That said, it seems to me that you and the other authors are quite happy that people don't do your missions now because of lack of rewards, but will be happy that people "may" play your missions if rewards are placed in. So basically people will just click the buttons just to get the reward and won't give a hoot about what the story is?
Why bother creating "great" stories knowing that people are more motivated by rewards? Or are you so convinced that people will play foundry missions for story and reward?
I think both are necessary. Reward is what validates that the story mattered in a gaming environment. Reward is a measurable consequence. Without a measurable consequence of a story (or a chance for measurable consequence), yes, I think stories lose their meaning.
I think both are necessary. Reward is what validates that the story mattered in a gaming environment. Reward is a measurable consequence. Without a measurable consequence of a story (or a chance for measurable consequence), yes, I think stories lose their meaning.
I too have to say I think both are necessary, however I think for the foundry, it's different.
In any game I play, I need story and reward, however is that the same with the foundry. Will people still look at the foundry as a story and reward part of STO, or just now another avenue for quick rewards.
Not sure, but will Dil be offered? If so, then I think you have found your way to grind for that ship or lockbox, story be damned..
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
Even providing the Foundry wrapper bites the dust, doing the Explore New Worlds mission, the PvP and PvE dailies, the STFs and some doff assignments will always be the less time consuming alternative when it comes to dilithium grinding.
If adding rewards to the Foundry leads to an upswing in the use of its missions, all that proves is that people who would've preferred to play story content felt forced into those other options as long as the Foundry missions offered no return at all.
I too have to say I think both are necessary, however I think for the foundry, it's different.
In any game I play, I need story and reward, however is that the same with the foundry. Will people still look at the foundry as a story and reward part of STO, or just now another avenue for quick rewards.
Not sure, but will Dil be offered? If so, then I think you have found your way to grind for that ship or lockbox, story be damned..
Sure, some will cut the story out if they can.
Which is why the essential key for Foundry rewards, IMHO, is to make them GOOD but NOT quick.
As we've been saying all along, they need to be timer based and the timer stops ticking when idle.
Personally, I'd also say to make them DIFFERENT so as to be hard to compare.
Right now, for example, I always take the dilithium option on the Foundry daily. Why? Because dilithium can get me any item that's in that box.
One long, solid day can get me purples and blues, Mk XI or better. So why would I want Mk X greens? (Same thing goes for my rant on the Relativity Lobi weapons.) One solid day of replay can get every bridge officer a solid purple/blue gear set.
Only way you could get me to consider going back to greens is, say, a new energy type of weapon. Something difficult to measure existing rewards against.
I'll add, the box might have appeal if it contained hybrid weapon types, maybe a chance at chroniton cannons or spiral wave cannons, quad cannons with different energy types, projectile ground weapons, and maybe a rare shot at a set that unlocks a costume like MACO/Omega Force variants.
Which is why the essential key for Foundry rewards, IMHO, is to make them GOOD but NOT quick.
As we've been saying all along, they need to be timer based and the timer stops ticking when idle.
We know that in NW, a chest drops with a reward based on the average playtime of a mission. So, someone could just be idle for an hour or another person could zoom through without reading the text. They'd get the same reward, because the loot is based on an average playtime.
What is unclear is what players get before that average playtime is determined. Also, I imagine that a lot of authors will get upset when the grinders just skip dialogue, which means the loot won't really match the actual length of the mission. But, hopefully, we'll have enough idlers to offset it.
A story in a game has to some kind of impact on the flow, else it just becomes a painful distraction to get back to the gameplay.
And that's why the sto story means absolutely zero, you can't impact it, it doesn't impact you and you are in no way required to read even a single line of text to play along on stf -
which is all I ever do since the biggest rewards are on those maps.
Foundry Missions can tell more Star Trek type STORY than Kestral ever has or will with official STO missions. If you are here for Star Trek story, you take your chances on the Foundry. If you are just here to shoot, you accept the hollow missions available by Cryptic.
STO: @AGNT009 Since Dec 2010
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
Foundry Missions can tell more Star Trek type STORY than Kestral ever has or will with official STO missions. If you are here for Star Trek story, you take your chances on the Foundry. If you are just here to shoot, you accept the hollow missions available by Cryptic.
There are some good Trek stories in the official content. Some of the FEs are really good. But, yes, there are lots of bad stuff. Still, it's probably unfair to blame the writer for a lot of things that may be beyond her control. Kestrel isn't a writer who has full control of what a mission turns out to be. Foundry authors can. That's part of the reason why so many Foundry missions are better.
There are just too many cooks in the kitchen in Cryptic content, combined with the fact that a lot of it was slapped together in an unrealistic timeframe. Not even the best writer could write 100 good stories in a year, let alone whatever the real time period was.
And if I, as a foundry author, had to send a draft script off to someone who had a limited period of time to build a set and plug in my story... Or, if someone just sent my the bones of a mission and said, "Give this a story" then the result would probably be bad.
Just saying. It's fair to critique the quality of official content as a whole, but I don't think it's fair to blame everything on the writer.
We know that in NW, a chest drops with a reward based on the average playtime of a mission. So, someone could just be idle for an hour or another person could zoom through without reading the text. They'd get the same reward, because the loot is based on an average playtime.
What is unclear is what players get before that average playtime is determined. Also, I imagine that a lot of authors will get upset when the grinders just skip dialogue, which means the loot won't really match the actual length of the mission. But, hopefully, we'll have enough idlers to offset it.
I think it's actual time, not average. But I don't know, honestly.
First let me say that I am not in favor of Cryptic leaving all story development to the Foundry, not that I believe this is their long-term plan.
Cryptic is able to put together original missions that Foundry authors simply can not do, due to limitations in the Foundry toolset. Foundry stories are forced to work around these limitations all the time, albeit with some truly amazing results.
And that brings me to my second comment. I would far rather have STO with the Foundry than STO without the Foundry. STO without the Foundry will ultimately always lack story content. So I don't criticize Cryptic for using the Foundry to fill that gap.
It's fair to say that they have not produced enough story missions over the last couple of years. I want more. But it's also reasonable to say that there is more to come.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
There are some good Trek stories in the official content. Some of the FEs are really good. But, yes, there are lots of bad stuff. Still, it's probably unfair to blame the writer for a lot of things that may be beyond her control. Kestrel isn't a writer who has full control of what a mission turns out to be. Foundry authors can. That's part of the reason why so many Foundry missions are better.
There are just too many cooks in the kitchen in Cryptic content, combined with the fact that a lot of it was slapped together in an unrealistic timeframe. Not even the best writer could write 100 good stories in a year, let alone whatever the real time period was.
And if I, as a foundry author, had to send a draft script off to someone who had a limited period of time to build a set and plug in my story... Or, if someone just sent my the bones of a mission and said, "Give this a story" then the result would probably be bad.
Just saying. It's fair to critique the quality of official content as a whole, but I don't think it's fair to blame everything on the writer.
While I do see your point, its still asinine for her to need those types of excuses as the reason she cant tell a thought provoking heartfelt Star Trek quality story. Oh poor Kestral, an ENTIRE dev team at her disposal and she still cant outclass fans with much more limited resources.
Something maybe Dan should consider. They have Featured Episodes that they all insist on having all the chefs in the kitchen for. Why not let Kestral write and direct her own "Mission" occasionally and give her a real chance to tell a real story. Not a "Featured Episode" that requires every dev mucking it up with their input on story and game features. Assuming its true that shes at such a disadvantage compared to the foundry authors. I have yet to see any sign or quality in the storylines here to make me want to retract my desire to see both Kestral and Dan fired until they start producing stories worthy of a show itself. At the very least, 75% of the story quality compared to a show. No, I take that back. This is game. In video games, we get the quality of stories like Uncharted and the like to compete with Hollywood. Theres just no excuse for STO to not be able to handle itself like a Star Trek show. And if they cant do it with their engine, if I were CBS, Id take the license away and give it to a company that CAN turn STO into a quality show so good, its fame brings us back another REAL tv show. THATS what STO should be doing for the franchise, not dragging its name in the mud. Nevermind all the lockbox TRIBBLE we deal with.
STO: @AGNT009 Since Dec 2010
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
That said, it seems to me that you and the other authors are quite happy that people don't do your missions now because of lack of rewards, but will be happy that people "may" play your missions if rewards are placed in. So basically people will just click the buttons just to get the reward and won't give a hoot about what the story is?
Why bother creating "great" stories knowing that people are more motivated by rewards? Or are you so convinced that people will play foundry missions for story and reward?
Here's the ting: Players will play Foundry missions for a variety of reasons - some for the rewards, some for the story, etc. As someone who's authored two missions; I did it to see if (and how well), I could use the tool provided to tell the story I wanted to tell. I also did what I could to 'advertise it on the STO Forums, Starbase UGC, and a couple of other sites that list Foundry missions.
After that, you have no control (beyond unpublishing) as to how the 'public' (in this case the playerbase) will react; or why they will, or will not play your Foundry mission. Foundry authors I'm sure have a wide variety of reasons for creating missions (some want to tell the story they've come up with; others I'm sure want to see how many 'tips' they can get since that option was added, etc.); and this goes for EVERY Foundry mission made, as there's not a single one that say after 100 reviews/ratings is all 5 stars.
if you're an author you need to develop a thick skin, as, while you'll always get the occasional 'drive by' 1 star rating/comment; you'll also get some well thought out 1 star comments, and it's up to the author to determine what feedback is valid in his/her eyes, and further, determine if it's something they want to, or can 'fix'.
In the end, though, it's the player's choice as to whether they want to create (and deal with all the positives and negatives that come along with doing so); and a player's choice as to whether he/she wants to play a Foundry mission, as you really never know what you'll get; but in the end, no one is forced to author or play Foundry content, it's a player's choice one way or the other.
As has been said by others above, the only difference between Foundry/Fanfic and Official/Licensed content is that one is vetted through a system of lawyers and 'authorized' by the IP holders and some sort of set monetary compensation is provided; and the other isn't. The actual overall 'quality' of either is 100% subjective and left to the consumer to decide.
In Star Trek's case over the last 46 years - a LOT of concepts born in Star Trek fan fiction have been adopted into 'official' Star trek canon. Perhaps that another incentive for some STO Foundry authors.
As for the idea that Cryptic is somehow sinisterly using the Foundry to do the job of creating new content so they don't have to... Please. The Foundry is just another option in STO. Players are free to use or ignore it as they choose; and (to my honest surprise); it appears PWE has put money back into STO, and the Dev team has expanded the game beyond where it was when Atari sold them to PWE and have added new story content in the last 9 months since the F2P relaunch of the game ("The 2800 FE series", the various 'Event' missions, new areas including the City of Bajor and the Nukara zone, etc); so I don't get where the attitude of "The Foundry is the 100% substitute for Dev created game and story content" - since there's a fair bit of evidence to the contrary over the last 9 months.) The Devs have also stated Season 7 will start to focus more on the 'story' they've given us in STO; and said Season 8 will see another FE series introduced. We'll see, but given how the past 9 months have gone, I'm hopeful what was stated will appear in the game with the launches of those Seasons, but time will tell.
As for the C-Store and other things; the game has to make money from somewhere; and ANY MMO is a business first in that, if it ain't making a profit (and a good one in the parent company/investor's eyes), there's no reason to continue running it; but in the end; it's the players who decide what gets added and continued to be offered by what they buy, or don't buy - so if you hate some aspect (or really dislike the game in general and want to see it shutdown); the BEST type of 'feedback' you can give is NOT to buy/support in any way, the aspect you don't like (like Lockboxes for example - I have never opened one beyond the free one in the Ferengi lockbox mission; and I have never acquired a Master key by any means in game as I don't want to support Lockboxes in any way. In the end though, it seems the majority of the STO playerbase does, or there wouldn't be such a big market in game for these keys, yet there is.)
At this point, I've gone beyond topic a bit, but I guess in the end, I don't understand the need of some people to vilify the addition of the Foundry as a 'tool to make the players do the Devs job for them"; because, that wasn't how I saw it. I saw it as something else I could do in game if I choose to make use of it; and further, a way to tell a story I'd developed, and see how people respond.
I also think that if other MMO developers asked their playerbases if they wanted a tool by which members of the playerbase who chose to, could add stories/quests to their game world that all the other players in said game world could access and play; the "yes, please add it" responses would outweigh the "no" responses.
The one thing I can say from personal experience is that Cryptic's implementation of UGC/Foundry tools so far is that is has been much better, and has had more options and less pitfalls than Paragon's version of their UGC/Mission Architect system that was in City of Heroes. (And it's a real shame that NCSoft is shutting hat game down as I have fond memories of it, and it was the one of the most enjoyable closed betas I was a part of -- but again, it shows what can happen when the parent company isn't getting what it considers enough profit from a project.)
But in the end, I use the Foundry (as a Foundry Author and player) because I choose to. IMO - It's just another option the game offers.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I love the foundry, and I think of it as the Pocket books of STO. just like Star Trek books are not canon to the TV start Trek, the foundry is not canon to STO, but are still great to read.;)
It's pretty sad at times that the foundry has better story missions than the official ones. The only story arch in the game that cryptic made that i enjoy a lot is the Feklar, which I know cryptic wont revisit for a very very long time. There was a foundry mission that did continue the Feklar mission which was great.:eek:
I do understand why some players can be turned off by the foundry, there are some that are just too long dialog wise, that I might as well read a book. There are foundry mission that don't have combat that I enjoy, because the dialog is witty, so cryptic please hurry with that bookmark so i can add my favorite authors.
My only problem with Star Trek fan fiction is when they try to make a show out of it, and by that i mean try to act. Dear god, the acting is horrible, but the stories are good,and with the foundry the fans get to write and express that story without the horrendous acting.
Authors also, please don't try to make my BO have some sort of personality, just keep them to a minimum explaining the situation, and bring a random character of the week to express themselves, i already have an idea of how my BO should act like. KDF authors, lets remember that not all of us play Klingons so stop making my Orion sound like she's going to cut out my tongue and wear it as a belt....I have to sleep with her at the end of the day not you
One area that the Foundry beats out CoH's Mission Architect is in the ability to customize maps and place objects, which you couldn't do at all in MA except in the most crude sense (couldn't place spawn points). Another area is in the advanced dialog editor. You can do lots of tricky things that you could never pull off in MA.
BUT.
MA allowed for a greater range of NPC behavior and objective types than we get with the Foundry currently, and I'd like to see some of those kinds of options. MA allowed us to do things like:
Have the bad guy try to get away when they got down to x% hit points
Have an NPC follow you around
Have an NPC flee
Have an NPC ally fight on your side
Allow an NPC to switch sides
Send NPC's to "seek and destroy"
Trigger explosions
Protect an NPC
Other interesting objective types...
By chaining objectives, you could easily create some complex interactions. I'm not going to consider the Foundry close to complete until it can do most of that stuff.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Why bother creating "great" stories knowing that people are more motivated by rewards? Or are you so convinced that people will play foundry missions for story and reward?
The same question could be asked of the devs when making new FEs. Unless they add rewards people actually want, many will not bother even if it is a good story. Why? Because they could spend that same time earning dilithium or something else they want.
Case for what? That people will play foundry for dil/rewards not for your story.
So that's really what the foundry is for then. Fast rewards and dil.
I see now.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
The same question could be asked of the devs when making new FEs. Unless they add rewards people actually want, many will not bother even if it is a good story. Why? Because they could spend that same time earning dilithium or something else they want.
So really what exactly are you trying to say? All I read from this is that people only play the FE's for reward and will only play the foundry for rewards?
If this is the case, then once again, why do foundry authors put so much time into story, when people will just use them for dil/rewards?
It seem to me that the foundry authors then are mugs? That's what your basically saying, people only play for rewards.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
One area that the Foundry beats out CoH's Mission Architect is in the ability to customize maps and place objects, which you couldn't do at all in MA except in the most crude sense (couldn't place spawn points). Another area is in the advanced dialog editor. You can do lots of tricky things that you could never pull off in MA.
BUT.
MA allowed for a greater range of NPC behavior and objective types than we get with the Foundry currently, and I'd like to see some of those kinds of options. MA allowed us to do things like:
Have the bad guy try to get away when they got down to x% hit points
Have an NPC follow you around
Have an NPC flee
Have an NPC ally fight on your side
Allow an NPC to switch sides
Send NPC's to "seek and destroy"
Trigger explosions
Protect an NPC
Other interesting objective types...
By chaining objectives, you could easily create some complex interactions. I'm not going to consider the Foundry close to complete until it can do most of that stuff.
WANT!
But, you can spawn friendly combat units in STO's foundry.
To Solomace: It's an MMO. Missions are played for the rewards. No reward means no reason to play a mission. Sure missions with an awesome story are more fun, but, no matter how amazing the story, I'm not gonna play it more than once or twice if there's no reward.
I think the problem here is you guys are over generalizing. There are many different people who play many different ways.
Within the STO playerbase there is a subset of players who will only do things for rewards. Within that is a group that will look for the quickest path to those rewards, while others may balance that with entertainment value and story value, but still primarily based on getting rewarded.
There is a subset that will play primarily for story, but who also wish to be rewarded at the end.
There is also a subset who will play story missions with no thought of reward. That's usually where I fall. I look at it this way, I just spent a couple bucks on the latest episode of Warehouse 13. At the end of the 43 minutes I got no reward, other than the satisfaction of having been entertained. I do not consider it time wasted, but that's just me.
I could go on and on. The point is there will likely never be a Foundry system that will please everyone and get everyone to play missions and will never be exploited. I'm kind of ok with that. If dilithium grinders don't want to play my 5-part, 4+ hour mission arc, fine. I want people for whom the experience of playing is a reward. I recognize that it is a subset of the community that thinks that way and not everyone. That's ok too. No large community is ever going to think one way about anything.
That said, I am not opposed to adding a good reward system, because I know that there are good, discerning, enlightened Star Trek fans out there who will enjoy our stories, but who do want that extra carrot to entice them into playing. Cool, no worries, I want you guys to come play as well
I use the Foundry because it allows me to write and produce Star Trek episodes in really the only way I can. I have accepted that I will never be a television writer, actor, director or producer so this is the next best thing.
Are my missions canon? They are to me. If anyone else wants to think so as well they are free to do so, or not. The beauty of Star Trek is that there is so much of it, that we can all choose what we want to accept as canon. Many people don't like the VOY episode "Threshold" and have banished it from canon, an actual episode on screen, which is the usual definition of canon. By that token I know people who have accepted the Vanguard novels as canon. Its all fine by me, everyone can have their own canon.
To my mind (what follows here is purely opinion) there are some bottom line things about the foundry:
1. It should not be a replacement for quality, professional work from game developers. It should be a supplement, not a replacement. The devs are free to determine what direction they want to take for that work. My own preference would be for something story-focused, but I ain't their boss.
2. The devs need to continue to find ways to get people playing the Foundry. I don't mean everyone, I mean the people who will enjoy it for what it is supposed to be, not as a means to a grind.
3. People should get off their high-horses about fan fiction. All fiction is made by people. People who get paid to do it are not automatically gods.
4. Most Foundry authors are hard-working people who put in their time without thought of reward other than praise for a job well done, because aside from tips, which rarely amount to much, there are no author rewards. They are also players just like you. Please keep that in mind.
5. The playerbase who does not have experience in the Foundry needs to be educated as to its limitations. People who only stop to play a Spotlight mission every now and then may not have a good idea as to what authors can and can't do.
6. The Foundry needs to be continually improved. It will never be perfect, just as STO itself will never be perfect. But we need to it to keep improving, and we need to keep having these discussions, because there are many opinions both positive and negative and I believe talking these things out will only benefit the Foundry in the long run.
I for one, hope the devs are watching this thread, whether they choose to post in it or not.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
I have never done a Foundry mission and probably never will...
I don't care about the reward factor, either.
I don't think it's fair that you have to pay a fee to create new and often better, mission content for a company who is making money of of your unpaid efforts when the company is seemly incapable or unwilling (<-- this most likely) to create any new mission content on it's own.
Yep, I know it means I miss out on some awesome missions.
Now, if there were regular, new missions being released by the company making a profit off of their product, then maybe I would consider it.
They are making a profit, no doubt, or this game would not continue...for them to claim they're not making enough of a profit to be worth the time to make new missions is ridiculous
While the Foundry remains as the ONLY source of new mission content, I will not touch it.
All IMOHPO...
Lord Krueg
KBF CO We are the Dead
join date Aug 2008
I have never done a Foundry mission and probably never will...
I don't care about the reward factor, either.
I don't think it's fair that you have to pay a fee to create new and often better, mission content for a company who is making money of of your unpaid efforts when the company is seemly incapable or unwilling (<-- this most likely) to create any new mission content on it's own.
Yep, I know it means I miss out on some awesome missions.
Now, if there were regular, new missions being released by the company making a profit off of their product, then maybe I would consider it.
They are making a profit, no doubt, or this game would not continue...for them to claim they're not making enough of a profit to be worth the time to make new missions is ridiculous
While the Foundry remains as the ONLY source of new mission content, I will not touch it.
All IMOHPO...
Case in point eh Nagus?
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
So really what exactly are you trying to say? All I read from this is that people only play the FE's for reward and will only play the foundry for rewards?
If this is the case, then once again, why do foundry authors put so much time into story, when people will just use them for dil/rewards?
It seem to me that the foundry authors then are mugs? That's what your basically saying, people only play for rewards.
Some people will play with the story as their main motivation. However that does not mean those people would not also enjoy having a nice reward at the end. Other people will play with the reward as their main motivation. However that does not mean those people would not enjoy a nice story as a means to get that reward.
While the Foundry remains as the ONLY source of new mission content, I will not touch it.
Thats great and all, except for the fact that no one ever said that. If you had been keeping up with the devs comments you would know S7 is mainly focused on new mission content, and that they are now planning to start the FEs again before the end of the year. So to re-emphasize the point: neither Cryptic nor the foundry fans have ever said it should be the ONLY source of new mission content. Which means the statement above has nothing to do with the actual situation.
I have never done a Foundry mission and probably never will...
I don't care about the reward factor, either.
I don't think it's fair that you have to pay a fee to create new and often better, mission content for a company who is making money of of your unpaid efforts when the company is seemly incapable or unwilling (<-- this most likely) to create any new mission content on it's own.
Yep, I know it means I miss out on some awesome missions.
Now, if there were regular, new missions being released by the company making a profit off of their product, then maybe I would consider it.
They are making a profit, no doubt, or this game would not continue...for them to claim they're not making enough of a profit to be worth the time to make new missions is ridiculous
While the Foundry remains as the ONLY source of new mission content, I will not touch it.
All IMOHPO...
It's optional.... and fun.
Why not? I mean really.... you make it sound like the Foundry is the most important aspect of Sto's design.
Do they make a profit off my missions, or Diogene0's, or Nagorak's, or Kirkfat's? NOPE!
Truth is.... they don't make money off it. What makes money is finding way to get people to spend money on the game. Currently, that's not the Foundry.
I make Foundry missions because it's fun to create a setting and share it with other players.
Well, the bottom line is that people aren't playing the missions. I won the Foundry contest and it's earned me about 150 new reviews in a game population of (insert your best guess here).
There are a lot of authors who would enjoy that boost to their missions, but again (insert your best guess here) of players out there, just ignoring some Foundry content.
Sigh, I spent over 120 hours making my contest entry. Let's see: 280 reviews.
But a Nagus daily, well that gets 18k reviews, I see.
Comments
I think both are necessary. Reward is what validates that the story mattered in a gaming environment. Reward is a measurable consequence. Without a measurable consequence of a story (or a chance for measurable consequence), yes, I think stories lose their meaning.
I too have to say I think both are necessary, however I think for the foundry, it's different.
In any game I play, I need story and reward, however is that the same with the foundry. Will people still look at the foundry as a story and reward part of STO, or just now another avenue for quick rewards.
Not sure, but will Dil be offered? If so, then I think you have found your way to grind for that ship or lockbox, story be damned..
If adding rewards to the Foundry leads to an upswing in the use of its missions, all that proves is that people who would've preferred to play story content felt forced into those other options as long as the Foundry missions offered no return at all.
Sure, some will cut the story out if they can.
Which is why the essential key for Foundry rewards, IMHO, is to make them GOOD but NOT quick.
As we've been saying all along, they need to be timer based and the timer stops ticking when idle.
Personally, I'd also say to make them DIFFERENT so as to be hard to compare.
Right now, for example, I always take the dilithium option on the Foundry daily. Why? Because dilithium can get me any item that's in that box.
One long, solid day can get me purples and blues, Mk XI or better. So why would I want Mk X greens? (Same thing goes for my rant on the Relativity Lobi weapons.) One solid day of replay can get every bridge officer a solid purple/blue gear set.
Only way you could get me to consider going back to greens is, say, a new energy type of weapon. Something difficult to measure existing rewards against.
We know that in NW, a chest drops with a reward based on the average playtime of a mission. So, someone could just be idle for an hour or another person could zoom through without reading the text. They'd get the same reward, because the loot is based on an average playtime.
What is unclear is what players get before that average playtime is determined. Also, I imagine that a lot of authors will get upset when the grinders just skip dialogue, which means the loot won't really match the actual length of the mission. But, hopefully, we'll have enough idlers to offset it.
And that's why the sto story means absolutely zero, you can't impact it, it doesn't impact you and you are in no way required to read even a single line of text to play along on stf -
which is all I ever do since the biggest rewards are on those maps.
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
There are some good Trek stories in the official content. Some of the FEs are really good. But, yes, there are lots of bad stuff. Still, it's probably unfair to blame the writer for a lot of things that may be beyond her control. Kestrel isn't a writer who has full control of what a mission turns out to be. Foundry authors can. That's part of the reason why so many Foundry missions are better.
There are just too many cooks in the kitchen in Cryptic content, combined with the fact that a lot of it was slapped together in an unrealistic timeframe. Not even the best writer could write 100 good stories in a year, let alone whatever the real time period was.
And if I, as a foundry author, had to send a draft script off to someone who had a limited period of time to build a set and plug in my story... Or, if someone just sent my the bones of a mission and said, "Give this a story" then the result would probably be bad.
Just saying. It's fair to critique the quality of official content as a whole, but I don't think it's fair to blame everything on the writer.
I think it's actual time, not average. But I don't know, honestly.
Cryptic is able to put together original missions that Foundry authors simply can not do, due to limitations in the Foundry toolset. Foundry stories are forced to work around these limitations all the time, albeit with some truly amazing results.
And that brings me to my second comment. I would far rather have STO with the Foundry than STO without the Foundry. STO without the Foundry will ultimately always lack story content. So I don't criticize Cryptic for using the Foundry to fill that gap.
It's fair to say that they have not produced enough story missions over the last couple of years. I want more. But it's also reasonable to say that there is more to come.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
I just made a thread with the quotes in the Foundry discussion section.
While I do see your point, its still asinine for her to need those types of excuses as the reason she cant tell a thought provoking heartfelt Star Trek quality story. Oh poor Kestral, an ENTIRE dev team at her disposal and she still cant outclass fans with much more limited resources.
Something maybe Dan should consider. They have Featured Episodes that they all insist on having all the chefs in the kitchen for. Why not let Kestral write and direct her own "Mission" occasionally and give her a real chance to tell a real story. Not a "Featured Episode" that requires every dev mucking it up with their input on story and game features. Assuming its true that shes at such a disadvantage compared to the foundry authors. I have yet to see any sign or quality in the storylines here to make me want to retract my desire to see both Kestral and Dan fired until they start producing stories worthy of a show itself. At the very least, 75% of the story quality compared to a show. No, I take that back. This is game. In video games, we get the quality of stories like Uncharted and the like to compete with Hollywood. Theres just no excuse for STO to not be able to handle itself like a Star Trek show. And if they cant do it with their engine, if I were CBS, Id take the license away and give it to a company that CAN turn STO into a quality show so good, its fame brings us back another REAL tv show. THATS what STO should be doing for the franchise, not dragging its name in the mud. Nevermind all the lockbox TRIBBLE we deal with.
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
Here's the ting: Players will play Foundry missions for a variety of reasons - some for the rewards, some for the story, etc. As someone who's authored two missions; I did it to see if (and how well), I could use the tool provided to tell the story I wanted to tell. I also did what I could to 'advertise it on the STO Forums, Starbase UGC, and a couple of other sites that list Foundry missions.
After that, you have no control (beyond unpublishing) as to how the 'public' (in this case the playerbase) will react; or why they will, or will not play your Foundry mission. Foundry authors I'm sure have a wide variety of reasons for creating missions (some want to tell the story they've come up with; others I'm sure want to see how many 'tips' they can get since that option was added, etc.); and this goes for EVERY Foundry mission made, as there's not a single one that say after 100 reviews/ratings is all 5 stars.
if you're an author you need to develop a thick skin, as, while you'll always get the occasional 'drive by' 1 star rating/comment; you'll also get some well thought out 1 star comments, and it's up to the author to determine what feedback is valid in his/her eyes, and further, determine if it's something they want to, or can 'fix'.
In the end, though, it's the player's choice as to whether they want to create (and deal with all the positives and negatives that come along with doing so); and a player's choice as to whether he/she wants to play a Foundry mission, as you really never know what you'll get; but in the end, no one is forced to author or play Foundry content, it's a player's choice one way or the other.
As has been said by others above, the only difference between Foundry/Fanfic and Official/Licensed content is that one is vetted through a system of lawyers and 'authorized' by the IP holders and some sort of set monetary compensation is provided; and the other isn't. The actual overall 'quality' of either is 100% subjective and left to the consumer to decide.
In Star Trek's case over the last 46 years - a LOT of concepts born in Star Trek fan fiction have been adopted into 'official' Star trek canon. Perhaps that another incentive for some STO Foundry authors.
As for the idea that Cryptic is somehow sinisterly using the Foundry to do the job of creating new content so they don't have to... Please. The Foundry is just another option in STO. Players are free to use or ignore it as they choose; and (to my honest surprise); it appears PWE has put money back into STO, and the Dev team has expanded the game beyond where it was when Atari sold them to PWE and have added new story content in the last 9 months since the F2P relaunch of the game ("The 2800 FE series", the various 'Event' missions, new areas including the City of Bajor and the Nukara zone, etc); so I don't get where the attitude of "The Foundry is the 100% substitute for Dev created game and story content" - since there's a fair bit of evidence to the contrary over the last 9 months.) The Devs have also stated Season 7 will start to focus more on the 'story' they've given us in STO; and said Season 8 will see another FE series introduced. We'll see, but given how the past 9 months have gone, I'm hopeful what was stated will appear in the game with the launches of those Seasons, but time will tell.
As for the C-Store and other things; the game has to make money from somewhere; and ANY MMO is a business first in that, if it ain't making a profit (and a good one in the parent company/investor's eyes), there's no reason to continue running it; but in the end; it's the players who decide what gets added and continued to be offered by what they buy, or don't buy - so if you hate some aspect (or really dislike the game in general and want to see it shutdown); the BEST type of 'feedback' you can give is NOT to buy/support in any way, the aspect you don't like (like Lockboxes for example - I have never opened one beyond the free one in the Ferengi lockbox mission; and I have never acquired a Master key by any means in game as I don't want to support Lockboxes in any way. In the end though, it seems the majority of the STO playerbase does, or there wouldn't be such a big market in game for these keys, yet there is.)
At this point, I've gone beyond topic a bit, but I guess in the end, I don't understand the need of some people to vilify the addition of the Foundry as a 'tool to make the players do the Devs job for them"; because, that wasn't how I saw it. I saw it as something else I could do in game if I choose to make use of it; and further, a way to tell a story I'd developed, and see how people respond.
I also think that if other MMO developers asked their playerbases if they wanted a tool by which members of the playerbase who chose to, could add stories/quests to their game world that all the other players in said game world could access and play; the "yes, please add it" responses would outweigh the "no" responses.
The one thing I can say from personal experience is that Cryptic's implementation of UGC/Foundry tools so far is that is has been much better, and has had more options and less pitfalls than Paragon's version of their UGC/Mission Architect system that was in City of Heroes. (And it's a real shame that NCSoft is shutting hat game down as I have fond memories of it, and it was the one of the most enjoyable closed betas I was a part of -- but again, it shows what can happen when the parent company isn't getting what it considers enough profit from a project.)
But in the end, I use the Foundry (as a Foundry Author and player) because I choose to. IMO - It's just another option the game offers.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
It's pretty sad at times that the foundry has better story missions than the official ones. The only story arch in the game that cryptic made that i enjoy a lot is the Feklar, which I know cryptic wont revisit for a very very long time. There was a foundry mission that did continue the Feklar mission which was great.:eek:
I do understand why some players can be turned off by the foundry, there are some that are just too long dialog wise, that I might as well read a book. There are foundry mission that don't have combat that I enjoy, because the dialog is witty, so cryptic please hurry with that bookmark so i can add my favorite authors.
My only problem with Star Trek fan fiction is when they try to make a show out of it, and by that i mean try to act. Dear god, the acting is horrible, but the stories are good,and with the foundry the fans get to write and express that story without the horrendous acting.
Authors also, please don't try to make my BO have some sort of personality, just keep them to a minimum explaining the situation, and bring a random character of the week to express themselves, i already have an idea of how my BO should act like. KDF authors, lets remember that not all of us play Klingons so stop making my Orion sound like she's going to cut out my tongue and wear it as a belt....I have to sleep with her at the end of the day not you
BUT.
MA allowed for a greater range of NPC behavior and objective types than we get with the Foundry currently, and I'd like to see some of those kinds of options. MA allowed us to do things like:
By chaining objectives, you could easily create some complex interactions. I'm not going to consider the Foundry close to complete until it can do most of that stuff.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Glad you still agree :cool:
The same question could be asked of the devs when making new FEs. Unless they add rewards people actually want, many will not bother even if it is a good story. Why? Because they could spend that same time earning dilithium or something else they want.
If your talking about the NW system, it is in fact average time, not personal.
The reason for this is simple: I need resources for advancement.
Given the massive grind required for Starbases and most everything else, I have to use my limited play time for the greatest benefit.
As soon as Foundry missions are allowed to give full rewards I'll play more of them.
Yet another case in point.
Case for what? That people will play foundry for dil/rewards not for your story.
So that's really what the foundry is for then. Fast rewards and dil.
I see now.
So really what exactly are you trying to say? All I read from this is that people only play the FE's for reward and will only play the foundry for rewards?
If this is the case, then once again, why do foundry authors put so much time into story, when people will just use them for dil/rewards?
It seem to me that the foundry authors then are mugs? That's what your basically saying, people only play for rewards.
But, you can spawn friendly combat units in STO's foundry.
To Solomace: It's an MMO. Missions are played for the rewards. No reward means no reason to play a mission. Sure missions with an awesome story are more fun, but, no matter how amazing the story, I'm not gonna play it more than once or twice if there's no reward.
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~Bluegeek
My character Tsin'xing
Within the STO playerbase there is a subset of players who will only do things for rewards. Within that is a group that will look for the quickest path to those rewards, while others may balance that with entertainment value and story value, but still primarily based on getting rewarded.
There is a subset that will play primarily for story, but who also wish to be rewarded at the end.
There is also a subset who will play story missions with no thought of reward. That's usually where I fall. I look at it this way, I just spent a couple bucks on the latest episode of Warehouse 13. At the end of the 43 minutes I got no reward, other than the satisfaction of having been entertained. I do not consider it time wasted, but that's just me.
I could go on and on. The point is there will likely never be a Foundry system that will please everyone and get everyone to play missions and will never be exploited. I'm kind of ok with that. If dilithium grinders don't want to play my 5-part, 4+ hour mission arc, fine. I want people for whom the experience of playing is a reward. I recognize that it is a subset of the community that thinks that way and not everyone. That's ok too. No large community is ever going to think one way about anything.
That said, I am not opposed to adding a good reward system, because I know that there are good, discerning, enlightened Star Trek fans out there who will enjoy our stories, but who do want that extra carrot to entice them into playing. Cool, no worries, I want you guys to come play as well
I use the Foundry because it allows me to write and produce Star Trek episodes in really the only way I can. I have accepted that I will never be a television writer, actor, director or producer so this is the next best thing.
Are my missions canon? They are to me. If anyone else wants to think so as well they are free to do so, or not. The beauty of Star Trek is that there is so much of it, that we can all choose what we want to accept as canon. Many people don't like the VOY episode "Threshold" and have banished it from canon, an actual episode on screen, which is the usual definition of canon. By that token I know people who have accepted the Vanguard novels as canon. Its all fine by me, everyone can have their own canon.
To my mind (what follows here is purely opinion) there are some bottom line things about the foundry:
1. It should not be a replacement for quality, professional work from game developers. It should be a supplement, not a replacement. The devs are free to determine what direction they want to take for that work. My own preference would be for something story-focused, but I ain't their boss.
2. The devs need to continue to find ways to get people playing the Foundry. I don't mean everyone, I mean the people who will enjoy it for what it is supposed to be, not as a means to a grind.
3. People should get off their high-horses about fan fiction. All fiction is made by people. People who get paid to do it are not automatically gods.
4. Most Foundry authors are hard-working people who put in their time without thought of reward other than praise for a job well done, because aside from tips, which rarely amount to much, there are no author rewards. They are also players just like you. Please keep that in mind.
5. The playerbase who does not have experience in the Foundry needs to be educated as to its limitations. People who only stop to play a Spotlight mission every now and then may not have a good idea as to what authors can and can't do.
6. The Foundry needs to be continually improved. It will never be perfect, just as STO itself will never be perfect. But we need to it to keep improving, and we need to keep having these discussions, because there are many opinions both positive and negative and I believe talking these things out will only benefit the Foundry in the long run.
I for one, hope the devs are watching this thread, whether they choose to post in it or not.
I have never done a Foundry mission and probably never will...
I don't care about the reward factor, either.
I don't think it's fair that you have to pay a fee to create new and often better, mission content for a company who is making money of of your unpaid efforts when the company is seemly incapable or unwilling (<-- this most likely) to create any new mission content on it's own.
Yep, I know it means I miss out on some awesome missions.
Now, if there were regular, new missions being released by the company making a profit off of their product, then maybe I would consider it.
They are making a profit, no doubt, or this game would not continue...for them to claim they're not making enough of a profit to be worth the time to make new missions is ridiculous
While the Foundry remains as the ONLY source of new mission content, I will not touch it.
All IMOHPO...
KBF CO
We are the Dead
join date Aug 2008
Case in point eh Nagus?
Some people will play with the story as their main motivation. However that does not mean those people would not also enjoy having a nice reward at the end. Other people will play with the reward as their main motivation. However that does not mean those people would not enjoy a nice story as a means to get that reward.
Thats great and all, except for the fact that no one ever said that. If you had been keeping up with the devs comments you would know S7 is mainly focused on new mission content, and that they are now planning to start the FEs again before the end of the year. So to re-emphasize the point: neither Cryptic nor the foundry fans have ever said it should be the ONLY source of new mission content. Which means the statement above has nothing to do with the actual situation.
Why not? I mean really.... you make it sound like the Foundry is the most important aspect of Sto's design.
Do they make a profit off my missions, or Diogene0's, or Nagorak's, or Kirkfat's? NOPE!
Truth is.... they don't make money off it. What makes money is finding way to get people to spend money on the game. Currently, that's not the Foundry.
I make Foundry missions because it's fun to create a setting and share it with other players.
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~Bluegeek
My character Tsin'xing
There are a lot of authors who would enjoy that boost to their missions, but again (insert your best guess here) of players out there, just ignoring some Foundry content.
Sigh, I spent over 120 hours making my contest entry. Let's see: 280 reviews.
But a Nagus daily, well that gets 18k reviews, I see.