Thank for sharing your thoughts and concerns about the recent announcement of the leader board for week 1+2 of BC 2.
Issues will be addressed individually.
One of the main topics seems to be a discrepancy between the DATA on experiencesâ analytics page and the data we share for the ranking of the BC, this is due to a couple of things:
1- We only take into account visits from players that have completed at least 1 quest. Some players sessions wonât be taken into account.
2- Our anti cheat filters comb out a lot of players and their play time sessions. These are bots and players we have detected, as well as cheaters in past events such as the Doctor Bomkus trials During BC1 this decreased playtime overall by 20%. This can have a great impact on your engagement score.
This might not explain the discrepancy for some cases. We will individually investigate the experiences showing the greatest discrepancies.
We manually logged 605 visits for the first 2 weeks for LAST STAND.
These results claim we had only 339.
Iâm told by TSB our dashboard results vary because of:
⢠TSB doesnât count the creators own visits (Iâm not playing my own game 300 times, this isnât it)
⢠TSB doesnât count visits from players who donât complete atleast one quest. (We have an auto quest to complete after a player joins, so not this one either)
⢠TSB doesnât count visits from players who have been flagged as fraudulent from previous events (Bomkus, BC1)
I guess that means that the majority of TSB players are all flagged as cheaters⌠(and they probably shouldnât be, but TSB wonât help them)
AND, LAST STAND was a new experience we launched for public day 1 of this builders challenge BUT it did not receive the ânew experienceâ booster. And apparently it wonât get that booster Iâm told from TSB because we had it privately published live to test it on a land. WHY? Because GM testing wont properly perform how the experience does on a land. Whose fault is that?
So when we get featured on TSB with creators like Tushay, Kravir and Sandja only cheaters come to ours? What are you trying to say? We do have auto quest just like everyone else. I did not create 600 accounts to play my games. Please.
Feel free to share the problems or concerns you are encountering on this Forum thread.
We have shared the ranking publicly on our Forum in order to make sure everyoneâs issues is addressed before reward distribution to make sure everyone gets what they have earned.
Reggae Golf ( -22,185) started late but if week 1 and 2 ended sunday july 7, then by analytics, i had at over 200 visits.
Im not ranked at all, but should be
âButton of Chanceâ is the name of the game in question⌠you can see the experience page here⌠https://bit.ly/ButtonOfChance
I have NEVER been banned, my data is screenshot daily and put into a spreadsheet to document this type of failure. My other games got on the list which did not perform to the level that âButton Of Chanceâ did.
I hope you (TSB data retriever and processor) can right this WRONG!!!
Edittted to also clarify, I have an auto quest at the very beginning that completes⌠so before some says no quest were completed⌠that thought is wrong.
Hi @PeaJay , thank you for posting theses results.
Weâre happy to see Funguy Frenzy in the top 3 games as we put a massive amount of effort, however the results look more like the results from only week 1 and not week 1 and 2.
Will we be receiving a breakdown of our stats like we did via email in BC1 so we can understand some discrepancies to help us plan?
Iâll add to this as i think the reason might be that somehow Iâm labelled on my profile as a brand, which im not. The game reggae golf has me labelled as a creator, so Iâm confused. From the rules,
it seems that brands dont qualify for builders challenge, so Iâm wondering if this is why i was iced?
@PeaJay can you confirm or clarify this? Will there be an update to this week 1 leaderboard or is that it?
The data is clearly inaccurate. On one of the days within week 1-2 Kamisawze and LukusIsRight brought an entourage of 20 pax including themselves to various experiences including mine, staying for almost half an hour. That is only on 1 day, and iâm pretty damn sure One Last Chance had, very conservatively, more than double that within week 1-2.
Also, I have a quest that automatically completes at the entrance, so saying that I clocked 27 pax in a 2 week span is highly inaccurate base on my own analytics page as well as the entourage visit.
I also have other experiences that are visited and quest clocked by an entourage of regular players that isnât accounted for, and yet experiences with less than 10 visits appear in the 126 places?
Can we have a better and clear understanding on the data with regards to player counts and visit. What exactly makes the cut and what does not. Making a multiplayer game is going to minimally need 2 accounts to confirm the working nature of the game play mode. That is just for an independent creator like me. Larger studios are going to need more employees accounts to work. Will they get banned?
Does running multiple play together sessions at a same location counted as ârepeat accountsâ? I am an educator and trainer that run events where the local community and newcomers usually play my experiences to learn how build in GameMaker. Obviously, I have a regular venue where my community come together to learn. Would that automatically disqualify me?
No creator in the right mind will be playing its own games for hundreds of times just for the sake of qualifying. Making dummy accounts just to artificially boost number is also scummy. I believe most of us as creators run events, host play togethers where we engage and give away rewards of our community. To just get answers without evidence is a bit disheartening⌠and why should it be only experiences showing the greatest discrepancies be investigated? I believe anyone who didnât qualify should be given a clear answer what and where went wrong so they can improve for future weeks.
Just as @TEMPESTstudios stated, unless most non-qualifying experience are full of fraudulent players then somewhere the data messed up. We are trying to be part of a community of builders because we love this platform.
PS: Wasnât the rule to have min 10 Unique visitor to qualify? How is it there are Experience that qualify with less that that?
Hello, I am AndrĂŠs RodrĂguez, CEO of Ashara Studios.
The data you are sharing about our experiences is extremely inaccurately measured. Around 30%-100% of the engagement is not being accounted for. The Tower of Myths experience is not contributing to the engagement.
The anti-cheating system you are using is not working. I had already reported through a ticket that all members of development teams who open two accounts, one for work and one personal, are getting banned. As a result, many players who share equipment, which is a reality in Latin America where our audience is, are not being considered. For example, we have done marketing campaigns with cyber cafes where many people play on the same computer, and this valid engagement is being eliminated with your current system.
We understand that you want to reinforce the anti-cheating system after the incredible irregularities of the studio that took 40% of the pool last season, but the problem needs to be addressed at its source, not by creating abusive systems that will end up hurting us all.
In the last AMA, it was said that experiences that were significantly updated would have the bonus of new experiences. Our experiences ToM: Olbeel Tavern and ToM: Colosseum were completely updated over 2 months, and now it turns out that they are not being considered as new experiences despite having completely new and different content.
This system was supposed to favor more creators earning SAND, disadvantaging all creators not in the top 3. Looking at the list of eligible experiences, only 126 of the 1000 experiences are being supported. The rewards are really too low for studios like ours that are professionally dedicated to working in The Sandbox, bringing not only incredible experiences but also constantly working to attract users to the ecosystem, even though we lost many players during the Love a Music Festival event due to your anti-cheating system. I invite you to reconsider the possibility of using unused rewards to improve the pool.
It is vital to explain the exact calculation of the scores since no formula matches the numbers presented here.
It is really concerning that after 3 weeks of the event and already having the experience of a Builder Challenge, these are the results delivered. For us as creators, it is a severe blow that all our work and investments to make this the most important metaverse are represented in these completely inaccurate data.
Thank you for sharing this information with us. I would like to go on record as also showing number of my visit for HUB - Slay the Hidden Dragon showing much more play time and users than listed on our analytics page and would be thankful if that can be reviewed.
@PeaJay Would appreciate some transparency on those cheater Reports/Flags, we got reduced 75% of the metrics on our Analytics page. Itâs a HUGE difference.
We stream everyday and we gather the players in the map everyday, we run an ambassador program, that every day a different streamer also gather players in the map. There is absolutely no way this data is correct.
Also, we were told that experiences that would have their gameplay revisited and had a major change, would have their âNew Gameâ booster reviewed.
Not only we changed the game from SP to MP Resource Management Game, we added more than 7 New features on top of the existing game.
Lastly want to end by stating again how broken the Boosters are (which a Poll was crated before the BC and itâs feedback was completely ignored):
Branded Assets are good for the Brands, not for the Creators - This should not have such a huge impact on the âYear of the Creatorsâ - Maximum a 5% Bonus would be OK. Otherwise put it as âYear of the Brandsâ as they get all the perks.
New Experiences get 50% boost: This clearly states that we should throw those old games in the garbage and just make new ones. Projects like us that have been pushing to be on the edge of Game Maker possibilities for 3 years now feel completely left out and our efforts meaningless for keeping our games up to date. If there is a booster for new games, there should also be a booster for old games, rewarding longevity.
Multiplayer Boosters: This booster is just misplaced as The Sandbox is nowhere capable of having MultiPlayer games due to the high lag.
Itâs very hard to thrive in The Sandbox ecosystem, despite working full time and all the efforts put into growing this space. Instead of getting better with time, itâs only getting worse.
