Probably too late, but something to chew on...
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-05-24 20:04 in Mission Architect
Quote:
And yet another reason why the stars system needs to go. If there isn't a valid way to tell whether an arc is good by looking at it's description and community feedback then it leaves the potential to piss off folks who many want to try legitimate arcs for RP.|
Originally Posted by Gunbunny
I stopped writing arcs for similair resons as above and the fact that I will never ever be able to write it in correct English. Having had many comments saying: nice arc, shame about the bad english and that is after having it proofread by somebody a few times. Thus my conclusion that I better stop writing completely.
About rating things, Supafreak convinced me to change my criteria. 5 Stars would be, I am blown away. 4 stars was a good job indeed, I had good fun. From now on it will be 5, 1 or nothing. I want to encourage authors and by no means I want to discourage somebody with a rating that makes him feel sad. |
If a person sees an arc is rated at 5 stars, they expect it to not only be good, but be excellent. If they go in and it littered with things that might have made it a 4, 3, or 2 star arc and yet it was rated a 5 (or a 1), this might make the "reader" suspect of the whole system. And thus, in combination with the horrid search system, might drive folks AWAY from the AE system.
If folks want to always give 5 stars so that the AUTHORS don't feel bad that's fine. But keep in mind that that may drive more PLAYERS away from the system. Which also potentially spreads bad word of mouth about AE, and thus makes getting ANY plays even harder.
Yes the star system is bad, however until the devs FIX IT, by nuking it from orbit, people might be doing more of a disservice to the system. Do we want more authors to get 5 stars or do we want more people using the AE, thus justfiying more resources being spent.
Keep in mind an arc with a lot of 5 stars may be very still NEVER be seen due to the volume of arcs in the system in general. So . . . I'm not really sure what 5 staring ever arc accomplishes other than making the authors feel good. And if it's only the author's feelings we care about then I see the entire system as a pointless endeavor.
EDIT: Keep in mind you did say you give 5, 1, or nothing. So kudos for that. I just don't agree that there's no middle ground between those.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
My thoughts on this... a player should be able to tell after either contact of first mission if it's worth their time to continue on. And if they do quit, it's not like they need to travel across Nerva to get another mission... it's less than 5 seconds away to choose another.| If a person sees an arc is rated at 5 stars, they expect it to not only be good, but be excellent. If they go in and it littered with things that might have made it a 4, 3, or 2 star arc and yet it was rated a 5 (or a 1), this might make the "reader" suspect of the whole system. And thus, in combination with the horrid search system, might drive folks AWAY from the AE system. |
Quote:
| Keep in mind an arc with a lot of 5 stars may be very still NEVER be seen due to the volume of arcs in the system in general. So . . . I'm not really sure what 5 staring ever arc accomplishes other than making the authors feel good. And if it's only the author's feelings we care about then I see the entire system as a pointless endeavor. |
Let's take a comparison to why some PvP communities fail.
Good PvPer owns an aspiring PvPer: Laughs and taunts only as feedback.
Aspiring PvPers: Gives up. PvP competition: Down
Good PvPer owns an aspiring PvPer: Tells aspiring PvPer how to improve.
Aspiring PvPers: Continue on. PvP competition: Up
Since the ratings system is the gauger on how one's best progressing in A/E, I will continue to "encourage" aspiring authors who show potential. I don't care if it's "not really one of the best" at this point. If I give them feedback and they do care and continue to improve it... the HoF status will be the true indicator.
People can deny it all they want... but we're drawn to positivity, not negativity.
Personally, I prefer to rate arcs using the whole range of 1 star to 5 stars. Although I respect that a lot of forum goers seem to have gone to a "5 star or nothing" system, I feel you lose a lot of information by doing so. I'm not willing to lump arcs that are "good try, could be great if you work at it more" in the same category as the "best stories that MA has to offer", and in my opinion, to do so is a disservice to both the writer and the player of MA story arcs.
There are several arcs I originally gave 4 stars or even 3 stars, that I believe I actually helped by providing useful feedback that the author was able to use to improve his or her story arc. Some of these have made it onto my "favorites" list and would easily score 5 stars from me now.
Likewise, I've received several middling to low scoring reviews, with extensive feedback, that let me considerably improve some of the story arcs I've worked on.
This feedback effect is greatly reduced in an environment were people are generally willing to give arcs 5 stars just "for effort" rather than for actual quality.
@PW - Police Woman (50 AR/dev blaster on Liberty)
TALOS - PW war journal - alternate contact tree using MA story arcs
=VICE= "Give me Liberty, or give me debt!"
Quote:
We'll have to agree to disagree. The gauge for me is if people play my arc and give me feedback, positive or negative. If there are no people coming to the AE my job as an author is a fruitless effort as no one will be there to play my creations.|
Originally Posted by SupaFreak
Since the ratings system is the gauger on how one's best progressing in A/E, I will continue to "encourage" aspiring authors who show potential. I don't care if it's "not really one of the best" at this point. If I give them feedback and they do care and continue to improve it... the HoF status will be the true indicator. People can deny it all they want... but we're drawn to positivity, not negativity. |
If the system to best gauge whether arcs are good is as useless as the search function, it will drive away people who would otherwise be willing to explore in the AE.
Since players don't see the comments people have given you on your arc.
The comments and tickets are for the author. The star system is for the audience to properly guage if a story is good or bad . . .
I will say that's IF the star system is used correctly by the audience. if the audience is just going to 5 star or 1 star everything with no feedback or logical rhyme or reason then it makes it even more impossible for the audience to tell if a potential new story is good or bad.
I don't agree that anyone can just step into a mission and know if it's good or bad. What if it's an ARC that builds up it's story over time? How does one tell if the overall story is good or bad just by playing the first missions?
Whether folks like it or not the jump point for whether folks play or don't play something is the STAR system.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
This is an awesome idea.|
Originally Posted by MaestroMavius
I also ran an Archnemesis campaign for a bit. I'd take the backstory for your toon and then create their Arch Nem and set up various missions for you. But the time involved combined with the thankless nature of some of the participants soured me on the concept.
|
For what it's worth - I'm interested.
Quote:
Said it better than me. I'd rather get 3 stars WITH comments telling me what I did wrong, right, and could improve. A fake 5 with no comments or nothing telling me what they liked or didn't like is useless to me as an author.|
Originally Posted by PoliceWoman
This feedback effect is greatly reduced in an environment were people are generally willing to give arcs 5 stars just "for effort" rather than for actual quality. |
/shrug.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Quote:
As someone on the receiving end, I feel it certainly did help. I think a lot of the problem is that many people don't give detailed feedback and even those who do usually have to do so outside of the game. Stars are an intriguingly objective system for rather subjective matters of taste and quality. There's no way to differentiate between "this arc is mechanically sound" and "I enjoyed this arc".
|
Originally Posted by PoliceWoman
There are several arcs I originally gave 4 stars or even 3 stars, that I believe I actually helped by providing useful feedback that the author was able to use to improve his or her story arc.
|
I stopped writing arcs for similair resons as above and the fact that I will never ever be able to write it in correct English. Having had many comments saying: nice arc, shame about the bad english and that is after having it proofread by somebody a few times. Thus my conclusion that I better stop writing completely.
About rating things, Supafreak convinced me to change my criteria. 5 Stars would be, I am blown away. 4 stars was a good job indeed, I had good fun.
From now on it will be 5, 1 or nothing. I want to encourage authors and by no means I want to discourage somebody with a rating that makes him feel sad.