Login / Register  0 items | $0.00 NewWhat is KVR? Submit News Advertise
Dominus
KVRAF
 
1949 posts since 15 Sep, 2003, from Land of Crazies, USA

Postby Dominus; Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:13 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

AXP wrote:5. About the contest timeframe. I wholeheartedly agree that more regular and predictable contests would be great. Also, I think that it would be interesting to have (a choice of) specific goals for each challenge in order to prevent devs from spending a year or two on their entry. If anybody is curious, for this and the previous DC, it took me 2 months to develop a plugin, the plan that I tried to follow was 1 month for coming up with an idea, doing the research and coding the DSP part and another month for UI, integration and testing. This year I slipped with the DSP part and had only about 10 days for UI and the rest. It was fun, but unhealthy! :)


9. Overall, I think that they barely get enough submissions to keep the DC alive, so they're not in a position to make the rules more strict without also taking some steps to increase the interest of developers as well as the voting crowd.


I do think they kinda half-assed it this year. I really think they should have moved the discussion forum to the top of the forum list. (Just below the "getting started one" was my suggestion.)

I think there was a good crop of developers and plugins in total though. In fact, I was completely shocked. I wasn't expecting much based on the lack of time and enthusiasm they showed in promoting it, but I did find a good 7 or 8 that I wanted to award points to, and had to limit myself to 5.
Remember the iLokalypse Summer 2013

Samples and presets and free stuff!
User avatar
BeatMaker_xyz
KVRist
 
33 posts since 2 Dec, 2016, from Palma de Mallorca

Postby BeatMaker_xyz; Mon Dec 19, 2016 8:23 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

I have published a news update today, 19th at 17:20 Spanish time and it leaves yesterday. I hope no one thinks I've violated the rules :? :?

"BeatMaker updates RVK-808 to v1.1
18th December 2016"
lkjb
KVRist
 
102 posts since 13 Oct, 2012

Postby lkjb; Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:30 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

While you might have a valid point with your 3rd point (not that I care since the entry probably won't win and even if it did, it could be disqualified after the voting has ended) your other points are ridiculous.

On a general note, what signal do you think sends this kind of rant we have here to KVR and the developers? The DC is something KVR as well as developers work hard for to present users with free software. But instead of some gratitude to the developers and Ben from KVR who takes the time to organise the DCs we get demands and complaints about technicalities.
Compyfox
KVRAF
 
14142 posts since 18 Oct, 2003, from Berlin, Germany

Postby Compyfox; Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:46 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

So... according to the KVR News, the winners have been announced - and I already read "negative comments" towards the top spot. Like "only FX is allowed to win" and "It's a sad day when a plugin that doesn't make or effect sound wins".

Personally I'd have loved to see the Youlean Loudness Meter in the top3 spots, but I did not expect this to win (yes, other stuff was just as creative and IMO even a tad better - not to mention working right out of the box without bugs). Still - the feedback is a bit unfair considering what this plugin actually "offers" compared to what's already "out there" (it does give commercial products a run for it's money - and according to the dev, it's still at the "first stages").

Either way:
https://www.kvraudio.com/news/kvr-devel ... r-is-35781



What I kind of miss in this case, is indeed a "listing" of how all other participants performed (that happened last time with DC'2009). I especially want to know how the Standalone Tools and the "Apps" fared. Synth wise, yes... it's sad to not even see them listed. From what I've read (and heard - wasn't my focus this year), definitely some cool stuff in the pool.


So yeah.. .definitely a lot of catching-up to do in this case.

And I still didn't read anything else about the rule violation. Neither did I get an answer by Ben. So it has to be assumed that this "behavior is absolutely okay".




lkjb wrote:On a general note, what signal do you think sends this kind of rant we have here to KVR and the developers? The DC is something KVR as well as developers work hard for to present users with free software. But instead of some gratitude to the developers and Ben from KVR who takes the time to organise the DCs we get demands and complaints about technicalities.


I'm having a deja vu as "Mix Challenge" host/CTO (gratitude and all that)... but okay. Also, case of TL;DR (we're still beating the dead horse on point 1 and 2, aren't we?!)


Still - what signal do you think this sends towards developers (freeware, indie, professionals) that work their rear end off to get something creative done in time and out the door, while other developers can be like "meh, we just create a run down version join and maybe steal the winning spot" or "hey, we're a magazine/high-end company - we don't need this - but hey, we win anyway... do we pass on our won license? Sure... might place 4 and up benefit from it? Only the winners podium will, so nope...".

I think it's important to talk about all this in some form or another.

And after what I've read so far "feedback wise" (more like criticism and annoyance) after the Winner announcement, I think the course of the Developer Challenge might change. Into which direction, I don't know yet... but I am fairly sure that "frustration" will be a huge topic in the following days...
[ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ] | [ Mix Challenge ] | [ Video Project (in the making) ]
DSmolken
KVRian
 
1196 posts since 20 Sep, 2013, from Poland

Postby DSmolken; Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:31 pm Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

Compyfox wrote:Still - what signal do you think this sends towards developers (freeware, indie, professionals) that work their rear end off to get something creative done in time and out the door, while other developers can be like "meh, we just create a run down version join and maybe steal the winning spot" or "hey, we're a magazine/high-end company - we don't need this - but hey, we win anyway... do we pass on our won license? Sure... might place 4 and up benefit from it? Only the winners podium will, so nope...".

I think it's important to talk about all this in some form or another.

Importnat to you, not important to me.

More important: top 3 are once again all effects. Maybe there should be an instrument category, in addition to soundware, so the most popular instrument would at least get 10% or something.
Compyfox
KVRAF
 
14142 posts since 18 Oct, 2003, from Berlin, Germany

Postby Compyfox; Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:34 pm Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

This brings us back to the prize distribution criticism...
[ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ] | [ Mix Challenge ] | [ Video Project (in the making) ]
DSmolken
KVRian
 
1196 posts since 20 Sep, 2013, from Poland

Postby DSmolken; Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:41 pm Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

Yeah. A Reaktor synth being in the winners' circle as soundware and synth plugins not being represented, when last time there was a Kontakt synth as soundware and no plugin synths. That might be something that could be improved.

IMO synth plugins deserve some love, too, even if they're not as universally useful to as many people as a meter, delay, or chorus.
Compyfox
KVRAF
 
14142 posts since 18 Oct, 2003, from Berlin, Germany

Postby Compyfox; Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:23 pm Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

I think, with the popularity of the Developer Challenge, there should be categories at this point (and a better sorting of tools).


Like:
- top three soundware (can be Reaktor, samples, preset - although Reaktor does sound as "Synth" or "FX")
- top three synths
- top three Effects
- top three "other" (anyOS, iOS, Android, etc)

Especially the latter needs so much more encouragement, considering the mobile market is growing more and more.


Yes, you might already be saying "but how should the prizes be distributed?!" - evenly or at least like this:
30% - top synth
30% - top Effect
20% - top soundware (can be Reaktor, samples, preset - although Reaktor does sound as "Synth" or "FX")
20% - top "other" (anyOS, iOS, Android, etc)

So if we have a financial buffer of like 1200USD, this will be split into:
360USD- top synth
360USD- top Effect
240USD - top soundware (can be Reaktor, samples, preset - although Reaktor does sound as "Synth" or "FX")
240USD - top "other" (anyOS, iOS, Android, etc)

Second and third place will be left out I'm afraid, but hey... there are license donations!



"But we need more sponsors to cover that"...

Yes, there would be more needed, or a more evened out distribution rather than ultimately "one gets all". In case of the JUCE licenses, the top Synth, FX and AnyOS developers (read: #1 winner) could pick it up (three licenses were addressed this year, so maybe continue that) - I don't think the Soundware section would have a problem with that.

Everything else available is up for debate.


"but what about NAMM prices?! Or 'one-of' deals like the speakers?!"
Do a Second Round - and from these top 12 people of the 4 categories, 2 of them make it to NAMM. And the person with the most votes gets the "one-of" deal as well. So the combination for the NAMM Presentation could be FX and FX, Synth and FX, Synth and Soundware, etc. Granted, the booth will be smaller - but hey... we want to encourage creativity, no?



"But this is so much more work, this eats up too much time"
That is correct - but it would make things a tad more fair. Of course you can still "rig" the system if you use your social media and/or mailing lists and say "sign up to KVR, vote for us". But if we'd change the rules to this system, it would cause less frustration as there is a balanced pool of winners. So even newbies in this field would benefit, even if it would only be in a small way.




I really, really, really hope Ben is reading along, and we might see a major(!) overhaul for future Developer Challenges. I think with the feedback so far, it's long overdue as well.
[ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ] | [ Mix Challenge ] | [ Video Project (in the making) ]
SadKo
KVRer
 
9 posts since 22 Sep, 2016

Postby SadKo; Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:24 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

I think the most important thing for the Developers Challenge should done is publishing statistics of the voting, at least this:
1. The total amount of points that got each item.
2. The average amount of points (summary points got / total voted for item) for each item.
3. The overall percentage of votes for each item (summary points got / total voted for all items).
ghettosynth
KVRAF
 
9258 posts since 13 Oct, 2009

Postby ghettosynth; Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:38 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

DSmolken wrote:Yeah. A Reaktor synth being in the winners' circle as soundware and synth plugins not being represented, when last time there was a Kontakt synth as soundware and no plugin synths. That might be something that could be improved.

IMO synth plugins deserve some love, too, even if they're not as universally useful to as many people as a meter, delay, or chorus.


It's probably just a distribution thing. Effects tend to have more universal appeal. In fact, if you look at what won, it has really universal appeal. With synths, people are picky. I voted for several synths, and no I won't say which ones, but if you know me at all, it's probably not hard to guess. The thing is though, I was pretty sure that my synth votes wouldn't be for the winning plugins. I'm sure that people do vote for synths, but you're going to face the issue that anything with universal appeal is likely to be too large of a project for the DC. Specialized synths will get some votes, but not from everyone. General synths aren't going to stand out and impress anyone unless they're substantial.
DSmolken
KVRian
 
1196 posts since 20 Sep, 2013, from Poland

Postby DSmolken; Tue Dec 20, 2016 5:50 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

Publishing statistics is not a good idea - do we all need to tell the world who came in last? Edit: well, I guess we do tell the world who came in last... Ah well.
ghettosynth wrote:It's probably just a distribution thing. Effects tend to have more universal appeal. In fact, if you look at what won, it has really universal appeal. With synths, people are picky. I voted for several synths, and no I won't say which ones, but if you know me at all, it's probably not hard to guess. The thing is though, I was pretty sure that my synth votes wouldn't be for the winning plugins. I'm sure that people do vote for synths, but you're going to face the issue that anything with universal appeal is likely to be too large of a project for the DC. Specialized synths will get some votes, but not from everyone. General synths aren't going to stand out and impress anyone unless they're substantial.

All true. Effects obviously have the broadest appeal, and earn the most votes. That's fair.

But the way things are set up now, a "soundware" synth (Kontakt, Reaktor etc.) apparently has better chances of snagging a prize than a plugin synth, and that's kinda weird and not entirely fair. Maybe reserving some slice of the prize money pie for a synth plugin, or at least a synth (whatever platform it uses) might encourage more people to make interesting synths in future challenges. A minor change, but I think a positive one.
Last edited by DSmolken on Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Compyfox
KVRAF
 
14142 posts since 18 Oct, 2003, from Berlin, Germany

Postby Compyfox; Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:01 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

What do you think of my proposal, DSmolken?
(a couple of posts up)
[ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ] | [ Mix Challenge ] | [ Video Project (in the making) ]
DSmolken
KVRian
 
1196 posts since 20 Sep, 2013, from Poland

Postby DSmolken; Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:35 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

Ultimately, our opinions don't really matter, and I favor small tweaks over a big overhaul, but as a way to overhaul the whole thing and make it bigger and more elaborate, your proposal is generally reasonable.

I would not give more than 10% to top soundware and top "other", though - look at where the most popular items in those categories rank overall. There's obviously much more interest in Win/Mac plugins, and the prize distribution should reflect that.
Compyfox
KVRAF
 
14142 posts since 18 Oct, 2003, from Berlin, Germany

Postby Compyfox; Tue Dec 20, 2016 6:47 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

Sadly, you're right. Which is why I hope that Ben reads along, and maybe expands the team.


Regarding the math, so...
40% - top synth
40% - top Effect
10% - top soundware (can be Reaktor, samples, preset - although Reaktor does sound as "Synth" or "FX")
10% - top "other" (anyOS, iOS, Android, etc)


But I must admit, there were(!) interesting Standalone Tools in recent years (and this year as well). It's just a PITA to get them linked into hosts. I really don't want to see a fading creativity, I want to see more Android content as well. So I think 20% is more encouraging.

There was also great sample content in recent years... but as usual, this is always a matter of taste.



One way or another... a "shift" needs to happen. How it will happen... here is where I hope that the hosts take a listen and start an objective discussion.
[ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ] | [ Mix Challenge ] | [ Video Project (in the making) ]
blurk
KVRist
 
474 posts since 13 May, 2003, from Sydney, Australia

Postby blurk; Wed Dec 21, 2016 5:05 am Re: Developer Challenge 2016 Rules - Violations and Prize Distribution criticism

DSmolken wrote:
Ivan_C wrote:It would be especially interesting to hear from devs who wanted to enter but decided not to, or tried but didn't get an entry completed in time. What would have helped them get into this one?

What would have helped is more time between announcement and deadline. If I had more time we might have seen an iOS port of Noisetar, as a joint submission from NUSofting and me.

As to Compyfox's original point, I can't offer an opinion on the specifics of Autotonic because I haven't downloaded it or the supposed full featured version. So I can't verify personally that the former is a cut down version of the latter. But if it is, I agree disqualification is in order and it's disappointing that there isn't a clear mechanism for reporting potential rule violations. So here's a concrete suggestion: how about a "report this entry" button?
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to KVR Developer Challenge Chat