'Selling' your mission

System

This question I hope has an easy answer, but I rather expect that won't be the case. I've been looking for some feedback for the missions that I have written, but so far they seem to be all but neglected with a little traffic on one and no traffic on the other that I can tell. That actually leads me to my question:

What best helps to 'sell' a mission to the playerbase, and thus gets you traffic. Is it a popularity contest that means only the 'best' known people will get traffic? Is it because I'm not in a fleet and can't go 'hey my mission is up, check it out? Is it because I have stayed away from missions with major amounts of combat? Does the episode description need to be changed? Could they simply need new names for the missions?. What quality draws you towards trying out a mission someone else has created.

I ask these questions now since the Foundry is in beta right now, we don't have a large influx of missions being created and uploaded right now. Once the system moves over to the Holodeck though, I expect things to become even 'worse' as the number of searchable missions increases geometrically. Conversely, my question might be a moot one because there will be a larger number of players willing to try out missions, but I have a feeling that most people will only bother with those missions that get the highest possible rankings.


Now for the 'advertising' if you will. The 2 missions I have published are Digging in the Past and Keeping up with the J'Sens. If you are so inclined take a look and tell me if you think you would play it, or if you choose to, what you think of it so that maybe I won't have to ask in the future what I need to do so people will play it

Archived Post

I think getting noticed on Tribble without a fleet sponsorship will be next to impossible unless the growing movement to balance reviews gains sufficient momentum. Right now, the fleet members are the ones with the name recognition because the number of reviews they get puts them at or near the top of every list. Once you've played an awesome "PlayerX" mission, then most likely you'll play another "PlayerX" mission even if it has no reviews. This will carry itself onto Holodeck and continue in the same fashion with even more dire result as even greater name recognition even greater reviews per mission will be required in order to stand out from the crowd.

This is why I think a movement towards balancing the reviews is something to be started now (as the forums suggest) so that we all have a fair shot at having our content played and reviewed, for good or for bad. Hopefully, the momentum created by this "review balancing" moevement will carry forward to Holodeck and allow for more players to find the Foundry useful and worthy of using (as opposed to just giving up due to fleet monopoly of the Foundry).

Viva la Review Balancing!

(PS, play Where's Maldo Part 1 when the Foundry missions become available again)

Archived Post

If I am not mistaken, after someone does a UGC mission, it comes off thier list.

So as the Big ones get done..they work thier way through the list to some that have not had
a lot of attension.

So given time, all adventures will be tried. I hope.
Do keep in mind it is Tribble...not the main server.

Archived Post

Personally, I think if missions were authored and categorised based on their content (Science, Tactical, Engineering) there might be a better way to get an audience for your work.

For example if your mission contains zero combat (as all my efforts to date have) and are focused on scientific areas of the Federation with a bit of fix-it interaction with objects at science outposts, I would like to be able to categorise it a science mission.

I'd also like to be able to browse the Science and Engineering categories and would probably play a lot of those missions, since I find the combat in STO to currently be very tiresome.

I know everybody keeps going on about "oh, the Federation is at war, it's a war game" but ultimately, all Star Trek was always about exploration and diplomacy, no matter how often it was puncutated with battle.

"It's five year mission to explore strange, new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations" ring a bell?

And the war has to end some time. Fingers crossed there is some non-combat content being seriously developed by mid-late 2011 at the latest.

Archived Post

Good point, but I still say that, for each rated mission a player chooses, he were to play an unrated one, the Foundry would be a much more balanced place.

Archived Post

castmodean wrote: »

This question I hope has an easy answer, but I rather expect that won't be the case. I've been looking for some feedback for the missions that I have written, but so far they seem to be all but neglected with a little traffic on one and no traffic on the other that I can tell. That actually leads me to my question:

What best helps to 'sell' a mission to the playerbase, and thus gets you traffic. Is it a popularity contest that means only the 'best' known people will get traffic? Is it because I'm not in a fleet and can't go 'hey my mission is up, check it out? Is it because I have stayed away from missions with major amounts of combat? Does the episode description need to be changed? Could they simply need new names for the missions?. What quality draws you towards trying out a mission someone else has created.

I ask these questions now since the Foundry is in beta right now, we don't have a large influx of missions being created and uploaded right now. Once the system moves over to the Holodeck though, I expect things to become even 'worse' as the number of searchable missions increases geometrically. Conversely, my question might be a moot one because there will be a larger number of players willing to try out missions, but I have a feeling that most people will only bother with those missions that get the highest possible rankings.


Now for the 'advertising' if you will. The 2 missions I have published are Digging in the Past and Keeping up with the J'Sens. If you are so inclined take a look and tell me if you think you would play it, or if you choose to, what you think of it so that maybe I won't have to ask in the future what I need to do so people will play it

well once I can play misisons again, im gonna try something different to advertise my mission: make a video trailer of it
Im also trying to nag my fleet tinto playing- im on the starbase UGC and update my weiki pages regularly.

People like the guys over at STOKED can also help with that too. you just need to hit hard and expose yourself- erm your misison as much as possible

Archived Post

My advice would be to market it properly in the description. Also, let em know if it is space or ground centered.

Archived Post

I see this a real problem. It dose not matter how good your work is no one sees it. A better review system is needed and it is only going to get worse once there is 10,000 missions oniline. People will set it to 5 stars and just leave there meaning new people will never get there mission play no matter how good it is.

Archived Post

I don't think there can really be a better review system. A better categorization/tagging system might be possible. But you have to keep your expectations realistic on what players will be willing to do to review a mission. A comment and a number of stars seems realistic, but what else?

I also think that the ratio of content producers and content consumers on Tribble is different then on Holodeck. I would guess that a notable majority of players active on Tribble right now are producers and so spend a lot of time creating their stuff. I personally do exactly that, and I don't have much time for other people's content now, and I wouldn't be surprised if other people on Tribble have the same issue. But I also think a majority of people that will produce content is already on Tribble, but only a minority of people overall are even on Tribble to check out the Foundry-generated content.

Archived Post

I'm inclined to agree with Mustrum. The ratio of players to creators is probably much more heavily tilted towards creators right now, as we're the most enthusiastic ones about getting involved in this. I'm literally the only person in my fleet that's fiddled with the Foundry, but most of them are looking forward to merely playing UGC when it comes to Holodeck with no intention of making their own missions.

I've tried to do initial reviews for newly-published missions to help people get started, but 1: I can only do so much, and 2: most of the missions I've played, unfortunately, have been pretty terrible, which kills my motivation to keep reviewing. I suspect that may be another factor that will keep people away (i.e. they try out a couple new unreviewed missions, said missions are very rough and unpolished, and that turns them off from trying out further missions that aren't "proven" successes in the future).

Archived Post

Yes, this is a problem, but I hope that the blog and the wiki help. On the bright side, we now have more missions to play than time to play them, which is a huge change for the game. I hope that over time the good missions gradually rise to the surface, due at least in part to a permanent database of missions and other tools to help all of you promote your missions.

Archived Post

I agree that the ratio of Producers to Consumers on Tribble is skewed towards the Producers that are not there to play missions that other players make. It takes a lot of time to get one finished, play-tested, published, then play tested again, then edit, publish, re-test... ad-nauseum.

It is unfortunate that non-fleet producers lack a player base to test & review their missions. My fleet is so small now that I hardly see anyone these days and then I'm neck-deep in the Foundry...

I can understand the frustration... I knocked out a 6-part epic that no one else has played all the way through except me... I've probably spent 100 hours creating, testing & editing them and there's not a whole lot ways to get anyone to try them.

I would suggest using some good teaser type explanations for the missions... you only get one chance at a good impression and players need to know Pertinent information.. where to go... what type of mission - whatever that means - all of My missions have Space and Ground Combat segments.

I'm sure there are Space only, Ground only or Both and non-combat types such as Exploration, Archaeology & Diplomacy. Someone Mentioned Profession Specific Missions as well.

Perhaps what is needed is a Check Box type of Indicator in the Mission Description as to what the content is... you can Check each Box as appropriate. That way players could choose a mission type that they want instead of being disappointed.

Archived Post

MustrumRidcully wrote: »

I don't think there can really be a better review system. A better categorization/tagging system might be possible. But you have to keep your expectations realistic on what players will be willing to do to review a mission. A comment and a number of stars seems realistic, but what else?

I also think that the ratio of content producers and content consumers on Tribble is different then on Holodeck. I would guess that a notable majority of players active on Tribble right now are producers and so spend a lot of time creating their stuff. I personally do exactly that, and I don't have much time for other people's content now, and I wouldn't be surprised if other people on Tribble have the same issue. But I also think a majority of people that will produce content is already on Tribble, but only a minority of people overall are even on Tribble to check out the Foundry-generated content.

I think you hit the nail on the head. How many people even play on Tribble? I mean, really play there, rather than just hopping on to test something now and again (and for that matter how many even log on to test)? I bet the number of people who will make missions will be about 1% of all players, and that may be an over estimate.

At least at first there isn't any danger of there being too many missions on Holodeck. Six months down the road, I guess we'll see. I don't think there will be 10,000 missions any time soon. There just aren't that many content creators.

Once everything goes live there will be plenty of people playing the missions. As has often been discussed there's almost nothing to do once you hit max level right now. So, I wouldn't assume your work has been done in vain yet.

Archived Post

This situation will carry over to Holodeck. (It was the same in the CoX Mission Architect - trying to get your mission seen or played was next to impossible unless you had Guildmats, friends.)

In addition to this 'balancing' movement (which is a fine idea). You could also 'trade plays' - IE someone played yours and reviewed it. You play one of theirs in return, etc. Again, it may sound like 'begging' per se; but without some sort of support network; or people willing to go through and review the stuff in just published queue - a LOT of missions will languish unplayed for a LONG time.

So, if yiou plan to do some authoring; give other authors a break, and give their stuff a runthrough once in a while too as the Foundry hits Holodeck in the future.

My question will honestly be: How many player reviews will the Devs decide it ultimately takes for a new published mission to appear on the list of stuff available to non-reviewers? Based on that it might be hard far non-affiliated folks; or those who didn't get a rep for good missions in Beta to get enough reviews to get on the 'general' list.

Either way, some support for the 'loaners' out there would be a nice thing as the Foundry goes forward.

But in the end, the last thing an author shoukd do is beg in game or overmuch omn the forums. Post your mission details in the appropriate thread - use UGC fan sites and Blogs, etc; and again, maybe propose a mission play swap with friends, etc; but realize - not everyone will be interested in player made missions; and begging for plays/reviews won't win you a good community rep in the long run.

Archived Post

I think (like myself) there will be also people who have interests in specific locations or species. They will probably search for these words (for an example: Cardassians / Deep Space Nine / Badlands) directly. So, it may get you more players / reviewers if you mention the place or species your mission is all about. It doesnt have to be in the mission name (just checked), so if you like, you can put this info in your description. That way you (hopefully) get the people with the same interest in that location / species reviewing your mission.

And i have to agree that a lot of people will probably "only" play UGC missions later on Holodeck, and not create them. I mean, the UI is really good and quick to learn, but like we all know now, it can get very time consuming to publish just a small mission (at least if you try to make them fun to play, with a story & bug free). So we get a taste of how its like to be a real content designer on such a game. I think a lot of people simply will dont have the time (or muse) for it. But on a personal note, i am looking forward to create some missions (even if they take a while). Its very fun and satisfying to create stuff. And we all get a chance to leave something from us in this game for the community behind.

@ Cryptic

This...

Napoleon_BlownApart wrote:

Perhaps what is needed is a Check Box type of Indicator in the Mission Description as to what the content is... you can Check each Box as appropriate. That way players could choose a mission type that they want instead of being disappointed.

...would be very helpful! Please implement this (if you can).

Archived Post

castmodean wrote: »

This question I hope has an easy answer, but I rather expect that won't be the case. I've been looking for some feedback for the missions that I have written, but so far they seem to be all but neglected with a little traffic on one and no traffic on the other that I can tell. That actually leads me to my question:

What best helps to 'sell' a mission to the playerbase, and thus gets you traffic. Is it a popularity contest that means only the 'best' known people will get traffic? Is it because I'm not in a fleet and can't go 'hey my mission is up, check it out? Is it because I have stayed away from missions with major amounts of combat? Does the episode description need to be changed? Could they simply need new names for the missions?. What quality draws you towards trying out a mission someone else has created.

I ask these questions now since the Foundry is in beta right now, we don't have a large influx of missions being created and uploaded right now. Once the system moves over to the Holodeck though, I expect things to become even 'worse' as the number of searchable missions increases geometrically. Conversely, my question might be a moot one because there will be a larger number of players willing to try out missions, but I have a feeling that most people will only bother with those missions that get the highest possible rankings.


Now for the 'advertising' if you will. The 2 missions I have published are Digging in the Past and Keeping up with the J'Sens. If you are so inclined take a look and tell me if you think you would play it, or if you choose to, what you think of it so that maybe I won't have to ask in the future what I need to do so people will play it

Advertisement is more about who you know...it is not about how much or how well you advertise. When a business advertises, it is about advertising to your friends. This is why they make trailers and billboards. So the people who know you will say, 'Hey I know that person' and then they can go tell their friends 'Hey I have a deal for you' or 'Hey I think that story is good.'

Some people will tell you, 'No way!' However, I learned that in a advertisement class.

One way to get notice is to:

Do not be stingy with 5 stars...when you give a person a bad rating, they will probably be looking to tell you what they do not like about your story. In this medium you are a producer and critic. It is not like a book or movie critic, who has never made a movie or wrote a book.

Even if you absolutely hate something, only drop it to 4 stars. Everyone here is a amateur. So grading like the stories here are by professionals is not realistic. One rule in real estate is 'no one customer is worth it.'

Sometimes a bunch of people saying your product sucks is a good way to drive people to play your story.

Archived Post

Rating

Builders name (if I have played something they made that I liked)

Description

Mission name