I recently ran across the Interactive Fiction Review Conspiracy site (iffydoemain.org/IFRC/index.html). I love the idea, and am a bit disappointed that it’s no longer running. I’m all for conspiracies and secret handshakes (oh, and reviewing IF, that’s cool too).
Would anyone else be interested in reviving the site and joining the conspiracy?
I am in favour of things that mean more reviewage for out-of-comp games. (So yeah, if this was alive again I’d do it.)
Great to hear, maga. That makes two of us.
I wonder how a “review for reviews” sort of site would work for IF. You submit your game to a pool, and are subsequently assigned someone else’s game to review. Your game is reviewed and not provided until you write your own review.
Triggerstreet (screenplay peer review) works sort of like this - you get a credit for every screenplay you review. If you post your screenplay, you must post two credits on it to have it in the random review pool. Every time you get a review, two credits are subtracted from your posted credits on that screenplay. If your credits go below two, your screenplay is not assigned randomly anymore. You might get one or several reviews for each pair of credits depending on how much your screenplay was assigned, and the people reviewing each get a credit for every screenplay they review.
Perhaps we could have a pool every week and potential authors could submit a full or partial game. Each week, everyone who submitted a game would randomly get assigned one of the other games for review. If the games are complete, the author can opt to have the reviewer post the review on IFDB. If you run late, you don’t get your review till you turn in yours.
Maybe a commentary/review section should be part of Inky Path.
I like the idea a lot. That’s kind of how Coursera courses work with peer grading, and that turned out pretty well. This will also help distinguish IFRC from general review sites like IFDB or beta-testing sites like game-testing.org. My two thoughts are
I think people should be able to review games without submitting games themselves, seeing as they might not have that many projects they want reviewed and might not want to keep submitting the same piece over and over, and
People might be less inclined to submit games seeing as they have to put in the “extra effort” of reviewing others’ games.
With that said, I actually prefer this idea. It’d be great to be able to match game-size or genre according to preference as well so submitters would have a better chance of getting a game they like and sitting through the thing.
I’ve thought about this as well, and think that that’s the direction I want to take it. Since it’s still such an up-in-the-air idea, though, i figured I’d gauge interest first, though.