test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
No Mission--No Vote
ajstoner
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
You should be required to have at least one published foundry mission to be able to rate or comment on someone else's work. Put-up or shut-up.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Post edited by ajstoner on
0
Comments
Well I;m locked out. I can;t even get into the foundry.
Yeah, as much as we deal with a lot of folks who have no idea what the foundry can even do giving us low ratings A.J. Not everyone can get access or is even interested in making their own content.
Still, I lament your pain.
"* - u shood hav made bttr enemy behavor & given better drops"
With that said, perhaps it would benefit players to have access to a resource in game to better aquatint them with the can and can nots the foundry have.
That said, I still think there needs to be in game access to things like the forums and other FAQ bearing material without having to tab out.
Click here for my Foundry tutorial on Creating A Custom Interior Map.
You don't need to be a cook to say whether something is tasty. You don't need to be a musician to say whether you like a piece of music. You don't need to be a television producer to say whether you enjoyed an episode of your favorite series. And as STO has shown us, you don't need to be in the games industry to say whether game elements are good or bad.
I understand the frustration with some Foundry reviews. But it IS the author's responsibility to make missions accessible and find work-arounds around Foundry limitations. If there are players who can't play your mission, chances are you really ought to change something.
And BTW I find reviews that comment on (often minor) spelling or grammar mistakes much more irritating at times. Especially when the reviewers don't even take the time to spellcheck their own 1,000 word reviews.
"Sometimes you have to do things that you hate, so you can survive to fight another day."
To be fair, there are some reviews that make you go 'really??' I would like to hear your proposal, for example, of how as an author one is supposed to compensate for 'The loot drops suck.' or "I don't know where X System is (even if you tell them what sector block its in using the missioninfo tag so its highlighted).
There are certain things you really cant do anything about. With that said, I can only hope that the pathing system gets improved tremendously because that in itself is one of the largest causes of complaint. And it is not fair to say 'its the authors responsibility to compromise interior set design just so idiot Npcs can follow correctly.
The whole "Where is System X?" thing gets tedious, but I would include the name and Sector Block wherever possible (Mission grant dialog, mission description, first task (e.g. 'Go to System X in the YZ Sector Block)). And in general, Foundry authors should probably restrain from using too exotic systems in the far reaches of the game map. Try to use systems that are near social hubs.
Well, if you know the limits of the Foundry, you should really design your maps/missions in a way that takes those limits into account. You might see this as "compromising" interior sets, I think it's just another challenge to be creative with what you can actually do with the Foundry. Nothing wrong with that - and I don't see how this is unfair.
On the contrary, I think it would be unfair to players to sacrifice gameplay so you can design maps in a way you deem as "good".
"Sometimes you have to do things that you hate, so you can survive to fight another day."
people with missions published should NOT vote or rate other missions there is a temptation to 1 star them to clear them off "your slot" in the chart
However, I believe that you do not have to experience something to understand it, IF you bother to try. Some people won't try, obviously, but some people will and will leave intelligent and thoughtful comments without ever creating a mission of their own. We shouldn't limit them because some idiot doesn't bother to figure out the limitations we Foundry authors take.
On the start position: As I see it, there are three places you should put the starting location: in the mission summary, in the opening dialogue (both highlighted) and in the first objective (the one you see in your objective menu after accepting the mission) using the mission text box. I would also make the button to enter that first door something like "Begin: <Mission Name>" so people know they are in the right place. I believe after doing all that, it becomes the player's responsibility to read and figure out where to go. And if they can't be bothered to go more than a sector away from ESD than I don't really care if they play my mission or not.
As for NPC pathing... well its TRIBBLE, to be honest. I admit I have compromised designs I have wanted (removing door assets) to make sure the player has their full away team when they get to the end of the map. I really, really hated to do it, but I knew the player was going to face some combat at the end. Its gameplay vs. aesthetics. Real developers have to go through it to. Its a choice we all have to make. I opted for gameplay in this instance, in another I might go with aesthetics. And you know what, its still a pain because the built-in cryptic doors on the map still make the away teams screwed up sometimes. That one ain't my fault.
I second this. :biggrin:
I highly suspect some authors to put a 1 star on missions with a few votes but reaching the top of the available mission list. It's always fun to see several 4 and 5 stars reviews on an all new missions with one single one star at the right moment, a few hours after it gets out of the limbo.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
I hope not. I'm quite certain none of the authors I know personally would do that. I hope none of the authors I don't know would do it either. They ought to know how hard we all work on our missions and should want to keep the process fair. We're all in this together after all. In any case there's no evidence.
As for not allowing authors to rate and review missions, well I tell you I'd be pretty angry if they did that. Foundry missions are about the only content I play in this game, and I want to leave my thoughts, and I want to post a recommendation of play or don't play for all to see. If they did what you suggest, it would again be punishing a large group for the actions of a small one (if it even happens). Should we shut off the foundry because a few people abuse it to make quicky mission?
I know that it will never happen, and I'm not sure this would be a positive change, but believe me, the problem I raised happen. It's not a big deal though, it's just maddening.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
People could still play any mission they like and can still talk about it to other people without rating it. I don't see how it is either infringing upon anyone's "rights" or taking away from their enjoyment of a foundry mission by limiting the ability to publicly rank them to those who have shown some commitment to learning to use and understand the tools involved in create them. I think it would be nifty to do all manner of things I am not qualified to do but don't get all bent out of shape just because I can't.
As for authors down-rating missions to boost their own; there are several problems with this idea:
1) Creative people, as a rule, respect other creative people and tend to be far less petty than your average folk.
2) Any unethical foundry author who DOES do this sort of thing would only get to do it once and not be able to have their non-author friends and fleet mates join-in, which any such author would doubtless try since they know one vote doesn't **** for all that much.
3) Someone who goes around unfairly down-rating missions en mass would stand out and be quickly identified among this much smaller pool of people.
At least he said Sorry :P
Lol. Yes, as these things go he was very polite.
Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding! I totally agree.
For Example, my mission, "Q400 Dailies: The Cure" Review -
2 stars-
"Way to short, would have given 5 stars if longer."
Original Handle: @Q400
Join Date: December 2010
There are bad comments like the one you quoted. But hey, trolls will be trolls. And you said it yourself: "one vote doesn't **** for all that much."
This assessment seems a bit naive to me.
1) I don't think any such rule exists. Far from it, I think what others have pointed out is likely a reality. But again, in most cases those are singular votes. There have been reports by some popular authors about massive down-rating waves, though.
2.) Why would these authors not be able to rally friends? I don't get that point. But again, usually one vote doesn't change too much - whether it comes from someone not bothering with the Foundry or grudging authors.
3.) There is still the possibility to rate missions without leaving a comment - that is what is also happening in aforementioned down-rating waves. How exactly would you identify these people?
But again: I'm not in favor of excluding anyone from rating in the Foundry. Just wanted to point out where I thought your arguments were a bit flawed.
"Sometimes you have to do things that you hate, so you can survive to fight another day."
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
Right....
On my desktop right now is a formal DMCA against one of the crafting communities that I host a forum for about a Teddy Bear pattern pdf that I'm being told that they stole from another online knitting group.
Came from their attorney. Drafted, notarized and all that.
You don't need to be an author to know a good book. You don't need to be a producer to know a good movie. You don't need to be a programmer to know a good game. You don't need to be a singer/songwriter to know good music.
In fact, there's centuries of history in which the reactions of the creators to the response they've received suggest that being a creator actively hurts your ability to know a good creation, and there's a mountain of actual scientific research that proves that theory when the creation in question is your own - authors can rarely see their own typos, let alone their own plot holes.
Can't connect the OP's name to a foundry mission off hand, but every time one of these threads comes up I pick a few people who want to prevent troll ratings and find their missions. Every time it's the same thing: Overcluttered maps that break important parts of gameplay, intentionally overwhelming false-difficulty like stacked captains and battleships that engage at warp/beam in, poor or absent use of the objective tracker, and usually end up feeling their mission legitimately deserves a 2 or 3 at the outside. I might just do that today.
Absolutely. I'm a journalist and not a year goes by that there's not some high-profile plagerism case in our industry. That said I think most of the Foundry authors I know are great people who wouldn't engage in such actions... though I suppose you never know till it comes out in the papers, lol.
Plus disallowing non-authors to review missions would exclude people like mikewendell who are obviously passionate about the Foundry but are not authors, either by choice or by bugs.
It could happen, I suppose, but I don't really think it's a serious issue.
That being said, I think the opinion of the average player is important. What's considered good among Foundry authors might be wildly different from the average person. It seems like we're creating missions to have them played by more people than just Foundry authors, so the opinion of all players is definitely relevant.
In addition, if some sort of Foundry bug or issue is causing people not to enjoy one of my missions, then I'd like to know that. It means that a workaround either has to be put in, or the objectionable part needs to be removed. The fact that Foundry authors "understand" why the problem occurs wouldn't be much consolation to me.
Click here for my Foundry tutorial on Creating A Custom Interior Map.
While I agree with almost everything you have to say, an early 1-star vote can drop a mission so low no one will ever play it.
Foundry Mission Database
Check out my Foundry missions:
Standalone - The Great Escape - The Galaxy's Fair - Purity I: Of Denial - Return to Oblivion
Untitled Series - Duritanium Man - The Improbable Bulk - Commander Rihan
"Sometimes you have to do things that you hate, so you can survive to fight another day."
When I play foundry missions, I don't take anything that I think may be a "bug" into consideration when I rate the mission. I don't even take the technical things into consideration, as I recognize that my understanding of that stuff is limited. I may mention those kinds of things in my comments, but base my rating primarily on the storyline. There are many foundry players who think along the same line. Sometimes when you get a low rating, it's not because we "don't put out". Sometimes it really is because the storyline is lame and typo-ridden (for example).
Directive 010
You are one of the good ones. People like you give me hope for humanity.