₦airaland Forum

Seun:
Hello,

We were unable to pick an outright winner in this contest. No entry gave us 100% of what we were looking for. Some had the best gameplay. Others had the nicest looking boards. Others had the two dice system which is less tedious. Some were bug-free. Some had keyboard support.

No entry had all of the above, for 2 reasons:
1) We didn't want to provide detailed requirements because that would amount to writing your prompts for you in an AI contest.
2) We only gave you 48 hours. That was enough for working prototypes, but bugs can creep in when you're in a hurry.

We tried a point based system through human and AI judges but alas, the results were inconsistent. So we decided to go for "sweetness". Using this evaluation method, we were able to find 3 entries which were clearly better than the others, but we couldn't pick a winner among them.

I'm pleased to announce the 3 co-winners of this contest:
- Techtoyin: https://www.github.com/Tpepper2001/Ludo-challenge (sweetest double dice game)
- Horladoyin: https://www.github.com/Horladoyin/Ludo-3D (sweetest single dice game)
- Vikkkilee: https://www.github.com/vicosmaster/NAIRALUDO (prettiest board, sweet keyboard support)

We expanded the prizes from N375k for 1st and 2nd place to ₦540k for the first 3 (₦180k each).

Shoutout to BelloP, who had a very fun piece movement system. And Uromgoodluck, whose board was very pretty. There are others that I will mention later. I also want to thank everyone who participated in the contest. We look forward to the next one and hope you'll participate.

- Nairaland Team
Note: https://github.com/nairaland/ludocontest is the contest repository.

Huge congratulations to @Techtoyin, @Horladoyin, and @Vikkkilee. Well deserved!

This contest was a fantastic case study. Going by the original prompt where "Unique Features" were marked very important, I went all-in on the engine—building and focusing on the features.

However, seeing the results, it’s a valuable reminder for us developers: Functionality is King, but UI/UX is Queen. The "Sweetness" factor (the feel and look) often tips the scale.

I respect the @Seun decision to pivot to "Sweetness" as the tie-breaker. It’s a good lesson on balancing heavy backend logic with frontend polish.

Thanks to Seun and the Nairaland team for the opportunity. I’m already looking forward to the next challenge—I’ll be bringing both the brains and the beauty next time! 😉

Whoa, easy guys. I appreciate the passion, but let's keep it civil. 🏳️

@hullaman, before we get into the accusations, let me clarify the actual context of my appeal so we are on the same page:

1. Why I Appealed: The only reason I reached out to the organizer was that I spotted another entry that was pardoned despite having the exact same misalignment issue. My appeal wasn't about forcing a 'broken' entry through; it was simply asking for the same grace/treatment that was extended to another contestant, the log says "Entry 37 narrowly passed this stage despite pieces not sitting in place.". It was a request for consistency, nothing more and @Seun addressed that.

2. The 'Burner Account' Accusation: Just to clear the air—I am Showtechedge. I don't use burner accounts to fight my battles or defend my work. @TotoIsGud4boy is entitled to his opinion as a user who enjoyed the gameplay, just as you are entitled to yours regarding strict UI standards. I respect both views.

3. The Engineering vs. The UI: You mentioned that a game with a UI error is like 'a car with square wheels.' I think that characterization suggests the game is unplayable or fundamentally broken, which isn't the case. The misalignment was a visual offset (which I've since fixed), not a logic failure.

Since we are all technical people here, I invite you to actually take the 'car' for a test drive before writing it off completely. I’d value your critique on the actual mechanics:

🎮 Live Demo: https://showtechedge.github.io/3d-ludo-challenge/ (Tip: You don't have to finish it at once. The game features a robust Auto-Save system. Play a few moves against the 3 AIs, close the browser, and come back later. It picks up exactly where you left off.)

🔗 Repository: https://github.com/showtechedge/3d-ludo-challenge.git

My main goal for this competition wasn't just the prize money; it was to get to the stage where peers could look at the Code Architecture, discuss the AI logic, and collaborate. I am here for the culture of code review and learning.

If you check the repo and find the code lacking, I am open to that criticism. Let's keep the energy on building and learning. 🚀

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.

@hullaman and @Nipeks, I get your points regarding the 'Judge's Discretion' and the 'Pass/Fail' nature of Stage 0. You are right that the decision is final, and I have accepted that.

Just to clarify the intent behind my appeal: It wasn't about desperation or 'missing the point.' I am an experienced developer (Founder of Showtechedge) with a life and business outside this contest. My appeal was triggered purely by the precedent of inconsistency I noticed initially—where another entry with the exact same misalignment was pardoned while mine was disqualified. My stance was simply: 'If grace is shown to A, it should be shown to B.'

However, since the organizer has now clarified that both should have been rejected to maintain the standard, I respect that consistency.

@doffman, thank you for the kind words. You are spot on—talent recognizes talent. 👊

@TotoIsGud4boy, I really appreciate you vetting the code and recognizing it as one of the best. You hit the nail on the head regarding the goal. I didn't join this for the prize money; I joined for the networking, the fun of the challenge, and to see opportunities for future collaboration with talents. It just hurts a bit to have days of heavy engineering blocked at the gate because of a visual offset that I fixed in 2 minutes.

Good luck to the remaining 22! May the best code win. 🚀

Seun:
You will be able to prove yourself in the next challenge. Fear not.

Fair enough, Seun. I accept the verdict and I’ll definitely be back for the next one. Good luck to the remaining 22! 🚀

Before I bow out, I’d like to drop my '2 cents' as a professional developer—not as a complaint, but as feedback to improve the standard of future competitions here on Nairaland.

1. Define "Disqualification" vs. "Deduction" In professional hackathons, there is a clear line between Compliance Rules and Grading Criteria.

Compliance (Pass/Fail): Breaking the 'Single HTML' rule or using forbidden libraries. This warrants instant disqualification.

Grading (Points): Visual bugs, UI alignment, or glitches. These usually incur heavy point deductions, not expulsion. Blurring these lines at 'Stage 0' makes the judging feel arbitrary rather than systematic.

2. The "Nairaland Standard" Nairaland is the premier tech forum in Nigeria. When we host a coding challenge, the organization should reflect that status. A detailed Rubric published before the deadline (e.g., 'UI = 20 pts, Logic = 40 pts, Zero Tolerance List = X, Y, Z') would prevent ambiguity and 'narrow passes' based on feelings rather than metrics.

I believe establishing these Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) will make future competitions more competitive and transparent, befitting the platform's reputation.

Thanks for the opportunity, and I’ll be cheering from the sidelines this time. Well done to the team.

Nipeks:
I think you misunderstood. I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23. Just a closer look at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness.".
Passing you for passing sake will not make a difference.
I'm sure the judges have tried their best to be fair. Try to see it as learned lesson, not injustice.
Try to focus on how you can improve on your weak areas.

I get your point, but I respectfully disagree that this is about 'passing for passing sake.'

My argument is about Proportionality. In any competition (or exam), if you make a mistake, you lose marks. You don't get expelled.

The 'sin' here was a visual alignment issue—a UI bug. The penalty applied was Disqualification. That is the equivalent of 'Capital Punishment' for a minor offense.

If the judges deducted 5 points for 'Bad UI Alignment' and I moved to the next stage with a lower score, I would accept that as a 'learned lesson.' But to delete an entry that has valid AI, Physics, and a Save System etc (which are technically harder to develop than aligning a pieces on a designated holes) feels like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

On this "I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23"

Actually, that is exactly my point—the competition does continue.

The organizer explicitly stated regarding the 22 passed entries: 'You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and sweetness.'

This means Stage 0 was just the gatekeeper. The real grading happens next.

I am not asking to 'pass for passing sake.' I am asking to be allowed into the exam hall because I know I have the answers for the difficult questions (Logic & Engineering), even if I messed up the handwriting (UI Alignment) on the cover page.

Wow just seeing this, thank you so much @AbundantGrains! 🙌

I really appreciate you taking the time to test it deep enough to notice the Save System and Homing logic. I put effort into building a solid "brain" for the game—making sure it remembers your progress and the CPU plays smart—so it feels amazing to have that recognized.

I've just worked on a fix for the visual alignment issue (the holes) offline on my pc, so hopefully, @Seun and the organizers will give it a second thought because currently my entry was disqualified for that singular purpose. Thanks for the morale boost! 🚀

Seun:
I've determined that Entry 37 should also have been rejected. I understand how you feel about having focused on the gameplay only to get kicked out for the board design. Sorry for this mixup.

Dear Seun,

Thank you for the honest response. I truly appreciate you acknowledging the situation.

At the end of the day, we are all human, and I definitely don't want my appeal to be the reason another developer (Entry 37) gets disqualified. That wasn't my intention at all.

My point—and my plea for all of us—is that disqualification at Stage 0 feels too harsh for visual alignment issues, provided the core rules were followed. If a participant respected the hard constraints:

Single HTML file.

Correct Tech Stack (Three.js/JS).

No post-deadline edits.

A recognizable Ludo board.

Then they should pass Stage 0.

Visual misalignment (like pieces not centering on holes) feels like something that should incur a grade penalty (e.g., losing marks for UI/UX) rather than an outright disqualification. If I lose 5 or 10 marks for "Bad Alignment," I can accept that and try to make up for it with my AI and Save System code in the next stage. But being kicked out entirely for a UI tweak feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I am appealing not just for myself, but for the spirit of the contest. Please consider converting these "visual alignment disqualifications" into "point deductions" instead. It keeps the competition richer and allows the effort put into the actual coding logic to be seen and judged.

I hope you can reconsider Entry 03 (and Entry 37) under this light. We are eager to compete!

Thanks.

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Dear Seun and the Organizing Team,

I am writing to express my dissatisfaction regarding the disqualification of Entry 03 (showtechedge) at this initial stage. While I respect the need for quality control, disqualifying a fully functional, feature-rich entry solely because "pieces didn't stay on the designated holes" feels incredibly harsh—especially when compared to other decisions made in this same round.

I noticed in the decision log that Entry 37 was passed with the remark: "narrowly passed this round despite pieces not sitting in place."

If Entry 37 was granted a pass despite alignment issues, I strongly appeal that the same standard be applied to Entry 03. My board layout is correct and looks like a Ludo board, the single-file rule was obeyed, and the game features (AI, Save System, Physics) are robust.

The quality of the game’s engineering has not gone unnoticed by the community. @XploraBen specifically testified to the game's strength, stating:

"Not discrediting the effort of others, but among the 3D Ludo games I have tried here, these two wins it for me. I like the implementation of this one better because of its movable Ludo interface, 2 dice, player stats, and nice game play."

Even @TotoIsGud4boy, who correctly pointed out the visual misalignment ("why does the objects not sit on the rounded icons?", still acknowledged the engineering effort, stating: "You packed good features."

The original grading criteria explicitly stated that "Unique Features (very important)" would be a major factor. It seems unfair to prioritize a minor visual alignment issue over engineering effort that the community is already enjoying, especially when precedents for leniency exist with Entry 37.

To demonstrate that this is a trivial fix and not a structural flaw, I have corrected the visual alignment (by removing the confusing hole markers entirely) in under 2 minutes. I have attached the screenshot of the updated look below alongside the old look for comparison.

I kindly ask you to reconsider this decision and allow Entry 03 to proceed to the next stage where gameplay and code quality can be properly assessed.

Thank you.

doffman:
Based on my little personal observation so far , Let me give you expos .😀

If your game doesn’t have sound , 5 marks reduction 😀

If your game doesn’t represent ludo game morphologic appearance , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game doesn’t declare winners from your game users that played it , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game is not mobile responsive , 2 marks ; Athough, Seun did not mentioned it as an instruction in the challenge rule . 😀


If your game script does not well neatly written with comment for easy assessment, 3 marks 😀

Haha, thanks for the expo! 😂

I hope there are also:

10 marks for having an AI that actually thinks and blocks you. 🧠

10 marks for a Save System so you don't lose your game when data runs out. 💾

10 marks for Physics Dice that don't just spin in a loop. 🎲

If missing sound is -5, I believe the Brains + Memory + Physics will carry enough weight to balance the equation nicely, especially since unique features are a priority, @Seun said so. Good luck to us all! 🚀

TotoIsGud4boy:
Freezes and glitches on play… fix this. + why does the objects not sit on the rounded icons? You packed good features but your UI is like a tool not a game. Work on design… you tried tho

Appreciate the feedback! The 'glitches' might be due to device performance, but I'll look into it.

On the design: The organizer emphasized that Unique Features were 'very important,' so that's where I put 85% of my time (AI, Save/Load System, Physics, 2X speed, master volume etc). I prioritized functionality over decoration for this submission.

Funny thing is, I actually did prioritize some 'sweetness' in the logic more than UI. I made sure the game doesn't just end when the first person wins. I added the ability to keep playing for 2nd and 3rd place—complete with confetti and celebrations for each rank. Wanted to keep the game alive longer! I'll definitely polish the UI for the next one.

Thanks!

Seun:
You can see the all the submitted entries here:
https://www.github.com/nairaland/ludocontest

I just checked the GitHub repo link. It looks like they pushed a batch of entries (including mine) with some management scripts. It seems they are setting up a system to test/judge them properly. Looks professional.

Nipeks:
A list of reviewed links will also be ideal for confirmation and transparency.

I completely agree with this. A compiled list of reviewed entries would be great for transparency and would help everyone be sure their submission was seen.

To the organizers, @seun a quick status update would really go a long way right now. The silence is breeding skepticism (like the 'April Fool' comment above implies 😄). Please keep the momentum going and let us know the progress!

XploraBen:
Not discrediting the effort of others, but among the 3D Ludo games I have tried here, these two wins it for me.


I like the implementation of this one better because of its movable Ludo interface, 2 dice, player stats, and nice game play.

Though it only use 1 dice, I like this one too because of its simple, yet intuitive interface, and nice game play.

Thank you so much for the feedback! I really appreciate you taking the time to test it out, there are some really great entries here, so that means a lot coming from you. I spent a lot of time refining the UI and the 2-dice mechanics to make sure it felt like a proper game, so I’m really glad those features stood out to you. Thanks for the support! 🙏

Hello Everyone and Respect to the Organizer,

Here is my final submission for the 3D Ludo Challenge.

This project was built as a robust Single Page Application (SPA) using Vanilla JavaScript and Three.js. My focus was on creating a stable, "Golden Master" build that performs flawlessly across both desktop and mobile devices without relying on heavy frameworks.

🔗 Repository: https://github.com/showtechedge/3d-ludo-challenge.git

🎮 Live Demo: https://showtechedge.github.io/3d-ludo-challenge/

🛠 Key Engineering Features:

🤖 Single Player AI (CPU): Unlike standard digital boards, this is a full video game. You can play Solo vs 3 CPUs, or Team Mode (2 Humans vs 2 CPUs). The AI handles rolling, decision making, and piece movement automatically.

🎮Ludo games can take 40 minutes. I prioritized a Save System so you never lose your progress, even on mobile.

📱 Mobile-First "Smart Tap" System: I implemented a custom raycasting algorithm with a proximity threshold. This ensures a smooth experience on touchscreens (solving the "fat finger" issue) while maintaining precise clicks on desktop.

💾 Intelligent State Management: The game features a persistent Auto-Save system using LocalStorage. You can close the browser and resume exactly where you left off, or create named Save Slots.

🎨 Studio Quality Visuals: Features custom lighting, procedural textures (generated via Canvas API to keep file size low), and a polished UI with a Start Screen and Victory Celebration.

🇳🇬 Naija Ruleset: Fully implements the "Killing," "Double Six," and "Home Stretch" rules we are used to.

🙏 Appreciation: A big thank you to @Seun and the organizers for putting this challenge together. It was a rigorous test of logic and 3D rendering optimization. To the other participants, well done on your builds—it is great to see the level of talent in our developer community.

Open to feedback and code reviews!