Stegie1234 wrote:
Code that contains advanced uses of lists, variables, custom blocks etc. and also requires intermediate or advanced knowledge of programming.

What is your definition of “intermediate or advanced knowledge of programming”?

Stegie1234 wrote:
Do you think pen is really a good measure of how complex or difficult to make a project is? I used to make “pen” projects on my old account, one of which contained 9 blocks and literally drew a square on the screen, and many projects like that exist on Scratch.

I have no idea. It almost seems that a “complex” project does not have a well-defined concrete definition …

Stegie1234 wrote:
I didn’t say there wasn’t a benefit to featuring simple projects; I meant there wasn’t a benefit to the majority or all of the featured projects being simple.

Sure there is. If most featured projects are simple, that often means most featured projects are easier to use, easier to understand, and easier to remix. These are all important for Scratch's goal to inspire others to make their own creations and remix existing projects. This is especially important given the featured project row's prominence on the front page.

Stegie1234 wrote:
But why do none of them have new types of coding? Also, many of the projects, such as “icon creator 2”, are just and idea used over and over again. (I suppose a counterargument to that would be that not all the projects have to be innovative.)

True, that is a counterargument, but my initial comeback is that coding is not the only aspect of Scratch. Creativity and presentation is a huge component of it. As for the icon creator, note that there will always be Scratchers who have never seen an icon creator before. Even if they have, they perhaps have never seen one that they liked, and a featured icon creator could inspire them, if it's a new one that they turn out to like. Even if they have seen plenty of icon creators that they've liked, they certainly would not have seen one in this Scratcher's art style. In any case, the project would showcase innovation, either through an icon creator or through a new art style.

Also: how does one define “new types of coding”? Are you suggesting that the Scratch Team should not feature 3D platformers because those have been made before?

Stegie1234 wrote:
I honestly don’t see how any of the featured projects could inspire coding, but I’ll take your word for it.

For example, those who see a featured icon creator may be inspired to code their own icon creator.

Stegie1234 wrote:
Every game on Scratch is a “real game” because, well, it’s a game and you can’t argue with that. What I meant by “real game” is games that look like they were coded “professionally” in JavaScript or Unity etc., the kind of games that people who don’t use Scratch think of if you say “video game”. I said it like that because I couldn’t find a better word for it.

Why look for professional games on Scratch? Isn't that what Steam or a Nintendo Switch is for?