Well, it’s a matter of what kind of balance you all prefer.
Certainly a two-week cycle would give us a lot more opportunity to beat each game and know it more deeply, and give the busiest among us a better shot at participating. On the other hand, a one-week cycle lets us play more games overall, gives us more motivation to not put off playing, and makes us wait less time for the next game if we aren’t enjoying the current one.
Not to mention, if it's a game you've beaten already, you probably don't need two weeks with it no matter what it is.
As you can probably see, I’d prefer a one-week cycle. I can easily understand why you’d want two weeks if we were playing games with the depth and difficulty of R-Type every cycle. If you look at the list so far, though, how many of those games are really begging for two weeks? Battle Royale and Drop Rock sure aren’t. Bonk’s Adventure is comfortable enough for one week, as is Somer Assault. Silent Debuggers and Slaughterhouse, I can’t honestly say. Even if they would do better with more time, though, I fear things getting stale with a two-week cycle.
Like I said before, I do want this to be a community thing, and if lots of you guys want two weeks, then two weeks it is. I do have to say, though, that given the broad range of games we’re going to be playing anyway, I think we should aim more at becoming familiar with lots of games and spending lots of time playing than we should at completing lots of games.
Thoughts?
