Alright, that's a good enough reason to say we're (as in all of the staff, not just QC) not on the same page about QC. Though for the record, I'm not QC staff; that was just the impression I got from reading their discussions. Looks like I misspoke, though my reasons aren't really wrong; they were taken into consideration also. So for an outsider who made a somewhat educated guess on why it was declined, I got it a little wrong. That's not the best evidence that we're all not on the same page. Not to mention that the QC staff is a panel of people who have to come to some form of agreement about whether a submission stays or goes; there will be tiny disagreements, like "the content is too much!" vs "eh the content is iffy but I care more about the gameplay". That's not much reason to call us inconsistent; it's the reason there's multiple votes required per submission.
Wario and Waluigi being brothers wasn't a big part of the hangup I don't think. It was mentioned, but it wasn't a dealbreaker or anything. And it was said in the staff chat that they aren't brothers.
For the record, I have yet to see this sprite of Amy pregnant. I'm sure it exists, but for having been brought up more than once, it's never been linked to me. If there really are all these examples of games worse than this one, please show them to us. Plus I still maintain that IMO there's nothing all that child-unfriendly about pregnancy.
If you think the game has enough gameplay, contest the QC on that. The game you linked, however, appears to have a lot more gameplay than this game, if that's your argument. That game definitely has more gameplay to it. The Wario+Waluigi game has a binary control scheme: mouse down, mouse up. While the mouse is down, the love meter fills. Toad will randomly appear, and you'll have to not be making out while he's there. The game you linked not only doesn't have less gameplay, but it certainly has more. It has level design; optional coins, and they aren't just in your way, but there are coins you can go up to get and then right back down. It has a four-button control scheme; move up, move down, move left, move right. You cannot move up or down without being on an arrow of that direction. There is more to it. How can you say there's less to it?
There are a lot of arguments you could make towards getting it back on the site. Most of these aren't solid ones.
EDIT: ninja'd. So there's further evidence that the QC is, *gasp*, a panel of different people with different opinions who deliberate on whether or not a submission is acceptable.
Alright, that's a good enough reason to say we're (as in all of the staff, not just QC) not on the same page about QC. Though for the record, I'm not QC staff; that was just the impression I got from reading their discussions. Looks like I misspoke, though my reasons aren't really wrong; they were taken into consideration also. So for an outsider who made a somewhat educated guess on why it was declined, I got it a little wrong. That's not the best evidence that we're all not on the same page. Not to mention that the QC staff is a panel of people who have to come to some form of agreement about whether a submission stays or goes; there will be tiny disagreements, like "the content is too much!" vs "eh the content is iffy but I care more about the gameplay". That's not much reason to call us inconsistent; it's the reason there's multiple votes required per submission.
Wario and Waluigi being brothers wasn't a big part of the hangup I don't think. It was mentioned, but it wasn't a dealbreaker or anything. And it was said in the staff chat that they aren't brothers.
For the record, I have yet to see this sprite of Amy pregnant. I'm sure it exists, but for having been brought up more than once, it's never been linked to me. If there really are all these examples of games worse than this one, please show them to us. Plus I still maintain that IMO there's nothing all that child-unfriendly about pregnancy.
If you think the game has enough gameplay, contest the QC on that. The game you linked, however, appears to have a lot more gameplay than this game, if that's your argument. That game [b]definitely[/b] has more gameplay to it. The Wario+Waluigi game has a binary control scheme: mouse down, mouse up. While the mouse is down, the love meter fills. Toad will randomly appear, and you'll have to not be making out while he's there. The game you linked not only doesn't have [i]less[/i] gameplay, but it certainly has more. It has level design; optional coins, and they aren't just in your way, but there are coins you can go up to get and then right back down. It has a four-button control scheme; move up, move down, move left, move right. You cannot move up or down without being on an arrow of that direction. There is more to it. How can you say there's less to it?
There are a lot of arguments you could make towards getting it back on the site. Most of these aren't solid ones.
[b]EDIT:[/b] ninja'd. So there's further evidence that the QC is, *gasp*, a panel of different people with different opinions who deliberate on whether or not a submission is acceptable.
_________________
|