This is not done totally random. I have lots of seeded songs, in different gradings. Tracks which I estimated to be stronger than others and which I rather have not meeting each other in the first round. There are some more factors. E.g. I have also looked at the people and the songs they brought in. E.g., if someone brought two songs, then these should not meet each other in the first round. That's just one of such factors. I tried to give every player a chance with at least one of their songs. To keep it fun for the people involved. I also looked at the artists and tried to spread them a bit over the sheet. Still, this has been lots of guess work as well. I can't regulate what goes to round two. In lots of matches I can't predict what will be the most popular song.
I stand corrected then. Thanks for the clarification!
Apart from some regulation, at the same time, I wanted to make this game a bit unpredictable (that's something I find interesting). To just pair all genres to each other would IMO be less interesting, and I am not sure if it would serve the purpose. The goal of the game is not to have every genre in an as comfortable position as possible. Also, I think less people would be involved when certain genres come on, every once in a while.
I get where you're coming from, but many pairings here are in fact predictable. For example, when a jazz fusion song is going up against a metal song, it's fairly obvious which will win. But what about a jazz fusion song against another jazz fusion song? This isn't a forum filled with jazz fusion listeners, I'd find it interesting to see which they'd pick when there's hardly any bias compared to if you showed the match to a jazz fusion forum. And on the flip side, a metal song against a metal song is also going to be less predictable. And then after the initial pairings and giving everyone a chance to hear each song once already, things can get more random and genres can be mixed up.
Flash has a point, and I have been saying it as well: 2014 is a time in which not many Maidenfans are into long, complex/proggy/you name it- tracks. Still, length is not an absolute measurement for popularity. Just look at a top 10 from any survivor; these do not consist out of the 10 shortest or longest songs. So, there's still an uncertainty when it comes to length. Personally, I can be moved by a great vibe or melodic acoustic guitar, even if it's one minute long. Who knows in advance how this work with others? I can't predict it because lots of songs might have never been heard before.
I think it has less to do with length and more to do with complexity and nuance. Some of these songs are hard to swallow with only one listen, I've had a lot of trouble with this in some rounds.
So instead of grouping songs per genre, I rather have people listening to everything when they play the game, as unprepared as possible (not knowing what kind of song will go on, until the moment they're playing the game (selecting a favourite) because it fits better to the idea behind this. I do that by mixing up various sounding stuff.
I like the idea of this, but it kinda fails in practice when someone already knows one of the songs. There's going to be a bias no matter what. Incidentally my favorite matchups have been ones where I don't know either song. Unfortunately these are too rare.
It certainly is. I think it tells something how you listen to music.
This is a personal thing, but I tend to not compare certain styles with each other, unless they're very close. Jazz and metal are very separate for me, and I take different things into account when judging music from both styles. So when I am supposed to choose between a jazz song I like and a metal song I like, I found myself a bit conflicted as these are songs that I wouldn't normally compare and appreciate for different reasons.
I have stated that when one plays this game, as much "bias" (or: factors) as possible should be tried to be denied. Leave out these genres, leave out intro/song or not songs. Eruption is not a song and look how popular it is; The Alan Parsons intro is not a song according to some, but look how popular it is / length or other aspects. Just go to the core: the feeling of enjoyment when you play two songs. I find that interesting, to see how that works.
I agree, the piece should be taken at face value and the voter should imply pick which is enjoyed more. Sometimes that is difficult though, Eruption is a good example for me since no matter how much I try to remove all bias, it's still a piece I've known and loved for years and have attached sentimental value to. Those feelings are not simply ignored.
What exactly does not work? Perhaps it doesn't work for you because you don't like to see so many prog songs eliminated? The game still works (I hope!). Because this has to work: The point of the game is to share and hear new music and find out which tracks are the most popular.
The game works fine, like I've said, this is a great setup. I just would've changed one detail, not to affect results but to make the game more interesting (IMO). Again, a personal preference. Either way I'll likely find the results disappointing, but that's normal in a survivor, and is why we ask if people are satisfied with the results at the end of each game. I'm not sure why being disappointed in this game's results is any different.
Perhaps there's interest in seeing only (legendary) prog songs battling each other. Well, we can always still organize that in a different game.
That could be cool, though I'm not sure how much interest that would garner. I'd play a game like that of course.
Don't get me started on the whole intro/non-songs debate; I've already made my own thoughts on that fairly clear. A line was drawn, just not where I'd have drawn it.
Some intros/non songs can have more impact on me than a fully fleshed song. Some work great out of context, such as Eruption. Battle Hymn works great in context of the album but by itself (which is how it should be judged here), it does not. Honestly I find the amount of votes for it ridiculous.
