Really? How do you know that? Are the methods for obtaining additional slots set in stone?
Even if by some remote chance the ONLY possible method of ever obtaining new story slots is the C-Store, a "good" author can continue to write as many arcs as they like. They aren't limited to 8.
As has already been mentioned, we were discussing mechanics as they currently stand on Tribble.
And you are correct, if the only way authors can get more slots is via the C-Store they can still make more than 8 missions IF, and it's a big if, they can justify the expense and can actually afford it. In that case, only the authors who can afford to drop money for CP can have more than 8 missions, regardless of whether they're "good" or not.
I don't want to live in that world. I would much rather the talented authors had the opportunity to develop their stories regardless of whether they're personally affluent or not.
IDK about betting, but I certainly hope thats the case.
It's in Cryptic's best interests to do so. There are some excellent (IMO) fan created missions in the Foundry on Tribble and those who follow podcasts/web radio etc. for STO already know there are others out there who are promoting their favorites. I've no doubt Cryptic will have their favorites as well and will do something to reward those authors out there who they feel have written an exceptional story that showcases all the work the developers have put into making the Foundry.
Limiting the overall number to 8 provides the future 4 star authors out there a decent start to get noticed while serving to limit the amount of "less than stellar" authors out there who will write "junk". Personally, I think 8 a fair number to start with, as - based on experience from the Foundy on Tribble here in STO and in the MA of CoH - for every one great story arc, there will be a hundred (or more) "bad" ones.
Just my 2 quatloos, but I can foresee something along the lines of a "Developer's Choice" rating (as was done in CoH's Mission Architect) being used here. Cryptic could reward their favorites with "top billing" in the search window and the author with free extra story slots as an incentive to keep writing quality stuff.
Not certain if this is how they will do it here, but IIRC in CoX anyone can submit their UGC story arc for a chance to become a "Developer's Choice" mission. If selected as a "Developer's Choice", the author gets an additional few story slots for free. It's an incentive for the author's out there to craft good stories.
You recall correctly, and I'm kind of surprised there has been only one mention of it in this thread. Not only do people who have stories chosen as Developer Choice get an extra mission, people who's missions become extremely popular have their mission enter the "Hall of Fame" and they get another slot as well. I haven't played CoX for little while, but as I recall they not only have the good authors get a slot option, they have a buying option.
In the end, there has to be a limit somewhere, because people just can't be allowed to create infinite content. Just a simple physical, real world limitation of disk space.
You recall correctly, and I'm kind of surprised there has been only one mention of it in this thread. Not only do people who have stories chosen as Developer Choice get an extra mission, people who's missions become extremely popular have their mission enter the "Hall of Fame" and they get another slot as well. I haven't played CoX for little while, but as I recall they not only have the good authors get a slot option, they have a buying option.
Ah good... thought that's the way it was. I forgot about the "Hall of Fame" part, thanks for adding that.
How about when a mission gets 100 plays/reviews it unlocks a new slot?
Too easily gamed. People would create a simple scan 5 mission and play it 100 times to unlock new slots.
The current betting on Triskelion is 500 quatloos on extra slots coming via Veteran Reward, C-Store purchase or Developer discretion (eg. "Dev Choice" rating). Word is, Galt is laying 2 to 1 odds on that triple play.
Still gameable.... people with a second account, using keys for a free month of play to run arcs, a couple of friends runing it a hundred times etc.
come come now even i see your grasping at straws here
then thats only 1 more view
Using keys for a free month? They would have to buy the game no?if they are dedicated to buying hundreds of accounts i saylet em
Once an account plays it once they dont add to play counter
come come now even i see your grasping at straws here
then thats only 1 more view
Using keys for a free month? They would have to buy the game no?if they are dedicated to buying hundreds of accounts i saylet em
Once an account plays it once they dont add to play counter
I think you are misunderstanding and need to re-read the posts again.
What his high Grand Nagus-ness posted was that the author's account would not count toward any play count total, so an author couldn't play their own mission 100 times to get the free story slot. However, 1 player can have multiple accounts, and use one to author stories and another to run them the 100 times to rack up easy play counts to unlock free stuff since it is technically a different account. This happens all the time in the Mission Architect over in CoH.
As for keys, I still have all the refer a friend key thingys (forget the actual name atm) from my wife's edition of the game. I could use those for the free month and cancel before I had to pay. That gives me a month to play my own arcs authored from my main account.
I think you are misunderstanding and need to re-read the posts again.
What his high Grand Nagus-ness posted was that the author's account would not count toward any play count total, so an author couldn't play their own mission 100 times to get the free story slot. However, 1 player can have multiple accounts, and use one to author stories and another to run them the 100 times to rack up easy play counts to unlock free stuff since it is technically a different account. This happens all the time in the Mission Architect over in CoH.
As for keys, I still have all the refer a friend key thingys (forget the actual name atm) from my wife's edition of the game. I could use those for the free month and cancel before I had to pay. That gives me a month to play my own arcs authored from my main account.
no you are misunderstanding me which is not surprised i explain halfheartedly. There is a difference between refer keys and real keys they can already tell that difference
just make only full blown i bought the game keys that are updated count
no you are misunderstanding me which is not surprised i explain halfheartedly. There is a difference between refer keys and real keys they can already tell that difference
just make only full blown i bought the game keys that are updated count
Ok so it's only paid accounts then... that still doesn't prevent individuals with 2 (or more) paid accounts gaming this Foundry system to boost their own play counts for free stuff.
Ok so it's only paid accounts then... that still doesn't prevent individuals with 2 (or more) paid accounts gaming this Foundry system to boost their own play counts for free stuff.
Im assuming the number would be far higher than 2. at the very least 75.
and i say if they are going to buy the game 75 times. let em get a free slot for making more foundry mission.
Im assuming the number would be far higher than 2. at the very least 75.
and i say if they are going to buy the game 75 times. let em get a free slot for making more foundry mission.
not stuff just this one item
You're still not reading the posts right
Perhaps this may help....
Player X has 2 paid accounts - Account A and Account B
Player X logs into Account A to author Foundry Missions. Any playthroughs of missions using Account A to play stories authored using Account A do not count toward a play total to unlock a free story slot.
Player X logs off Account A
Player X logs into Account B, loads up their story authored on Account A and plays them 100 times. Since this is a different account, the playthroughs count toward the total.
Player X gamed the system to unlock free story slots with only 2 accounts.
There are people who would do this. There are people who bought 5 copies of the game and paid for the months subscription for each just to get the Galaxy X when it was still available via the Refer a Friend program only.
Player X has 2 paid accounts - Account A and Account B
Player X logs into Account A to author Foundry Missions. Any playthroughs of missions using Account A to play stories authored using Account A do not count toward a play total to unlock a free story slot.
Player X logs off Account A
Player X logs into Account B, loads up their story authored on Account A and plays them 100 times. Since this is a different account, the playthroughs count toward the total. B can play it multiple times but since only 1 playthrough would be counted it would be pointless thus he would have to buy cdefghijklmnop etc
Player X gamed the system to unlock free story slots with only 2 accounts.
There are people who would do this. There are people who bought 5 copies of the game and paid for the months subscription for each just to get the Galaxy X.
and as i said if it does go the playthrough way i would assume it would be a somewhat large number of plays. 75 or more. show me a user who bought 75 heck lets lower it 20 accounts and loaded them all separately
also even if it isnt that way just implement a system ala accolades. if they see john@TRIBBLE made it then john@TRIBBLE played it ok. then they see raven@poopa played it 300 times. obviously he = no get reward?
and as i said if it does go the playthrough way i would assume it would be a somewhat large number of plays. 75 or more. show me a user who bought 75 heck lets lower it 20 accounts and loaded them all separately
also even if it isnt that way just implement a system ala accolades. if they see john@TRIBBLE made it then john@TRIBBLE played it ok. then they see raven@poopa played it 300 times. obviously he = no get reward?
Yep... still misunderstanding how it works, but oh well... I tried to explain.
As far as seeing the same people playing the same mission more than once, how do you prove that is someone who is gaming the system? It very well could be someone who really enjoyed the story arc and has run it a few times.
Speaking of which, in terms of limiting each account to only count one time as a playcount toward any story arc, it kind of defeats the purpose to the system. You would only ever help increase a favorite story's play count one time, whether it is yours or not. Suppose you find a really fun, well crafted story someone else wrote and you want to help it move up in play counts? Only one of your playthroughs will count ever.
Yep... still misunderstanding how it works, but oh well... I tried to explain.
As far as seeing the same people playing the same mission more than once, how do you prove that is someone who is gaming the system? It very well could be someone who really enjoyed the story arc and has run it a few times.
Speaking of which, in terms of limiting each account to only count one time as a playcount toward any story arc, it kind of defeats the purpose to the system. You would only ever help increase a favorite story's play count one time, whether it is yours or not.
Suppose you find a really fun, well crafted story someone else wrote and you want to help it move up in play counts?
Only one of your playthroughs will count ever.
using this logic it would be cool to manipulate the system. If it is really cool to help them , you would, i dont know, tell other people to play it? thus increasing the playthroughs?
and it doesnt defeat the purpose to the system. when you play a game and are reviewing it, can you give it 5 stars a million times because you think its great?
When publishers sell the game do they look at one person and see how many times he bought it to see how popular it is? no the look at all. the trend *presuming* is each game is given to a different person.
also this word gaming where the hell its new to me i get what you mean but the word just seems so out of place.
hmm just noted your wording. How it works. if im not mistaken this thread was a bout how it
should
work.
ofcourse i may be mistaken. damn if i spent all this time arguing how it should work with someone arguing how it currently works ima /wrists
and it doesnt defeat the purpose to the system. when you play a game and are reviewing it, can you give it 5 stars a million times because you think its great?
If a system is using total plays as a metric to determine a result, of course it would defeat the purpose to allow people to have their playthrough count only one time.
I think everybody can agree that a limit per account is needed but they could waive that for the good authors by the following:=
1 additional slot opened for each 4 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
2 additional slots opened for each 5 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
Individual authors can then delete their own missions to fit within the above aggregate totals.
I think everybody can agree that a limit per account is needed but they could waive that for the good authors by the following:=
1 additional slot opened for each 4 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
2 additional slots opened for each 5 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
Individual authors can then delete their own missions to fit within the above aggregate totals.
I'm curious why you used the word "discreet"? It seems like the word "distinct" would have made sense there, but maybe I'm missing your meaning.
After seeing the opinions raised I can understand the need for a limit. Given the current 'status' of the search options for the Foundry review screen it would be extremely tedious to delve through many under-par missions to find the gems you like playing.
However, I often go out of my way to play the missions that have received no ratings, low ratings and no/low reviews. I have been pleasantly surprised by the competence and creativity of many of them - in not just the story, but the simple things like transitioning to places and how it was handled and also in the ingenuity of getting around the current beta drawbacks or limitations to story-telling (using volcanic flowers under NPCs to enable you to interact with what seems to be the npcs etc).
My point is that having a limit in one way restricts the authors of mission who have not gotten enough attention to 'qualify' for more slots or who do not have the money to 'aquire' more slots because they must destroy one of their missions to have a chance at making another which will garner attention.
Of course that point can be argued as mute if we take the line of "Well it is up to the author to advertise their mission, in channels ingame and on the forums - "Come play my mission, here are details.."" and indeed I would like to see that type of 'marketing' for the communities attention. It should raise the level of quality across the board as people will want to attract attention, surely?
The problem I see with that being the only way to get your free slots (i.e. attention & great reviews) is that we may end up nuturing the creation of mission-formats that appeal to the wider audience. Like the episode season closers/openers of startrek. We might be doing damage to the also nuturing the creation of those mid-tv-season episodes (some terrible, but some truely making Star Trek , trek)..
i.e. (in theory)
I have eight slots. I need to attract attention, and with that attention I must get high ratings. What will I put into my mission? Well what does the mass audience like? They like A, B and C. So I will base my mission around that to have the highest chance of success - because I really want to qualify for those free slots.
What is more likely to 'sell' to the community... a mission about a new creative and innovative idea (in some ways) but one in which you are risking a very negative review - or something that you know people will like and rank highly so you can get your slots?
i.e. think of how real life marketing works, for instance we always see a new film advertised with a deep voice because that is an industry-advertising standard to attract our interest in what is being portrayed. Is it so wild a notion to suggest that after a while of having the Foundry on live, mission authors may do the same? Might we end up with exactly the types of mission we wanted to avoid? Repetitive and similar in nautre specifically targeted to only 'attract high reviews' and appeal to the masses like a Michael Bay movie?
Or do we want to have a system which will allow those obscure, those bizzare and those sometimes painfully funny, distortedly poignant or otherwise engaging missions are also encouraged and not hindered by a technical quota on what does and does not qualify as a 'worthy' mission to unlock free slots.
Such missions that will not garner widespread attention or good reviews may still be good. Much like many episodes in ST which may have had terrible main-storylines (mid season) but nevertheless were instrumental at times to develop character depth through side-stories.
Some missions will not be about ship battles, diplomatic affairs to end galaxy-wide wars and so on - they may take inspiration from a loving Godfather caring for his godchild while her mother is far away and in danger (the Wildmans) - how can it compete on the same level for the mass audience as an action thriller versus insurmountable odds and a great pace of action adventure and mystery etc.
We want both right? right?
I don't wish to ramble or de-rail my own thread, but I feel that Cryptic should engage with us before release about the issue of limitations and ways to increase that because of my above rationale. Limits will restrict many people from telling many different types of stories, the lush diversity which - up to now - I had felt the Foundry would be a bastion for.
We need to encourage the debate and get some feedback from what is in the minds of the developers in my view. Its not about demanding what they should do, its about providing to them our thoughts, and trying to compromise surely on how we wish to play this game.
Technically speaking, it would be nice to get an insight into exactly how much 'system resources' an average mission does in fact take up. As we have seen through the use of the Jpeg character pictures holding your character's visual information - perhaps the missions are saved to Cryptic's servers in a highly compressed form - which means the demand for loading and everything else will rest on the user's end? Could this allow for a larger limit as standard?
I remember last year that there was a healthy debate about the amount of character slots you had by default on game launch - so this discussion shares similarities to that - being about system resources.
I would implore any reading developer, community manager etc and of course the community itself to encourage this discussion before we see Foundry on Live. Many games companies have deployed features that impacted negatively on the 'view of the game' because such details were left to the last minute. Being in beta we should be able to talk about it without risking our current image - which we have worked hard over this year to keep good (seeing the latest mmorpg wins).
So, there must be a limit (as other posts have convinced me of now). But the developers will need to address what is fair to set the limit at by default. What qualifies for more slots (if applicable) and if there will be a multiple choice for doing so (by it C-Store and ingame), what system of free-upgrade will apply. Will it encourage the creation of mass-appealing missions or will it also support those missions that delve into unique but less 'popular' subject matter.
I think everybody can agree that a limit per account is needed but they could waive that for the good authors by the following:=
1 additional slot opened for each 4 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
2 additional slots opened for each 5 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
Individual authors can then delete their own missions to fit within the above aggregate totals.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, yet I think 10 discreet/distinct reviews with 4 or 5 star ratings is way too low. It would still be far too easy for those in large fleets to rack up free story slots quickly, which will only serve to add to the total number of stories to sift through.
IIRC a player authored story in the Mission Architect of CoH needs several thousand good reviews to be considered a "Hall of Fame" arc. Once that several thousand good reviews is achieved, a free story slot is given to the author.
Just my 2 quatloos, but writing stories for the singular purpose of unlocking more free story slots is missing the true intent of the Foundry. Writing a story that you as an author want to write regardless of how others may like it, or writing a story is enjoyed by friends and other players alike is the real reward. Any free story slot that may come as a result of many good reviews is just a bonus.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, yet I think 10 discreet/distinct reviews with 4 or 5 star ratings is way too low. It would still be far too easy for those in large fleets to rack up free story slots quickly, which will only serve to add to the total number of stories to sift through.
IIRC a player authored story in the Mission Architect of CoH needs several thousand good reviews to be considered a "Hall of Fame" arc. Once that several thousand good reviews is achieved, a free story slot is given to the author.
Unfortunately, STO doesn't have that many active players. 100K accounts maybe, but how many are actually active?
Unfortunately, STO doesn't have that many active players. 100K accounts maybe, but how many are actually active?
No one really knows exact subscription numbers. All they have is general ideas. CoH would appear to have roughly the same amount of subscribers and the Hall of Fame works just fine there.
Making it too easy for good authors to obtain more free story slots also means you're making it too easy for all the bad authors too, who will quickly clutter up the Foundry with nonsense missions that have to be sifted through.
Another reason for having a way to increase the limit occured to me today after finishing off my first run through the Devidian series.
Playing through the missions in that series it became obvious the Devs were looking at ways to increase the difference between the various types of Captain, with dialog options dependent on your choice of speciality. I'd already thought of this but it had slipped my mind, as it's something I would like to build into my missions.
The problem I'm going to have is that my initial story outline actually splits into three before converging again at the end. My plan was to have a different route for Tactical/Science/Engineering Captains, with the first mission telling you what mission of mine you should play next based on your speciality. Of course, people would be free to try the Tactical mission as a Science Captain as none of the missions would be "locked" in any way.
This sort of differentiation is something that is vitally needed in STO to my mind, and something which is sorely lacking at present. However, with an arbitrary limit and no realistic way to raise it, it would make it difficult for authors who have similar plans to flesh out these class differences.
As for the comment someone made about "You can make the mission as long as you want to compensate", well, I think it's been shown time and time again that the majority of the STO player base fits firmly into the "casual" bracket (ignoring the vocal minority on the forum of course!) and while you may very well be happy to sit through a 4 hour mission, they (and myself) do not have the time to slog through such a thing and I'm sure many authors will be looking to reach as wide an audience as possible!
Comments
I see; sorry for the misunderstanding.
As has already been mentioned, we were discussing mechanics as they currently stand on Tribble.
And you are correct, if the only way authors can get more slots is via the C-Store they can still make more than 8 missions IF, and it's a big if, they can justify the expense and can actually afford it. In that case, only the authors who can afford to drop money for CP can have more than 8 missions, regardless of whether they're "good" or not.
I don't want to live in that world. I would much rather the talented authors had the opportunity to develop their stories regardless of whether they're personally affluent or not.
It's in Cryptic's best interests to do so. There are some excellent (IMO) fan created missions in the Foundry on Tribble and those who follow podcasts/web radio etc. for STO already know there are others out there who are promoting their favorites. I've no doubt Cryptic will have their favorites as well and will do something to reward those authors out there who they feel have written an exceptional story that showcases all the work the developers have put into making the Foundry.
Limiting the overall number to 8 provides the future 4 star authors out there a decent start to get noticed while serving to limit the amount of "less than stellar" authors out there who will write "junk". Personally, I think 8 a fair number to start with, as - based on experience from the Foundy on Tribble here in STO and in the MA of CoH - for every one great story arc, there will be a hundred (or more) "bad" ones.
Just my 2 quatloos, but I can foresee something along the lines of a "Developer's Choice" rating (as was done in CoH's Mission Architect) being used here. Cryptic could reward their favorites with "top billing" in the search window and the author with free extra story slots as an incentive to keep writing quality stuff.
You recall correctly, and I'm kind of surprised there has been only one mention of it in this thread. Not only do people who have stories chosen as Developer Choice get an extra mission, people who's missions become extremely popular have their mission enter the "Hall of Fame" and they get another slot as well. I haven't played CoX for little while, but as I recall they not only have the good authors get a slot option, they have a buying option.
In the end, there has to be a limit somewhere, because people just can't be allowed to create infinite content. Just a simple physical, real world limitation of disk space.
That would only mean being in a guild = more spots than those who arent. I'm not saying thats "right" or "wrong", just saying.
Ah good... thought that's the way it was. I forgot about the "Hall of Fame" part, thanks for adding that.
Too easily gamed. People would create a simple scan 5 mission and play it 100 times to unlock new slots.
The current betting on Triskelion is 500 quatloos on extra slots coming via Veteran Reward, C-Store purchase or Developer discretion (eg. "Dev Choice" rating). Word is, Galt is laying 2 to 1 odds on that triple play.
The obvious solution to that would be characters on your account wouldnt count towards the number required to gain a new slot.
Still gameable.... people with a second account, using keys for a free month of play to run arcs, a couple of friends runing it a hundred times etc.
come come now even i see your grasping at straws here
then thats only 1 more view
Using keys for a free month? They would have to buy the game no?if they are dedicated to buying hundreds of accounts i saylet em
Once an account plays it once they dont add to play counter
I think you are misunderstanding and need to re-read the posts again.
What his high Grand Nagus-ness posted was that the author's account would not count toward any play count total, so an author couldn't play their own mission 100 times to get the free story slot. However, 1 player can have multiple accounts, and use one to author stories and another to run them the 100 times to rack up easy play counts to unlock free stuff since it is technically a different account. This happens all the time in the Mission Architect over in CoH.
As for keys, I still have all the refer a friend key thingys (forget the actual name atm) from my wife's edition of the game. I could use those for the free month and cancel before I had to pay. That gives me a month to play my own arcs authored from my main account.
no you are misunderstanding me which is not surprised i explain halfheartedly. There is a difference between refer keys and real keys they can already tell that difference
just make only full blown i bought the game keys that are updated count
Ok so it's only paid accounts then... that still doesn't prevent individuals with 2 (or more) paid accounts gaming this Foundry system to boost their own play counts for free stuff.
Im assuming the number would be far higher than 2. at the very least 75.
and i say if they are going to buy the game 75 times. let em get a free slot for making more foundry mission.
not stuff just this one item
You're still not reading the posts right
Perhaps this may help....
Player X has 2 paid accounts - Account A and Account B
Player X logs into Account A to author Foundry Missions. Any playthroughs of missions using Account A to play stories authored using Account A do not count toward a play total to unlock a free story slot.
Player X logs off Account A
Player X logs into Account B, loads up their story authored on Account A and plays them 100 times. Since this is a different account, the playthroughs count toward the total.
Player X gamed the system to unlock free story slots with only 2 accounts.
There are people who would do this. There are people who bought 5 copies of the game and paid for the months subscription for each just to get the Galaxy X when it was still available via the Refer a Friend program only.
and as i said if it does go the playthrough way i would assume it would be a somewhat large number of plays. 75 or more. show me a user who bought 75 heck lets lower it 20 accounts and loaded them all separately
also even if it isnt that way just implement a system ala accolades. if they see john@TRIBBLE made it then john@TRIBBLE played it ok. then they see raven@poopa played it 300 times. obviously he = no get reward?
Yep... still misunderstanding how it works, but oh well... I tried to explain.
As far as seeing the same people playing the same mission more than once, how do you prove that is someone who is gaming the system? It very well could be someone who really enjoyed the story arc and has run it a few times.
Speaking of which, in terms of limiting each account to only count one time as a playcount toward any story arc, it kind of defeats the purpose to the system. You would only ever help increase a favorite story's play count one time, whether it is yours or not. Suppose you find a really fun, well crafted story someone else wrote and you want to help it move up in play counts? Only one of your playthroughs will count ever.
using this logic it would be cool to manipulate the system. If it is really cool to help them , you would, i dont know, tell other people to play it? thus increasing the playthroughs?
and it doesnt defeat the purpose to the system. when you play a game and are reviewing it, can you give it 5 stars a million times because you think its great?
When publishers sell the game do they look at one person and see how many times he bought it to see how popular it is? no the look at all. the trend *presuming* is each game is given to a different person.
hmm just noted your wording. How it works. if im not mistaken this thread was a bout how it work.
ofcourse i may be mistaken. damn if i spent all this time arguing how it should work with someone arguing how it currently works ima /wrists
If a system is using total plays as a metric to determine a result, of course it would defeat the purpose to allow people to have their playthrough count only one time.
1 additional slot opened for each 4 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
2 additional slots opened for each 5 star authored mission (min. 10 discreet reviews)
Individual authors can then delete their own missions to fit within the above aggregate totals.
I'm curious why you used the word "discreet"? It seems like the word "distinct" would have made sense there, but maybe I'm missing your meaning.
However, I often go out of my way to play the missions that have received no ratings, low ratings and no/low reviews. I have been pleasantly surprised by the competence and creativity of many of them - in not just the story, but the simple things like transitioning to places and how it was handled and also in the ingenuity of getting around the current beta drawbacks or limitations to story-telling (using volcanic flowers under NPCs to enable you to interact with what seems to be the npcs etc).
My point is that having a limit in one way restricts the authors of mission who have not gotten enough attention to 'qualify' for more slots or who do not have the money to 'aquire' more slots because they must destroy one of their missions to have a chance at making another which will garner attention.
Of course that point can be argued as mute if we take the line of "Well it is up to the author to advertise their mission, in channels ingame and on the forums - "Come play my mission, here are details.."" and indeed I would like to see that type of 'marketing' for the communities attention. It should raise the level of quality across the board as people will want to attract attention, surely?
The problem I see with that being the only way to get your free slots (i.e. attention & great reviews) is that we may end up nuturing the creation of mission-formats that appeal to the wider audience. Like the episode season closers/openers of startrek. We might be doing damage to the also nuturing the creation of those mid-tv-season episodes (some terrible, but some truely making Star Trek , trek)..
i.e. (in theory)
I have eight slots. I need to attract attention, and with that attention I must get high ratings. What will I put into my mission? Well what does the mass audience like? They like A, B and C. So I will base my mission around that to have the highest chance of success - because I really want to qualify for those free slots.
What is more likely to 'sell' to the community... a mission about a new creative and innovative idea (in some ways) but one in which you are risking a very negative review - or something that you know people will like and rank highly so you can get your slots?
i.e. think of how real life marketing works, for instance we always see a new film advertised with a deep voice because that is an industry-advertising standard to attract our interest in what is being portrayed. Is it so wild a notion to suggest that after a while of having the Foundry on live, mission authors may do the same? Might we end up with exactly the types of mission we wanted to avoid? Repetitive and similar in nautre specifically targeted to only 'attract high reviews' and appeal to the masses like a Michael Bay movie?
Or do we want to have a system which will allow those obscure, those bizzare and those sometimes painfully funny, distortedly poignant or otherwise engaging missions are also encouraged and not hindered by a technical quota on what does and does not qualify as a 'worthy' mission to unlock free slots.
Such missions that will not garner widespread attention or good reviews may still be good. Much like many episodes in ST which may have had terrible main-storylines (mid season) but nevertheless were instrumental at times to develop character depth through side-stories.
Some missions will not be about ship battles, diplomatic affairs to end galaxy-wide wars and so on - they may take inspiration from a loving Godfather caring for his godchild while her mother is far away and in danger (the Wildmans) - how can it compete on the same level for the mass audience as an action thriller versus insurmountable odds and a great pace of action adventure and mystery etc.
We want both right? right?
I don't wish to ramble or de-rail my own thread, but I feel that Cryptic should engage with us before release about the issue of limitations and ways to increase that because of my above rationale. Limits will restrict many people from telling many different types of stories, the lush diversity which - up to now - I had felt the Foundry would be a bastion for.
We need to encourage the debate and get some feedback from what is in the minds of the developers in my view. Its not about demanding what they should do, its about providing to them our thoughts, and trying to compromise surely on how we wish to play this game.
Technically speaking, it would be nice to get an insight into exactly how much 'system resources' an average mission does in fact take up. As we have seen through the use of the Jpeg character pictures holding your character's visual information - perhaps the missions are saved to Cryptic's servers in a highly compressed form - which means the demand for loading and everything else will rest on the user's end? Could this allow for a larger limit as standard?
I remember last year that there was a healthy debate about the amount of character slots you had by default on game launch - so this discussion shares similarities to that - being about system resources.
I would implore any reading developer, community manager etc and of course the community itself to encourage this discussion before we see Foundry on Live. Many games companies have deployed features that impacted negatively on the 'view of the game' because such details were left to the last minute. Being in beta we should be able to talk about it without risking our current image - which we have worked hard over this year to keep good (seeing the latest mmorpg wins).
So, there must be a limit (as other posts have convinced me of now). But the developers will need to address what is fair to set the limit at by default. What qualifies for more slots (if applicable) and if there will be a multiple choice for doing so (by it C-Store and ingame), what system of free-upgrade will apply. Will it encourage the creation of mass-appealing missions or will it also support those missions that delve into unique but less 'popular' subject matter.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, yet I think 10 discreet/distinct reviews with 4 or 5 star ratings is way too low. It would still be far too easy for those in large fleets to rack up free story slots quickly, which will only serve to add to the total number of stories to sift through.
IIRC a player authored story in the Mission Architect of CoH needs several thousand good reviews to be considered a "Hall of Fame" arc. Once that several thousand good reviews is achieved, a free story slot is given to the author.
Just my 2 quatloos, but writing stories for the singular purpose of unlocking more free story slots is missing the true intent of the Foundry. Writing a story that you as an author want to write regardless of how others may like it, or writing a story is enjoyed by friends and other players alike is the real reward. Any free story slot that may come as a result of many good reviews is just a bonus.
No one really knows exact subscription numbers. All they have is general ideas. CoH would appear to have roughly the same amount of subscribers and the Hall of Fame works just fine there.
Making it too easy for good authors to obtain more free story slots also means you're making it too easy for all the bad authors too, who will quickly clutter up the Foundry with nonsense missions that have to be sifted through.
Playing through the missions in that series it became obvious the Devs were looking at ways to increase the difference between the various types of Captain, with dialog options dependent on your choice of speciality. I'd already thought of this but it had slipped my mind, as it's something I would like to build into my missions.
The problem I'm going to have is that my initial story outline actually splits into three before converging again at the end. My plan was to have a different route for Tactical/Science/Engineering Captains, with the first mission telling you what mission of mine you should play next based on your speciality. Of course, people would be free to try the Tactical mission as a Science Captain as none of the missions would be "locked" in any way.
This sort of differentiation is something that is vitally needed in STO to my mind, and something which is sorely lacking at present. However, with an arbitrary limit and no realistic way to raise it, it would make it difficult for authors who have similar plans to flesh out these class differences.
As for the comment someone made about "You can make the mission as long as you want to compensate", well, I think it's been shown time and time again that the majority of the STO player base fits firmly into the "casual" bracket (ignoring the vocal minority on the forum of course!) and while you may very well be happy to sit through a 4 hour mission, they (and myself) do not have the time to slog through such a thing and I'm sure many authors will be looking to reach as wide an audience as possible!