other builds that receive similar scores. I realize this could open a can of worms, as we've seen in contests run on other communities. Which is why I left it out of the rubric.

A simpler way to let judge subjectivity come into play would be to let the judges vote on the winner in the event of a tie, rather than letting the "Likes" make the decision.

So what do you all think? I'd love to get some comments on both my new rubric proposal, along with the idea of giving judges a tad more subjective control. And if you have any other ideas for tweaking the rubric for future contests, feel free to voice those here as well. Again, there are no plans to change the rubric as of now, but with three contests come and gone, it seemed like a good time to test the waters and hear some fresh input from the community.

[Telby]

Gameplay certainly should be important but in a game like Skyrim, gameplay is highly subjective. The current rubric I think forced you to hit all the aspects that someone may find important when considering whether or not to play a build. For me, gameplay is second or third on importance. World integration and presentation are more important to me and I think the current rubric finds a middle ground between you and someone like me. Personally, I'd like to see the community have more of an impact on the score because a build's purpose is to be played by people who like it enough. I wouldn't mind an edit to make gameplay worth more but grouping 3 categories into the same point worth as 1 category seems clunky and a bit random to me. 

Hope this adds something to the discussion. More opinions will create better and fairer contests :)

Also Ponty makes a good point when bringing up different contests and the consideration of how mods affect a build.

[Dr. Long-Chapper]

I didn't dislike the original rubric and I don't dislike this one either. I understand why people want that wiggle room. I DO like that judges can have a bit more subjectivity. It takes into account a building philosophy like mine versus another judge's. One is not better than the other, just different and competators would benefit from that, especially if judges for contests are selected to represent a wide variety of building backgrounds. If all three judges have the same philosophy, then you can have problems.  

For me, building is a very integrated process. Gameplay, IMHO, CANNOT function well without roleplay or without lore (there, I said the dirty, nasty word), LORE, LORE, LORE (lol), because to me, when I think of building, I think about creating a character that can exist within the Elder Scrolls universe. For me, that is the utmost importance, whether the build is modded or not. All three concepts directly serve each other to create a character that you can totally imagine in the world being either an endgame boss or a fulfillment of a particular vision of the Dragonborn, or a representative of a character you can encounter, or tell a story within the game you want to experience.  Others may disagree with me, and that's fine, but builds that only focus on one aspect, IMO, are lacking in something, even though they may be some of the most successful builds of the past. I think building has evolved and just focusing on one thing isn't going to cut it anymore. 

Notice I didn't mention presentation. Presentation serves the above three ideas. Presenation contributes to the mood of the build and can visually enhance your concept, but you can strip all the pictures away, all the flashy images and the build must still have substance. It must still be good. I have excellent artwork for many builds stored in files, but the concepts are not fine-tuned, so they will sit there. 

The most important thing, for me, is that I see that effort was put into the build, that it is not a lazy effort. That there was thought process, that there was dedication. That you took the time to look up mechanics, lore, roleplay, etc. Take pride in the work that you do and have your work represent your best "you". I am most put off by builds that do not demonstrate that investment, because I cannot imagine myself putting something out there like that. Winning is immaterial, what I desire most is that my best is represented when I choose to post something.