ze's blog :: zefrank.com
Ads Via The Deck



Via BuzzFeed


« picture book 2.0 | Main | so i wanna try something »

September 12, 2008

memory game

based on your advice here is an updated version of the Flickr Memory Game :: if you have the time i would love your advice on making it better ::

the scoring is a work in progress (although close)...if you are interested in my obsessive thoughts on the subject, here are some of the diagrams i created to think through the problem


Bookmark and Share
Comments (21)


I don't know if you've seen this, but it seemed like something very Ze Frank-ish. Insofar as it's basically a platform for creativity.

Try it out:
http://www.addictinggames.com/fantasticcontraption.html

Racing sports,
~Bill

Posted by: Bill at September 12, 2008 1:34 PM

>Ze, your brilliance is impossible for me to fathom.

Posted by: Lyn at September 12, 2008 3:23 PM

Such a pleasure to watch your thought process. Thank you for sharing it with us.

(It is comforting to me - seeing others obsess the way I do.)

Posted by: Doriette at September 12, 2008 3:25 PM

This *rocks*.

Posted by: Marianne at September 13, 2008 2:36 AM

This *rocks*. It would be nice if there was also a way to save selections' in a drop-down, maybe, so people could use each others' pics as well (I liked playing with the scribble pics!)

Posted by: Marianne at September 13, 2008 2:39 AM

I'm re-visiting your blog after a 2 year absence... or so. Why did I ever leave? I don't know. I hope you'll forgive me. I am up in the middle of the night when I should be asleep. I'm supposed to run 10 miles, clean a church building, and take care of my 4 kids starting at 5 am. But here I am at 2 am feeling completely entertained by your blog. I don't know if I should love you or hate you. I don't know if you're a genius or clinically insane. I guess what I'm trying to say is... Thank You.

Posted by: Suzie Petunia at September 13, 2008 5:02 AM

You kick ass! That is fabulous. Really easy to use, visually appealing. Great! Thank you, thank you. I know I' ll have much fun with it and it will make great interactive gifts to share with others.

Any chance of getting it to a place where it could be embedded on other sites?

Posted by: ashley at September 13, 2008 12:01 PM

here i thought i was going to get to see some napkin scribblings.

Posted by: tish at September 13, 2008 12:22 PM

Your work at figuring out a scoring scheme is dense, and I will have to tackle it on another day when my afternoon nap has not left me with a sensation similar to jet lag. I wonder how uniqueness of images might be factored into how well one scores. A set composed entirely of office party photos would be weighted as more difficult whereas someone's more artistically diverse creations are more unique, and therefore, easier to remember. Also, playing other people photos seems more difficult than playing your own, as I have noticed.

It might be nice to have the option of playing a random set of images from a random flickr user, along with a link to said user's photostream. A feed of 18 photos from the "most recent uploads" might be cool as well.

How to make that work, however, is also beyond me at 1:21 am.

Posted by: greentrench at September 13, 2008 12:28 PM

Minor bug: when playing a second time, the Loaded % starts at 100%.

when you guess incorrectly, you can very quickly select a different tile to start guessing again, but cannot do that with a tile that is currently revealed. I'm not sure this is intentional, but it's interesting.

Posted by: Robert Konigsberg at September 14, 2008 3:33 AM

game works just fine. cept for my memory

Posted by: hgsgfsd at September 14, 2008 12:54 PM

The animated version is the business - and the game is great, it teaches you to be methodical about going through each row to help remember the squares. Played your Flickr set a few times and the randomising seemed to be working AOK so never had the same arrangement and the distribution seemed to be random each time. Poss. amendment, in the intro. page (where players provide their Flickr set name) you left a bracket on the right hand side which you need to remove - the percentage score was really useful in the animated version so percentages alongside a set value would be A1.

Posted by: Nic at September 15, 2008 4:50 PM

Wondering:

What's the rationale for assigning a greater point value for a lucky match than an immediate match?

Is this an 'in my experience, there's no such thing as luck', kind of statement?

Posted by: Darrell Mast at September 16, 2008 2:13 PM

Wondering:

What's the rationale for assigning a greater point value for a lucky match than an immediate match?

Is this an 'in my experience, there's no such thing as luck', kind of statement?

Posted by: Darrell Mast at September 16, 2008 2:13 PM

OK.. by your (brilliant) system
I scored as follows:

Your Score: 1239

Accuracy Score: 730
Time Taken: 58 seconds
Time Bonus: 309
Perfect Match Bonus: 18 x 10 = 180
Lucky Match Bonus: 1 x 20 = 20

Anybody else playing?

Posted by: Xanax at September 19, 2008 1:50 AM

For what it's worth...one more try:

Your Score: 1256

Accuracy Score: 720
Time Taken: 54 seconds
Time Bonus: 326
Perfect Match Bonus: 15 x 10 = 150
Lucky Match Bonus: 3 x 20 = 60

Anybody playing?

Posted by: xanax at October 3, 2008 2:52 AM

Best yet... and consider it a challenge:

Your Score: 1318

Accuracy Score: 730
Time Taken: 46 seconds
Time Bonus: 368
Perfect Match Bonus: 18 x 10 = 180
Lucky Match Bonus: 2 x 20 = 40

That's going to be hard to beat.

Now, to other memory game junkies like me: does anyone have a system for working these memory games? Ze, these games pose an interesting intellectual challenge and I appreciate your keeping them posted here. At first, I found them difficult to "master" and struggled to recall much beyond two or three random elements or images.

What I discovered harkened back to grad school days and a brilliant and very innovative poetics / creative writing teacher I once had who gave us the following exercise: 1) Take a walk around the block (which we did together as a class) 2) Upon our return, we were instructed to write down everything we saw on our walk. He then asked us to look at our lists and raise our hands if they included any of the following... at which point he proceeded to read off dozens of plant names (wisteria, rosemary, hydrangea, etc.,) a variety of architectural details the specific names of which now escape me, and so on. None of us had any or his items on our lists.

When he described them to us, however, where they were, what they looked like, etc., a few of us could vaguely recall having passed them but did not notice them enough to add them to our lists. More to the point, he said, it's almost impossible to see and RECALL things you can't name. Think about being in a large crowd. If someone asks you later who you saw, you'll generally only mention those people you recognize and know by name. It would be highly unlikely and unusual for you to start listing random people you saw who were total strangers to you unless there was something extraordinary or very unusual and noteworthy about them... and even then, unlikely you'd mention them.
But you'll almost certainly recall the people whose names you know and who are familiar to you.

So, for the memory games, I've found my scores improve dramatically when I give each of the images a name and say them out loud as they go by. Using this method, they become less random and more specific to me and hence are easier to recall. Try it...see what happens.

Just one strategy. Anyone else?

Posted by: xanax at October 5, 2008 5:59 PM

i had fun playing the game, but even with my browser fully open, i didn't see the last row of blocks. wound up with four unmatchable drawings until i scrolled down.

Posted by: imposterpockets at October 7, 2008 10:29 AM

Your Score: 1338

Accuracy Score: 730
Time Taken: 46 seconds
Time Bonus: 368
Perfect Match Bonus: 18 x 10 = 180
Lucky Match Bonus: 3 x 20 = 60


YES!

Darrel's question above has merit: What's the rationale underpinning the award of more points for being lucky?

The added element of time being a factor in the score is a bonus. Could it be added to the other memory game sets?

Posted by: xanax at October 21, 2008 7:23 PM

i agree. there is no specific rationale for awarding luck points. I am in the process of modifying the game and scoring system, and will try and come up with some other ways of thinking about luck...

Posted by: ze at October 21, 2008 7:30 PM

Good work. It might be nice to have the option of playing a random set of images.

Posted by: laptop computers at July 22, 2010 6:05 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?