WaterBomb

if that's fine, then don't worry about adding it to your path -- just run it explicitly every time.

C:\Users\Waterbomb\Documents> C:\Python\python waterbomb.py

that documentation predates windows 7 anyway, so it might not be perfect.

can you run it explicitly, without adding it to your path?

if you installed it to C:\Python, it would be like this:

C:\> C:\Python\python

you should get a message that looks like this:

Python 2.7.3 (default, Apr 30 2012, 21:18:10)
[GCC 4.7.0 20120416 (Red Hat 4.7.0-2)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>>

there's a "view raw" option. http://fpaste.org/fvzz/raw/

you can right-click and "save as" or whatever. copying and pasting is fine too, as long as you don't accidentally chop anything off.

if it tells you "python is not a recognized command" or something like that, then it isn't installed or it isn't in your path. you can either add it to your path or call it explicitly like this:

C:\Users\Waterbomb\Documents> C:\python27\python waterbomb.py

also, apparently you can just try to run waterbomb.py itself:

C:\Users\Waterbomb\Documents> waterbomb.py

the process of adding it to your path (and more!) is described here.

and here's a link to it again. make sure the one you use says version 0.4 near the top. older versions are either broken or don't support various things (like a centralized, enormous thread).

yeah, on windows it's called the command prompt.

python 2.7 is a programming language, a set of commands; the interpreter is the program that turns those commands into actions. if you don't already have it, get it here. you want the Python 2.7.3 Windows Installer (or Python 2.7.3 Windows X86-64 Installer if your machine is 64-bit)

save waterbomb.py (the whole file) somewhere. it's in plain text, so you can edit it with notepad (you shouldn't need to change anything after line 61). when you're done configuring it, start a command prompt and go to the folder where you saved it with the cd command.

it might look like this:

C:\> cd Users\Waterbomb\Documents
C:\Users\Waterbomb\Documents> python waterbomb.py

i see from reading the thread that you had trouble using it. in short, you need to save waterbomb.py somewhere on your hard disk and run it from a commandline with the python2.7 interpreter. exactly how this is is done is done is platform-dependent, so what sort of os are you running?

i've actually made minor changes (out of boredom) since that post, but yes, version 0.4 works very well. just make sure the posters follow the format i outlined in my last post. did you have any trouble using it?

it can handle a single, huge thread, and you can make it start counting at any post in the thread by modifying the poll_start variable.

Hahah its just funny, because in Hebrew, Efes means zero. So I was curious.
I don't know anything about anything! I'm really out of the loop haha

Scotland, that's pretty cool!
Efes, what kind of food is that? Hahah

I grew up more upstate haha. Where you from

Haha yeah way! I'm sitting in a dorm now :3
I'm from Jersey almost originally! Been here since I was two and a half

I'm going to Rutgers in about an hour xD

At first I thought I saw it say that you lived in New Brunswick and I got really excited. But then I realized it was North Brunswick and I'm not so excited anymore

When it comes to second wave of eliminations, I feel there HAS to be some sort of discussion. Maybe not as thorough the final scoring discussions, but people have to be able to come up with SOME compelling reason that a game brings enough to the table to be worth discussing further.

I'm not sure what the realistic difference is between making a top 100 and rating games against each other. I thought that the top 100 would be the same thing, but just cutting every game past #100 off when all was said and done. Maybe I was wrong. But I'm not opposed to the idea.

The best that can come out of this is hopefully smogonites just debating about good games in a civil manner. That's lofty hopes but it is what I hope to see. At the very least you could really loosen your margins for a game being eliminated.

Even in a field that is generally considered subjective people still feel they know the difference between a 9 and a 10, or a 3 and 4. But what is the difference between an 84 and an 85? When someone sees a top 100 list they don't really know what to do with it, so they fixate on things like "Why is game #85 not higher than game #34?" "Why is game #99 so low on the list?". Next you have the vastly diminished margin for the reader's opinion. On a top ten list if the reader's favorite game is left out the first thought is "Maybe it would be #11?". Why not right, if they are so certain of the game's value? And number 11 isn't bad. But #101? No, now the first thought is "I bet they didn't even consider it" then "which means they must be ignorant".

I'm sorry it came to that, but I still don't see much effort on your part and some of your attitude about it rubs me the wrong way. Obviously the last thing I want to hear are reasons for less discussion.

When I said institute a veto rule, I meant to allow users the power of veto in some fashion. Maybe it would even be a step after the pool cleaning, but it would correct the major problem with pool cleaning - the stripping of discussion. I don't think any amount of discussion allowed is generous, with no reason to post in the thread right now there is absolutely no reason to not allow it.

Making lists is fun. If you feel burdened, my honest is to stop. It would be a shame, but this is not a burden anyone has to bare. There are numerous subconscious reasons that a Top 100 is bound for failure. For starters it's a lot like rating a game on a scale of 100 as opposed to a scale of 10.

My general instinct when I think that I can do something better is to do it. But the wisest contributors have all said that this list is a foolish endeavor and they are right. Why do something "so difficult and time consuming" when it would be mercilessly mocked on a forum less cynical than Smogon?

But you know what isn't going to endear people to the end result? This stuff about "all the hard work I've done" or "that's the way the rules work, the rules that I made by myself few days ago". You've done very little. You were lazy even when it came to making the list of 500, listing several games multiple times as a result of seemingly just copy/pasting people's entries. That isn't work. Doing it right wouldn't be work. I do more complex filing while relaxing.

This current stage needs some sort of veto power, and it behooves you not to just stick your fingers in your ears over this. Keeping 1 or 2 extra games per group on for the discussion stage is not a big deal.

i've got a working prototype right here. you need python 2.7.

http://fpaste.org/SHTV/

sample output:

http://fpaste.org/3UpG/

it has issues (like only being able to count one page at a time) but in 24 hours i should be able to have a (nearly) perfected version.

doug used to have a script to count bold votes in cap polling threads. i think that would make your counting easier!

if (for whatever reason) you can't contact him or he won't let you use it, i'll look into writing you one instead.

You mean in the way that Donkey Kong 94' influenced Mario 64 with having Mario pulling off backflips and other maneuvers? Yeah it was pretty cool, but it was also made right after Rondo of Blood where Richter Belmont was backflip and side-stepping all over the place.

Damn, not sure Rondo of Blood got on the list.

Ever play Wario Land 2 or 3?

16 people I'll have to remind that it's genuinely hard to play a game these days with a control scheme that doesn't derive directly from Ape Escape.

While in discussion I could talk about the immaculate controls and the inspiring level design, Ape Escape's important place in video game history should at least merit that discussion.

Y'know I like most of the games on this list. I offered up a few of my favorites in the first thread, not with the highest hopes that games like Resident Evil 3 would make the cut (though I could definitely make the arguments for it).

So don't take it the wrong way when I say that the current standing of Ape Escape is problematic. I don't know what people have against it, or if it's just enough in the back of their minds that they haven't seriously considered it. But it's one of the best selling franchises of all time, and the game in question sold 8 million copies (which would always be a feat, but this was 1999, a time when even Final Fantasy IX only sold 5 million due to the end of the console cycle).

The game was single handedly responsible for the wide acceptance of dual analog. It took a concept of using those sticks and turned out a game that used them more extensively and naturally than any since. What the Wii really needed to be successful was a game like Ape Escape.

We aren't at the rubric step yet, but if I had to guess I'd wager you want a universal scoring system, and then using a weighted average? That would explain the need to have so many people voting on each game, but I'd advice against that. I have my own suggestion that I'll pull out when that thread comes.