i'm not sure why this is an issue with you Jasmine. i mean, for the last contest, you had a really awesome game, and it was done in VB6, while I on the other hand, had a sucky game, and i used XNA. it just shows that no matter what language you use, or how easy a language makes it for you to make a game, the skill of the programmer determines how good the game is.
Arguing my case here, I am in fact thinking of Andy, who I'm pretty sure will be using C. I wouldn't want him to feel insulted if after 30 hours of work, somebody throws a 10 minute game into the pool made with 'XyZ Game Creator Wizard' , and gets a higher mark.
With the current scoring system, this is possible, and it shouldn't be.
Maybe my choice of words here is poor. I'm not saying actively penalize the programmer for choice of language. I'm not anti- any language. What I am saying is that some languages provide less opportunities for programmer credit, because of wizard-like elements, automated game construction, or pre-made frameworks -- parts that the programmer shouldn't get credit for. Surely a programmer should not get credit for running through a 5-step wizard?
The only way fair to recognize these elements in the current scoring system, is to increase the contribution for technical quality.
Else like I say, depending on the theme, there's nothing stopping me from submitting a 30 minute effort with the shoot-em-up construction kit, or the Warcraft 3 world editor, and not doing any programming, yet still produce a top-notch 'end result' that meets the design spec.
It's not a big issue, I'm just discussing my thoughts and feelings like we've been encouraged to do.
I see this is rather like a home baking challenge. Would you give high marks to someone who combines a supermarket shelf packet of instant sponge mix, with a tin of tropical fruit in light syrup? Even if the end result is scrumdiddlyumptious, is it worthy of 95%? No, the judges would respond to that with disdain.
I rest my case.