test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Official tag list feedback

badbotlimitbadbotlimit Member, NW_CrypticDev, Cryptic Developer Posts: 175 Cryptic Developer
Hey Gang,
WE need to lock down the tags we are going to have when Fury of the Feywild launches.

Some Guidelines first,
  1. I only really want to have 10 - 12 tags at most.
  2. Really think about what the tags are going to be as we are not likely to change them (we get one shot at this)
  3. Think of experiences instead of getting everything covered. for example: RP, Story, Hard, Easy, Lore, Unique, silly and serious are things that could be universally understood by gamers and fans.

What I want to do is get the feedback and then start posting potential lists.
We will have a round of feedback on a list and keep posting lists until we feel good with the end result.

Here are the tags we have do far:
  • Challenging
  • StoryRich
  • CombatHeavy
  • LoreFilled
  • Exploration
  • Surprising
  • Secrets
  • Humorous
  • Dramatic
  • Unusual
  • Solo
  • Group
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • agentjasporagentjaspor Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Silverstars Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I think that's a good start, though there are some that seem a bit redundant. What's the difference between Unusual, Surprising, and Secrets? And I like the idea of having opposites for some of the tags, like:

    Solo vs. Group
    Dramatic vs. Humorous
    Exploration vs. Linear
    Surprising vs. Predictable (although that could be considered a negative description I guess)
    Challenging vs... I don't know, Casual ?

    And I definitely think we need at least one tag to capture anything that is heavy with puzzles, riddles, and/or platforming exercises.

    While we're on the subject, I'm going to pitch the popular "Hey, can't the authors at least tag their own quests?" request again. First, because without it, brand spanking new quests still have the issue of not showing up on anybody's radar. At least with the author tagging things, there's a chance they'll show up in some advanced searches. (Maybe limit them to three choices so they don't just spam every category in the hope for hits.) And secondly, what about long-established quests that may not be getting as many plays as some of the shiny new ones do? With a 100% player driven tagging system, it's a similar deal as the new quest - they'll have to get a fair amount of new plays for the tags to mean anything.

    Anyways, looking forward to this going live and thanks for listening to the player feedback! :D
  • ministerofchangeministerofchange Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I would like to see a "Role Play" tag - there are a few of us (including myself) whose Foundries are more focus on RP in the environments created then hack and slash battles. I am sure the idea isn't as popular, but there are enough of us out there to warrant the inclusion in my opinion.
  • wingedkagoutiwingedkagouti Member Posts: 275 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    While we're on the subject, I'm going to pitch the popular "Hey, can't the authors at least tag their own quests?" request again.
    I see author tags as a necessity for new content to get discovered without massively spamming said content everywhere.
  • angryspriteangrysprite Member Posts: 4,982 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Here are the tags we have do far:

    I would ask, nay; BEG that you add one word: "Focussed" to four of these. So this list might look more like this:
    • Challenging
    • StoryFocussed
    • CombatFocussed
    • LoreFilled
    • Exploration
    • Surprising
    • Secrets
    • Humorous
    • Dramatic
    • Unusual
    • SoloFocussed
    • GroupFocussed
    • SoloGroupChoice <--NEW

    These are great tags... However, the primary criteria (I suspect) many people are considering is the "Story" to "Combat" ratio, then whether the quest is designed for solo or group play. By adding the word "Focussed" makes it CLEAR that the quest is designed with that thought in mind.

    The PROBLEM I am seeing right now is that there are too many quests manually tagged with "STORY HEAVY" *and* "COMBAT HEAVY" in the same quest because authors think their quest is both simultaneously. By adding "FOCUSSED" tells authors to PICK ONE, NOT BOTH.

    As for the new "SoloGroupChoice" - My quests (and I am seeing many more authors also doing it) are being designed for solo play, but allow the players to choose to "up the ante" combat-wise that would be suitable for small groups (2 or 3 players) - but a nightmare for solo players. Having such a tag would be useful, rather than using BOTH "Solo" and "Group" which would look confusing.

    TL;DR: Too many authors claim BOTH "Story" and "Combat" rather than one or the other (it's usually a lot more combat than story) - Adding "Focussed" tells author pick ONE or the OTHER not BOTH.

    Just my own too sense, your milage will obviously vary.

    EDIT TO ADD:

    Add a NEW TAG:

    TestingOnly

    So that a published quest that that author doesn't want people to play can be clearly tagged as such and players will know it's a work in progress that might not be completable, etc..
    #JustSaying
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Too many authors claim BOTH "Story" and "Combat" rather than one or the other (it's usually a lot more
    combat than story) - Adding "Focussed" tells author pick ONE or the OTHER not BOTH.

    And I would beg that it be spelled "Focused." Although I can completely see the desire, I think authors would just as soon double tag something with multiple foci, so I would propose either the more qualifying "Centric" or disabling opposite tag pairs - like selecting Combat Heavy (Combat Centric) would disable Story Rich (Story Centric). That might be a better alternative -- don't even allow the conflicting data to be entered in the first place.

    My additional Tag suggestions (in CamelCase):
    • AdjustableDifficulty
    • Dynamic
    • Scenic
    • Scary (Spooky? PG13?)
    • Parkour

    I would also LOUDLY re-iterate the need for the Author to at least enter the initial tags - could be exactly like the reviewer does, it doesn't need to be maintained separately it would just start off the quest with a chance to be searched.

    It also seems like Exploration/Surprising/Secrets have an awful lot of overlap.

    When the "final" tags get narrowed down, I hope there is at least a brief summarization of what the Devs feel that tag "represents."
  • izatarizatar Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,161 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    My preferences:

    Instead of Challenging use
    StandardDifficulty
    EasyDifficulty
    HardDifficulty


    Insteadof StoryRich use
    Story
    Instead of CombatHeavy use
    Action
    Instead of LoreFilled, use
    DnDLore
    ForgottenRealms

    Keep Exploration
    Nix Surprising. It isn't a surprise if you are expecting it..
    Nix Secrets, what does this even mean?
    Keep Humorous
    Nix Dramatic, this is the same as Story
    Nix Unusual, this has little meaning
    Keep Solo
    Keep Group

    Add Puzzle
    Add RolePlay
    Add Jumping
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    izatar wrote: »
    Add Jumping

    *cough* Parkour *cough* -- not as limiting as Jumping and widens scope a wee bit. And maybe young 'uns will learn a new word, get excited by them and go on to become the next great novelist. :cool:
  • angryspriteangrysprite Member Posts: 4,982 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    eldarth wrote: »
    And I would beg that it be spelled "Focused." Although I can completely see the desire, I think authors would just as soon double tag something with multiple foci, so I would propose either the more qualifying "Centric" or disabling opposite tag pairs - like selecting Combat Heavy (Combat Centric) would disable Story Rich (Story Centric). That might be a better alternative -- don't even allow the conflicting data to be entered in the first place.

    FIRST: It was my KEEBORD! It's EEEVIIIL. Yeah, that's the ticket - it was the keyboard!

    I cocnur with your comment. I'm not saying it has to be the way I suggest - but the CONCEPT of making it more specific. :)
  • izatarizatar Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,161 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    eldarth wrote: »
    *cough* Parkour *cough* -- not as limiting as Jumping and widens scope a wee bit. And maybe young 'uns will learn a new word, get excited by them and go on to become the next great novelist. :cool:
    You gotta make do with the words people understand; this is a game not a classroom. Quite frankly, nobody knows what 'Parkour' means. Thus, they will never search for it and the tag becomes useless.
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    • Story (covers Lore imo)
    • Puzzle (covers everything from jumping to riddles)
    • Humour
    • Combat
    • Horror
    • Mystery
    • Exploration
    • Tavern (RP homes, guild halls etc.)
    • Balanced
    • Group (Solo is the default, only group needs specifying)

    This would be an ideal list for me (AS A PLAYER, I don't author quests).

    I really hate the idea that something is labelled 'dramatic' or 'surprising' etc. Those concepts are entirely subjective and could lead to expectations not being met (or surprises being spoiled).
  • antonkyleantonkyle Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    karitr wrote: »
    • Story (covers Lore imo)
    • Puzzle (covers everything from jumping to riddles)
    • Humour
    • Combat
    • Horror
    • Mystery
    • Exploration
    • Tavern (RP homes, guild halls etc.)
    • Balanced
    • Group (Solo is the default, only group needs specifying)

    This would be an ideal list for me (AS A PLAYER, I don't author quests).

    I really hate the idea that something is labelled 'dramatic' or 'surprising' etc. Those concepts are entirely subjective and could lead to expectations not being met (or surprises being spoiled).


    I'd go with that list. except Story and Lore. A good Story could be very far away from the D&D Lore.
  • ministerofchangeministerofchange Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    My variation of the above list would be
    • Original Story (for stuff not D&D lore based)
    • Puzzle (covers everything from jumping to riddles)
    • Humor
    • Combat
    • Horror
    • Mystery
    • Exploration
    • Lore Based
    • Tavern (RP homes, guild halls etc. - Really like this idea)
    • Group (Solo is the default, only group needs specifying)
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    antonkyle wrote: »
    I'd go with that list. except Story and Lore. A good Story could be very far away from the D&D Lore.

    Fair enough. I think we could add Lore in without going over the allotted 12 categories :)

    My variation of the above list would be

    I'm not playing the preview shard, so don't know how many options we can pick to describe a quest. If it's more than one, I think your version is fine. However, you don't have to specify that story be 'original', which could be confusing and puts story quests such as Celantra's recent contest winner in limbo. Plus for people who are giving the list a quick glance, they may only see the 'Original' part of the description and miss the part where it says 'story'.

    If we can only select one option, then I do think 'Balanced' should be an option for those quests that don't lean heavily one way or another. Story/combat quests make up a huge percentage of the catalogue after all.
    • Story
    • Puzzle (covers everything from jumping to riddles)
    • Humour
    • Combat
    • Horror
    • Mystery
    • Exploration
    • Lore
    • Balanced (Include if players can only select one option)
    • Tavern (RP homes, guild halls etc.)
    • Group
    • Solo

    EDIT: I realised that some quests provide both solo or group content and the author would probably want to see that reflected in the tags. Added Solo to the list.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    izatar wrote: »
    You gotta make do with the words people understand; this is a game not a classroom. Quite frankly, nobody knows what 'Parkour' means. Thus, they will never search for it and the tag becomes useless.

    [edit: snipped somewhat harsh diatribe against society.]

    I think the actual people who are interested in jumping/platform/freerunning know exactly what it means.
    YouTube:About 5,560,000 results
    Google: About 22,100,000 results
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    eldarth, it isn't about people being more stupid. There is a whole world sharing the internet and not everyone speaks the same language, so there is a necessity to keep things simple and uncomplicated. An example of this would be the adaptation of the French word 'parcours' to accommodate different language structures and phonetics.

    Surely if you were really worried about dumbing down, you would be championing the original French version and not the simplified derived term that is currently fashionable? (Not being a follower of fashion, 'obstacle course' works fine for me).

    Aside all that, we are restricted to 10-12 tags which doesn't allow for niche genres or sub-headings, or sub-sub-headings - if we allow Parkour or Jumping, what about Maze maps, or Hidden Objects? Or Maze Maps with Hidden Objects? :p

    "Puzzle" encompasses all types of puzzle, including 'Action Puzzle' (211,000,000 results returned) of which Parkour is just one of many of that type.

    Given that the devs are considering a mix of genres and emotive adjectives (Please reconsider the latter Devs!), we have even less tags to play with. Let's try to be sensible?
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    karitr wrote: »
    Given that the devs are considering a mix of genres and emotive adjectives (Please reconsider the latter Devs!), we have even less tags to play with. Let's try to be sensible?

    Well stated (the entire message, actually). Agree. I think given a well worded tooltip that goes along with each tag "Puzzle" works great (and saves a tag!) :p
  • antonkyleantonkyle Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    eldarth wrote: »
    Which is exactly why each generation grows up stupider and stupider, we keep dumbing everything down until -- Idiocracy.

    This comment is not needed. It's simply not true and is offensive.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    antonkyle wrote: »
    This comment is not needed. It's simply not true and is offensive.

    Snipped diatribe against society.
  • antonkyleantonkyle Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    eldarth wrote: »
    Snipped diatribe against society.

    It's just not true though, 100 years ago we had no computers and mobile phones etc. As a society we are getting clever'er (haha) The problem is when things like the internet are created it means that anyone has a voice. Even the not so bright.

    I think you were referring to people being ignorant. Everyone is ignorant of something. Who has time to learn everything.

    And I didn't mean to come across as an $#@#, which I probably did.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    antonkyle wrote: »
    And I didn't mean to come across as an $#@#, which I probably did.

    Nope, just bringing my sometimes caustic bitter sarcasm to light. ;-)

    Back to tags...
    • Farming (I think we need to give it to them so they'll rally 'round it and not pollute other tags/quests)
  • antonkyleantonkyle Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    eldarth wrote: »
    Back to tags...
    • Farming (I think we need to give it to them so they'll rally 'round it and not pollute other tags/quests)

    I agree with that. I have a most awesome farming quest but I'm a little afraid to publish it. For one thing I'm not sure if they are allowed also I don't want to upset the foundry community.

    Mine is basically a little story where you protect a caravan around a spawn point and they run at you in turn, giving you just enough time to heal up before they get to you. It works really well. I designed it so I could test all the hard encounters re-skinned as a human. I was going to add a 2nd part the same but with them re-skinned as a bear. It was just so I could see what they looked and fought like but it works really well as a farming quest. I have not bought a potion or scroll thing since I designed it. It is odd that you get loot in the foundry, but I'm not complaining.
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    So what makes way for Farming? Combat perhaps? Are Arena maps combat or farming?

    I'd definitely say both Farming and Arena are Combat maps, so maybe we best stick to the sensible option that is actually likely to be put in place?



    Still undecided if eldarth is being facetious or not, but leaning toward, probably.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    karitr wrote: »
    So what makes way for Farming? Combat perhaps? Are Arena maps combat or farming?

    I'd definitely say both Farming and Arena are Combat maps, so maybe we best stick to the sensible option that is actually likely to be put in place?

    Still undecided if eldarth is being facetious or not, but leaning toward, probably.

    No,actually I think the people who care nothing about story and just want to basically wade through hundreds of spiders for simple loot drops, or grind through tougher encounters for their drops or Exp -- those kind of farmers.

    Look at all the exploit, "pit" map quests. They are going to exist until Cryptic figures out how to deal with them Then once they do, there will be thousands of "farming" quests for experience or loot that are devoid of any story or design.

    Those "authors" [term used facetiously :D] and their subscribers will exist. I want to give them a flag to rally around and hopefully keep the other tags from being polluted.
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    Farming signifies a combat heavy quest, not necessarily an exploit map.

    Exploits are actually being dealt with quite quickly now, but they do have to be reported. However that is another topic, not a discussion for this thread.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    karitr wrote: »
    Farming signifies a combat heavy quest, not necessarily an exploit map.

    Exploits are actually being dealt with quite quickly now, but they do have to be reported. However that is another topic, not a discussion for this thread.

    I think it needs to be a discussion for this thread. The type of individuals who create and use exploit quests are the same ones that will bend any restriction they can to create maps that farm either experience or loot with either least risk or least time and story/lore all the rest of the tags mean absolutely nothing to them.

    If we create a "Farming" (or other word) tag that means rapid experience and/or loot with least risk/least time then they will have something to search on and not muddy the waters for people who want all the other tags to have meaning.

    That's my 2 cents anyway. :p

    Edit: Not that exploits need to be reported, but the idea of a "farming" tag needs to be discussed.
    I essentially don't want to see "Combat Heavy" usurped by the farming crowd. And if we don't have a tag for farmers, then as authors we can kiss Combat Heavy goodbye as a usable tag.
  • karitrkaritr Member Posts: 662 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    You seem to want to use the tags themselves to quantify 'quality', but I was under the impression a star rating will exist in the new format to measure quality.

    I can't seem to find a screenshot at the moment and as I am also curious to see how many tags we can select on review, I think its about time to jump onto preview.

    EDIT: The Foundry is temporarily disabled on the Preview shard at the moment. Hopefully it will be back soon.
  • badbotlimitbadbotlimit Member, NW_CrypticDev, Cryptic Developer Posts: 175 Cryptic Developer
    edited August 2013
    OK gang,
    I have a list that we should take a look at.
    The team looked at all the feedback and suggestions.
    How does this look?

    Roleplay
    Puzzle
    Lore
    Humor
    Exploration
    Story Focus
    Combat Focus
    Solo
    Group
    Challenging
    Eventful
    Unusual
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Looks pretty good - but some are still a little confusing.
    What does Eventful signify? Or how is Challenging distinguishable from either Puzzle or Combat Focus?

    Could we maybe get a simple 1-sentence "summarization" of what they mean to you all??
    i.e. How would a "tooltip" be worded for each tag?

    Edit: I also still want an Adjustable Difficulty -- most of mine have Normal/Easy/Hard/Elite levels.
  • badbotlimitbadbotlimit Member, NW_CrypticDev, Cryptic Developer Posts: 175 Cryptic Developer
    edited August 2013
    Eventful - used in the case where one would speak to the events of the quest. For instance, there are a lot of triggered spawns or when conditions used very well. Eventful could also be used to signify the pace of a quest. In simple terms, a quest with a lot going on could be eventful.

    Challenging - used in the case where the content or combat was challenging. This is the opposite of easy. The word challenging was used instead of hard or difficult because of it's more positive tone. The use of challenging along with other tags gets us a lot. For instance: Solo, combat focus, challenging takes care of a "hard" tag and while it does use multiple tags it allows us not to have an easy tag. Think of this as a qualifier for other tags.

    We did skip the normal/easy/hard tags on purpose. On one hand they are subjective and on the other, as with the farm tag, may be equally misleading, confused or over used.
  • eldartheldarth Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    We did skip the normal/easy/hard tags on purpose. On one hand they are subjective and on the other, as with the farm tag, may be equally misleading, confused or over used.

    Absolutely - I definitely wouldn't put in normal/easy/hard individual tags - but I know a fair number of us make our quests adjustable from combat light to combat heavy - hence "Adjustable Difficulty." If I put in tag Combat Focus, Challenging then I lose everyone looking for something not too difficult. If I put only Combat Focus, Solo then I lose everyone looking for a Group or Challenging.
    Either way I'm forced to lose half (some?) of my potential audience.
Sign In or Register to comment.