test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Foundry missions/Community content

I don't want to assume too much as I haven't played for too long, nor do I want to step on any toes, but something seems off with the community content and I just can't put my finger on it. I'm hoping to get others opinions/guidance. Maybe there is something I am not aware of in later main story-line. Granted, were not all script writers and there are a couple of tribbles, I mean bugs, in the foundry system but there are a couple of annoyances, to me, that is currently making me avoid foundry missions:

- Long winded: Possibly because it's not spread over several missions/locations, like the main story-line is, but all shoved into one location (Planet system), meaning you have to complete it all in one sitting, you kinda loose interest in the story-line after a while and just want to finish, which is kinda sad tbh as the writer puts all the work and effort into it just to have someone quit halfway. A good example is when you get bounced back and forth between ground and space missions over and over again.

- Walls of text: Some conversations can do with a bit of tweaking to shorten it somewhat. I do like hearing technical Startrek jargon but something like "Sub-space particles clogged up the plasma scrubbers" is enough. Expanding into an in-depth explanation of how the ship works or how the problem can be resolved starts getting on my nerves. The same with backstories. Yes, NPC's needs a backstory to explain how they came to be where they are but going on to the second paragraph, it's getting a bit much and by the third I am wishing I was finished with the mission already.

- Enemy ballance: Attack waves on some, seems almost erratic, looking more like controlled chaos than actual combat ... and yes combat is frantic but there's still some semblance of order to it. There is something odd about foundry waves that just doesn't seem right, both space and ground missions (Not talking about "Farming missions").

- Captain responses: Ok, this one is purely my own preference, but my toon, as a captain, would never ask his crew "What do I do now" or "Should we" but rather "Lets do this" or "I suggest we" or "Engineering, status report". Better yet, have the crew submit their suggestions without being prompted. It just shows a lack of confidence from a captain to, what amounts to, asking his crew if he's doing the right thing.

- Direction: Here it gets tricky, as I understand some might want to bring in a little less "linear" style into it, which I actually appreciate. The problem comes in, and I don't know if it's a Foundry bug, when you don't have the quest marker to show you to the next point. I only say this because the game makes you used to this approach through the main story-line and it throws you for a loop when you suddenly have to look for the next point instead of having the location pointed to. Some may even think the mission is bugged altogether.

Leaving myself wide open for flaming here but as I said, just my take/feel on it and not intended to step on others toes.

(P.S. How do you get Foundry slots? )

Comments

  • This content has been removed.
  • ozawhozawh Member Posts: 5 Arc User
    spielman1 wrote: »
    For me if a player wants to make a foundry mission by all means go for it. I also agree with making the missions linear and multiple if one wants too. Not the rush in done wait rush in done wait rush in done. Make it have a story that makes sense make the mission one that the player will remember for time to come.

    By all means ... but maybe they need to add a descriptive flag to state if it has a heavy story as currently, when you select one, you don't know what your getting your self into until your half way through.

  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    edited July 2015
    I think the whole point that you may be missing is that it is community content--and therefore other than staying inside a basic EULA, people have the freedom to create what they want. It isn't intended to be STO canon (even though a few missions are so good I consider them parts of my characters' canons).

    While I certainly recommend that people use tags, indicate run time, and whether a mission is action-heavy or story-heavy, for everyone's sake, I think it's against the spirit of what the Foundry is to suggest styles other than what you like shouldn't exist. This is particularly true since unlike the official missions, there are many styles to choose from, and additionally, there are no rewards you can get from the Foundry that are unique to it. That means you are not required as a player to participate in order to remain competitive in game. I think you'd be better off either reading the descriptions and choosing missions more carefully accordingly, or not playing the Foundry.

    Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
    Proudly F2P.  Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0 Arc User
    Speaking as an active Foundry writer:
    ozawh wrote: »
    I don't want to assume too much as I haven't played for too long, nor do I want to step on any toes, but something seems off with the community content and I just can't put my finger on it. I'm hoping to get others opinions/guidance. Maybe there is something I am not aware of in later main story-line. Granted, were not all script writers and there are a couple of tribbles, I mean bugs, in the foundry system but there are a couple of annoyances, to me, that is currently making me avoid foundry missions:

    - Long winded: Possibly because it's not spread over several missions/locations, like the main story-line is, but all shoved into one location (Planet system), meaning you have to complete it all in one sitting, you kinda loose interest in the story-line after a while and just want to finish, which is kinda sad tbh as the writer puts all the work and effort into it just to have someone quit halfway. A good example is when you get bounced back and forth between ground and space missions over and over again.
    Mission length is definitely a genuine concern, especially since a lot of us in the Foundry like creating the epic Star Trek stories we don't often get in STO. But, outside the movies those stories tended to be only 45 minutes or so long. Personally, my opinion is that you should try to get to about a 60 minute runtime at most. If it's longer than that, see what you can cut for time, or find a good spot to break it into a two-parter.
    ozawh wrote: »
    - Walls of text: Some conversations can do with a bit of tweaking to shorten it somewhat. I do like hearing technical Startrek jargon but something like "Sub-space particles clogged up the plasma scrubbers" is enough. Expanding into an in-depth explanation of how the ship works or how the problem can be resolved starts getting on my nerves. The same with backstories. Yes, NPC's needs a backstory to explain how they came to be where they are but going on to the second paragraph, it's getting a bit much and by the third I am wishing I was finished with the mission already.
    Again, agreed. With my personal style, technobabble I generally skip or at least lampshade ("somebody please tell me what the heck he just said"), rather like later DS9 episodes tended to do. As for NPC backstories, unless the backstory is directly relevant I tend to segregate it into an optional dialog branch that you can skip past, or put it in side dialogs that you aren't required to read to advance the mission.
    ozawh wrote: »
    - Enemy ballance: Attack waves on some, seems almost erratic, looking more like controlled chaos than actual combat ... and yes combat is frantic but there's still some semblance of order to it. There is something odd about foundry waves that just doesn't seem right, both space and ground missions (Not talking about "Farming missions").
    That honestly isn't something we have very much control over. We can control enemy placement and we have a little control over what classes appear (in the sense we can select different premade mob groups), but the level scaling is hard-coded.
    ozawh wrote: »
    - Captain responses: Ok, this one is purely my own preference, but my toon, as a captain, would never ask his crew "What do I do now" or "Should we" but rather "Lets do this" or "I suggest we" or "Engineering, status report". Better yet, have the crew submit their suggestions without being prompted. It just shows a lack of confidence from a captain to, what amounts to, asking his crew if he's doing the right thing.

    - Direction: Here it gets tricky, as I understand some might want to bring in a little less "linear" style into it, which I actually appreciate. The problem comes in, and I don't know if it's a Foundry bug, when you don't have the quest marker to show you to the next point. I only say this because the game makes you used to this approach through the main story-line and it throws you for a loop when you suddenly have to look for the next point instead of having the location pointed to. Some may even think the mission is bugged altogether.
    These I think are stylistic things. As gulberat said, this is user-generated content, so not every Foundry mission is going to act the same way.

    In regards to the former, I will counter that a good superior does listen to the input of his subordinates, especially if it's something s/he isn't trained for.

    In regards to the latter, I personally agree with you: I really don't like having to go hunt down a mission goal, either.
    ozawh wrote: »
    (P.S. How do you get Foundry slots? )
    Get 10k refined dilithium on any of your toons, then go to the game's main menu, click "Create Content", and click "buy Foundry slots".
  • castsbugccastsbugc Member Posts: 830 Arc User
    edited July 2015
    level scaling is indeed a hard thing to manage. The thing of it is, you can only do so much to guess how it will work for everyone, and honestly, if you are 'good' (and I use that term loosely) its hard to say if a challenge is too much for the 'average' player. I know, from experience, that something I created that I mop the floor with on my science character, I hear nothing but trouble in reviews from people who say they get blown up before they even know what hit them.. Its a TRIBBLE shoot really,

    In regard to the boffs ordering you around....well that gets to be a tricky one. Its just hard to tell a player what they need to do, or to make sure they know what to do. Ok this is a bit of an example. I have a spotlight mission, Keeping Up With The J'Sens. In it, I have 2 'optional' objectives, the idea behind them being as a captain you have to make split second decisions that arent in your orders. I use the BOffs to lay out the options, but you get to do the things. Because this is not explicitly set out on the storyboard, people get very confused. I am told all the time that because I dont spell it out, they couldnt figure it out.


    I was typing a longform reply, but I think starsword pretty much hit all the topics with what I was going to say :)​​
  • ozawhozawh Member Posts: 5 Arc User
    Thanks for all the constructive feedback as it has put things in perspective :)

    I do realise now that the cost of foundry slots may play a large role in the size of missions and I did suspect the waves/mobs as being Arc controlled and that the authors don't have much control over it, just needed confirmation.

    The setup does pose certain limitations when trying to break out of the linear mode and might prove troublesome to some, but clear instructions does go a long way and I have seen a couple of good examples where notice is given that no markers are given.

    As for the rest of it, like I said, we can't all be seasoned script writers and I don't expect foundry missions to be just like the main story-line and I do find some very well written dialog/story-lines. It would be great to see how current authors evolve and become more adapt :)

    Much appreciated ;)

    ( Hope to tip all of you authors out there to the max :blush: )
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,983 Arc User
    edited July 2015
    gulberat wrote: »
    I think it's against the spirit of what the Foundry is to suggest styles other than what you like shouldn't exist.

    But some of the points the OP brings up aren't stylistic, they're mechanical. You'll find similar feedback in any creative writing class. Don't use a block of text to say what a few more thoughtful words can convey. Use tangents in a very definite way. Don't just throw them out there to make the world/mission feel bigger, use them to create a specific context for the main narrative. Make consistent characters. Ditto for game design (make objectives intuitive or at least finding them an intuitive process).

    The Foundry is a creative medium but as with any creative medium the work is not self-justifiable. You need someone else involved. You need feedback. True, authors do have in-game reviews but those short blurbs preclude a more lengthy discussion on what generally works and what doesn't. Some things you can get in there, but a lot you can't. Its worth discussing those topics, not to force authors to produce content on demand but to [hopefully] improve their ability to express themselves.

    My top two.
    1. Do more with less. There's a definite tendency in the foundry to try to move a plot along with explanations. Reactions, events, small comments, those aren't used as much in favor of the "well here's the story I want to tell you so here it is." It works, for the purposes of just making a playable mission, but it only allows for a narrow range of story telling (basically just shouting it.) Not that one shouldn't "shout" at all, but stories are most interesting when that's not all there is.

    2. Use characters. With the tendency to explain the need to present information content clearly is paramount. Therefore foundry authors may not provide themselves with the room to portray individual personalities, mannerisms, or to put it simply "human depth". The events may be complex and so too the concepts that need to be explained but the people involved can often come across as rather shallow and one dimensional. Its essentially playing to a Captain Proton mode of sci-fi as opposed to Star Trek.
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • drogyn1701drogyn1701 Member Posts: 3,606 Media Corps
    I think Cast and Starsword pretty much covered my general thoughts, but it seems we have here some folks with genuine interest in the Foundry which is excellent, and I would direct you to a few places if you have continued interest.

    First, obviously, the Foundry section of these forums.

    Second, StarbaseUGC.com, this is where the two dedicated Foundry podcasts live: The Foundry Roundtable and the Author's Outpost. All the episodes are linked to there, and there is a chatroom where a lot of authors hang out. There are also several podcasts, such as Tribbles in Ecstasy, that have Foundry content (reviews, live playthroughs, etc).
    The Foundry Roundtable live Saturdays at 7:30PM EST/4:30PM PST on twitch.tv/thefoundryroundtable
  • dragonkata81dragonkata81 Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    Foundry missions are clogged with arbitrary limitations dumped on content creators, such as dilithium reward vs time, exp/loot limit, even map count and asset limit. The biggest problem facing Foundry creators is working around these limitations.

    For example, I have two Foundry missions, both currently in the Top 3 for their respective systems, The Dragon Hunt and The Dragon's Wrath. Both missions take approximately 60 mins to complete, thus falling into the maximum dilithium reward bracket. A mission over this length of time gains no bonus (as far as I'm aware). Mindless lootem-ups/shootem-ups can now be completed so fast, that authors have taken to asking their players to wait 5-10 minutes before completing the mission, just to keep the tiniest dilithium reward. Generally, a mission with an average playtime of less than 20mins is not going to be worth a player investing in.

    My missions are aimed at lower level character (Captain level and below), who do not have access to the great swathes of dilithium in the Battlezones etc. Instantly, you have a captive audience, who if they understand the reward vs time mechanic, will be looking to use your mission. (Especially considering the average Cryptic play time is about the same, and rewards rather less.)

    The problem is how you go about making such a mission. There are two ways, mindless shooting of wave upon wave of enemies (which will offer no reward after about the second map anyway), or story. And as the majority of players who are looking into the Foundry are generally looking for a break from the mindless dues ex machina and DPS race, a decent story can go over quite well. If players chose not to read it, and complain at the end "too long", "way to much text", "moar shooting", well they've already robbed themselves by finishing quickly and decreasing their dilithium payout, so don't try to adjust if it's not your style.

    Balance of combat can be tricky, especially with the new enemy scaling mechanic introduced around Season 9.5 or Season 10. I've played missions with a level 30 character and passed them with ease, only to come back later at level 60+ and been given a serious thumping because the scaling mechanic is slightly out-of-whack (at the same time, some scaled opponents are laughably easy). Unless you are trying to make a statement, or drive home a challenge, the less-is-more rule can best apply to combat. Many players will give up in frustration if they keep getting stomped.

    And finally, always remember it's your story. Only you know just how its going to develop, or what your ultimate goal/objective actually is. How you convey that, through lots of short missions, or one or two long ones, is up to you. But always be open to constructive criticism, take advice as you feel you need to, respond to fans or reviewers who raise concerns (sometimes its simply they've misread something), and most of all...have fun creating! Nobody is expecting you to be a Star Trek guru or write a Noble Prize level story. As long as its fun, players will come.
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    Agreed. I have seen stories told very well ranging from 20 minutes all the way up to--no kidding--a mission I played that hit the 2 hour mark, if you took all of the extra, optional dialogue.

    For me, it is TONS of fun to get lost in a world that way. One way that authors can use to make missions at least a little bit "scalable" is optional dialogue--only a certain amount containing summary for those who want to get through quickly, but lots of little side chats you can have if you just feel like wandering around and immersing yourself into the world.

    As for me...I tend to be fine with 45-60 minutes required. The experience to me compares to watching a Star Trek episode.

    But again that's personal preference. I think that as long as mission creators are up front in the description about what they're doing, then there should be no reason to complaint. If one fails to read the disclaimer and continues anyway, that's on their head. ;)

    Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
    Proudly F2P.  Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Sign In or Register to comment.