- Altering submissions is a can of worms that people already went through.
My thoughts personally: I’m fine if its for legality or tiny bin avoiding editing. Be nice to know that that was going to be done in advance, or else I would’ve approached engineering differently. - I didn’t even know about the looks being in consideration using likes as points(?) and also something I take little issue with though I agree that’s not the best way to go about it.
No no, my biggest issue is why do I feel you… ‘misjudge’ isnt the right word im looking for. more-so misled.
I’ll be honest, at first I was okay with the rankings while reading the greatly written reviews. Everything was fine and dandy, the alteration thing, though unexpected and not a welcome one, wasn’t a huge deal. It was understandable. At first I thought my ranking was so low because of the realism adjustments made. So I looked at the spreadsheet to see how I did…
That’s when it got pretty sour. My entry did:
- The highest drivability by a significant margin (BY FAR if unaltered which I wasnt informed)
- You can see the spreadsheet of all the red purchase cost. Mine is at a pink 2nd place (both altered and original)
- No one else went under 800 SVC cost. Some were above 1000. mine eventually went under 700.
- The most fuel efficient BY FAR of all the finalists.
These are all of the HIGH priorities.
- Sportiness is by far the lowest. I accept that. That’s the design. Its not meant for Earl since Wendy is mostly driving.
(dk why Earl has equal stakes when hes not driving as much, but that’s a different issue) - Comfort was not the lowest. not even second lowest, not even 3rd lowest. 4th lowest in the middle of the pack but after alteration it became 2nd lowest I believe. Why so low? Because its a plush couch compared to the stone slab of a truck they have. That was the bar. Though fair and understandable that were comparing against the competition not the truck.
- The highest reliability of all finalists.
Unlike the HIGH Priorities, the MEDIUM Priorities were far from an outright win. Only being highest in reliability out of 7 finalists.
Winning in 3 out of 4 high priorities being 2nd in the 4th. winning a 1 out of 3 in the medium priorities. So far does it sound like this car is the lowest out of all the finalists to you? Well guess what! it is!
Going through the lower priorities its about the same. some are better some are worse, and not much of a consideration to me.
After comparing my entry to individual finalists, and seeing my entry’s advantages, a trend started to form. Again and again, beating every finalist in the high priority and losing in Sportiness and most of the time comfort.
How does all of those facts, fit the description of the LOWEST ranked finalist? I mean come on look at this.
Disclaimer: This is just an example, I mean nothing or make no attempt to single out Bdub1, and sorry if you feel targeted as a result.
I fail to see how this entry got not one but TWO places above me. Came out on top on every high priority, beaten in a single medium, and traded blows in the low priorities.
Please explain how beating my entry in a SINGULAR MEDIUM priority warrants two places higher when it got beaten at ALL FOUR HIGH priorities.
This trend continued and baffles me. This is where I try to understand the other perspective. What I came up with is I think you mis-prioritized.
Usually if a lower priority consideration makes the difference in a match-up between entries its because they’re tied in the higher priorities. At that point, its the little things that count. In this case however it wasnt tied or close. I clearly won most of the high priority only coming 2nd in price.
Seeing how medium priorities overruled the high priorities much to my astonishment, it has led me to believe that the intended deciding factors were what Earl and Wendy wanted, and not the things listed as high priority. As I re-read the review for my entry, It reinforced my theory of mis-prioritization. All the supposed high priorities were mentioned as if its a ‘nice addition’, a ‘good to have’ or ‘will definitely help’, while the deciding factors were Wendy and Earl’s wants which were medium priority.
In this case I can understand your judgement from the explanation, however in my opinion the spreadsheet nor the priorities listed supports your verdict.
It clearly shows that I followed the listed priorities. Excelling in the highs, putting thought in sacrificing one medium priority (sportiness) with reason to gain advantages in the high priorities, whilst maintaining reasonable comfort and utmost reliability. I feel I followed the brief excellently yet I still fall short being the lowest of the finalists. Delving into the reason as to why, it made me feel unfairly uninformed, and misled, therefore unfairly judged.
This is not your problem but with what little spare time I have, I choose to put in a significant amount of effort and thought into the design. This just serves to amplify all the sour note.
I’d also like to add that I’m not asking for the rankings to be changed or re-evaluated. You as host reserve the right of deciding that. I’m just saying I am rather disappointed with the methods and quite disappointed with the results.
TLDR
“Dead last in finals? After all that effort and thought? My car must be really unrealistic or everyone’s just better…”
checks spreadsheet
“What the f… NO EVERYONE ISNT BETTER IM STILL TOP ON OF MOST AFTER THE CHANGES”
“How tf is that bottom of the barrel! What kind of convoluted judging system did you use? That’s utter bullshit Im calling it out.”