The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback

[Nidan1]

There seems to be a bit of "be careful what you wish for" in this topic. 'Feedback' as it relates to public chat boards is not always pleasant. I doubt anyone would want to post a perfectly respectable scenario only to find 200 messages from fourteen year olds telling them they're incompetent and stupid and deserve to die a slow lingering death. Okay, that's a bit extreme. More likely they'll be told their map is too big/small, gamepay is too easy/hard, their orders text isn't historically accurate or helpful or grammatically correct. Feedback can be a buzzkill sometimes. Sometimes its best to give your scenario to the world then move on.

Well in that case you would hope that the designer is mature enough to know when he is being trolled by a 14 year old or is getting valid critique from a person interested in bettering the scenario.

That is why the ROW series seemed to succeed in getting creative AARs and mature and intelligent feed back on the battles. The feedback came from players who had actually played the series of battles from one side or the other within the parameters of the tournament. Of course if you design a scenario and just throw it out there like so much meat to the lions you have to expect feedback that is not honest or constructive.

[agusto]

I used to have a neighbor that would buy things just because they were on sale. He could have 50 lawn chairs, but if he passed a store with them on sale at some ridiculous price, he'd buy them anyway. Now they were just waste.

I think that kind of behaviour is even a recognized mental illness.

I think though we are going a bit too far. The vast majority of BFs consumer base does not even participate in this forum. They are silent for whatever reason. Maybe they are shy, maybe they think we are all a bunch of looneys. Maybe they think the Peng thread is representative of our mental state.

Probably the majority simply isnt interested in CM enough to feel the need to discuss it with others. Although I play several different computer games too i only have an account on this particular forum.

[Myles Keogh]

There seems to be a bit of "be careful what you wish for" in this topic. 'Feedback' as it relates to public chat boards is not always pleasant. I doubt anyone would want to post a perfectly respectable scenario only to find 200 messages from fourteen year olds telling them they're incompetent and stupid and deserve to die a slow lingering death. Okay, that's a bit extreme. More likely they'll be told their map is too big/small, gamepay is too easy/hard, their orders text isn't historically accurate or helpful or grammatically correct. Feedback can be a buzzkill sometimes. Sometimes its best to give your scenario to the world then move on.

There was a rather amusing incident on the CMBN mod forum a few months back. A player gave some brief but negative feedback about the play balance of a user-made scenario. And how did that scenario's designer react? By throwing what can only be described as an absolute fit!

He ranted on and on (with LOTS OF CAPITALIZATIONS throw in for emphasis) about how that player didn't play his scenario the "right" way.

It was appalling and amusing at the same time. Now, why would anyone even play that designer's scenarios again, let alone give him any feedback after that display?

[The Teacher]

Play testing is the key to a good scenario.

I start with an idea and then develope the scenario over a week or so. It takes a fair amount of tweaking until I put it into the testing stage, sometimes idea's dont convert into a good/fun scenario.

What one player thinks is a fun scenario may not be to everyones taste and thats why a good variety is the key to a happy ( we hope ) community of players.

[MikeyD]

Its always a good idea to set a scenario aside after finishing then revisit it with a fresh eye a couple days later. What you had thought was the cleverest thing ever done will probably get a "What was I thinking?!" reaction on second viewing. Revise and repeat.

[Werewolf]

To the OP:

I know exactly where you're comin' from and don't take this the wrong way but - Welcome to REAL life.

As a good friend of mine is want to say, "It is what it is".

I've been designing scenarios for various games as far back as I can remember. But since the late 90's many scenarios for the original Harpoon, Steel Beasts (numerous and some for USAEUR). Scenarios for Microprose's Falcon 4.0, Sub Command and a few other less well know titles. Most were extensively downloaded; rarely did I get formal forum feed back. On the Steel Beasts forums the guys who designed scenarios regularly made the same plea you have, even the forum moderators and devs chimed in making a strong case for designer feedback.

Result - squat. Players simply couldn't be bothered - until we stopped uploading. Then they'd complain about why no user created content. Users can be a spoiled and ungrateful lot. (for a prime example check out the Total War: Rome 2 Steam forum - those guys take the cake).

Like you - at 1st - I created scenarios to assuage my need to - well - create and experiment with the games. But just like any artist I eventually wanted to see how players received my stuff. It may sound weird but of the little feedback I actually received I preferred that which was negative as that could be used to make my designs even better. So it wasn't praise I was looking for but ways to improve what I made so both myself and my audience would get to experience an even better product.

Not to be though. As you presented - maybe 1 in a 100 bothered to comment (I got plenty of comment from multiplayer buds but they were a minority of users at the time). Eventually I just took everything I'd ever made offline. Now I make scenarios - when I take the time - just for me. If something doesn't work out the way I'd like it is trashed and I move on to something else instead of powering thru to finish it because I promised someone that I'd work on building their idea. Gaming and scenario designing is now a much more relaxed and pleasant experience.

Do it for yourself - you may find that the time you spend at the drawing board will be much more pleasant and way less angst inducing.

[mjkerner]

Here´s a fact: My first scenario, Two Bridges, is the one that has been downloaded most times: 651. It has recieved 3 ratings with an average of 3 stars (out of 5) and 4 comments, all of them rather negative. Of all my scenarios it is the one that has the worst ratings and comments (I´m disregarding Waylaid that had neither), yet it is the one that has been downloaded most times. Where´s the

Yup, that one sucked!

JUST KIDDING...I kid because I love!

My thoughts have all been covered by others in this thread, but I hope BFC will eventually redo the Repository and make it easier to give feedback. I have playtested a lot of scenarios for a few people, and of course they get that pre-release feedback, but post release, not much.

By the way, that 1% post-release feedback rate seems to hold true for modders as well, but the difference is that you can get a lot of pre- and post-release feedback by showing pics in the mods forum.

Oh, forgot to say that there really are no bad scenarios...only different ones. There have been a lot of scenarios I downloaded and for one reason or another didn't care to finish playing out, but giving a critique wouldn't have been useful, since it may have been a bad day at the office, or I just couldn't get into that particular setting, troop mix, etc. But I wouldn't want to in any way discourage the designer from continuing making more.

And as far as your scenarios, Umlaut, I love 'me all. Great job, and I hope you jeep them coming!

[Col Deadmarsh]

Just found this thread today and I just want to say that I always leave my thoughts on a scenario for the designer...and frankly, it bothers me as much as the designers when I don't see others leave comments.

I'd like to be able to browse through some of these and know immediately if it's a good H2H battle or whatever it is that I'm looking for. Without comments from others, who knows what you're getting.

Even if you just write 1 sentence, it would really help both people like me and encourage the designers to keep producing more great works.

[niall78]

An quick excuse for players like myself who love both player created mods, scenarios and campaigns but rarely leave comments.

I recently got CMFI and GL. I spent hours downloading all the wonderful mods. I then spent ages downloading all the player created scenarios. I still haven't actually played the game - I'm still plugging my way through 'The road to Nijmegen' in CMMG. I also have a lot of downloaded scenarios for that game but haven't had the time to play them. There is no feedback in a lot of cases with scenarios because they won't be played for weeks, months or even years after they are downloaded - I still have dozens of scenarios for CMBB I haven't played a decade after getting them.

The modders and designers do a superb job for us ordinary players. I've a ton or respect for them and their work - I'm sure most others do too. Please keep plugging away even if the feedback isn't great - one day I'll play those CMFI scenarios I've downloaded and in my head say a 'thank you' to the guy who sweated years before to make it happen.

As a side note I think all CM modders, designers and players would be greatly helped by a cleaned up and revamped repository section on the Battlefront website - frankly at the moment it is a mess.

[slysniper]

I ran 3 "out of the dust tournaments" on this forum and the main reason was so that I would get some feed back on my scenarios. Since most of them in the tournaments were ones I created.

That is about the best way to get any feed back.

Of course back then I used the scenario depot to make them available once we had used them.

I find the best indicator for a good scenario is how often it is downloaded.

I am not sure how the word gets around but I saw that the better scenarios were getting downloaded much more. A simple way to decide if your work is good enough and getting appreciated.

[kevinkin]

The most numerous feedback I ever received was being part of the CMBB ROW eMail tournaments as a designer. This dates an old timer. Tournaments are great community activities. We assembled good designers and players and used a scoring system that balanced scores based on the entire pool of data that was available to everyone. Cost of entering the tournaments was the player's commitment to post AARs. If we had 2-3 of these running, scenario designers and players would naturally have to be more vocal and involved. I will look to see if CMRT has anything like this going on now and make a separate thread if it is warranted. I am back to CM after long time away and trying to get up to speed so I need to fill in the gaps.

Kevin

[Ranger33]

I think a great way to generate some buzz in the community would be if Battlefront offered one copy of each new game/module as a tournament prize in the months before release. Maybe with the requirement that players create AAR's in the final round or two, which would make things even more exciting.

[John Kettler]

Speaking as one who was involved in RoW from the get, both as a player and an AAR judge, there were several cracks made at getting the AAR thing sorted out. RoW I rules provided an incentive to produce AARs, as much as 3% more tournament points than were obtainable via straight gaming. As noted, some, whom you'd think would move Heaven and Earth to claw out even a single point in desperate tourney combat, still didn't do them. And suffered accordingly in the hotly contested standings. Thereafter, I believe, they were made mandatory, with an additional incentive in the form of a hand-built tank model for the best one. Aptly, it was a T-34/85 with tankodesantniki aboard, the whole on a wooden plaque with a segment of ground laid in.

The rankings were computed using the now hallowed The Nabla System, named for (handle) Nabla, one of our own, and a most worthy opponent in RoW as Jarmo and was based on comparing your performance vs all those of your fellow gamers playing a given side in a defined scenario.

Nabla and the long-suffering Treeburst 155, who ran RoW, set forth the mysteries of the System.

http://cis.legacy.ics.tkk.fi/jarmo/nabla-system/nabla-manual.pdf

The beauty of this was that it enabled uneven battles to be fought, for victory lay not in the absolute attainment of a certain number of VPs, but in doing better in the uphill fight than did your same side colleagues in that fight. Also, it caused the wiser players to practice almost ruthless force conservation, evacuating men and equipment alike as things began to turn pear shaped, as opposed to throwing every last man into the fray when the battle was obviously lost. No one serious about RoW would willingly cede a single point on the game score for lack of diligence when it came to getting off the battlefield before a loss became a rank wrecking disaster.

Regards,

John Kettler

[GAZ NZ]

Maps get posted on the Blitz and sent out monthly for comment.

Try using this club.

We play on ladder cm games.

Good community there.

GAZ

[Sickie]

It seems to me as "just" an infrastructural challenge, the search keys or categories that I would find useful on a repository/scenariodepot are "Balanced for H2H", within that one, "(Semi-)Historical", "Casual" and "Competition". "Single player" that would have "(Semi-)Historical" and "Casual". A divide between scenarios and mods would be welcome as well for browsing. Not to mention modpacks; who wouldn't use all Aris'mods anyway?

All entries would have tags with these categories and all the settings used; Map size, duration, time of day and so on. In this way it would be possible to choose a scenario based on ones preferences without getting spoilers. A review/shared experiences section in which spoilers are allowed would be present as well, it would be up to the decency of the H2H-players not to read the spoiler-reviews before having finished the scenario.

This last bit may be tricky for some but I actually don't even watch ChrisND too much before a release because he uses maps that will turn up in the game.

Repository feedback and the right info without spoilers do work well with for instance AD's sweet little infantry scenarios for Gustav Line in the repository. Might be because of the small size and limited complexity.

It occurs to me that Battlefront might like this as it would also provide them with feedback on the stock scenarios. "The passage" from CMRT is utterly unbalanced for H2H and now everyone has to find out for themselves which might reflect bad on the game.

[umlaut]

As the thread starter I think it is nice - though a bit surprising - to see that the problem is being discussed again.

Several posters here have stated that if I want feedback on my scenarios, I should start a tournament. I´ll do no such thing.

I have absolutely zero interest in tournaments and I really don´t see that I should be doing even more work to make people to give a little in return for a scenario they get for free. Especially when forumites constantly whine about the lack of scenarios.

If players can´t be bothered to provide feedback, I can´t be bothered to release my scenarios. I´ll still make them for myself, but I wont bother doing all the extra work required for a release.

The past two months I´ve been working on a mini campaign for my Bitvagorod map, but I have put it on hold for now. The lack of players replying to test calls and the general lack of feedback on the Factory Mod Set means that I´ve lost all motivation for releasing anything.

[c3k]

Interesting topic. As far as the Factory Mod, it is phenomenal. It brings an incredible atmosphere to the game. However, how do you want to get feedback? Seriously.

If the game included a debrief screen with a "star" rating, perhaps that would help? But that would require players opt-in to a system to upload their playing history. (For example.)

Finish a game and a screen pops up with 5 empty stars. Click on the one you think it earned. Then have an optional comments box. Whhoosh, up into the internet it goes, straight to the BFC feedback site.

Barring something like that, the feedback system is poor. I don't use the repository. I don't have much time to dig through the sorting system, nor do I have much time to find and use what's offered. I don't know what's there. If I hit the repository twice a year, I'd be surprised.

I have recently started visiting GaJ's CMMODs site. Much better organization (but still lacking a bit on ease of sorting/finding), but no feedback mechanism.

I think the best source of feedback anyone could get, atm, is the number of downloads their work has garnered.

What system should be used for the care and feeding of volunteer help here?

Ken

[PanzerMike]

Sorry to hear that Umlaut. For a number of my scenarios I asked the betas if they were willing to test in the Beta forum. And some of them helped me out greatly. But after a while they are mostly busy with the new BFC stuff (CMBS for example), so their efforts are required elsewhere.

So I also asked for testers once on the normal forum and a few volunteered. Quality of the feedback was rather mixed and sometimes I had to wait quite a while for it. But hey, it is all unpaid volunteer work, so your mileage may vary. It is great if some are willing to help at all. But it is not an optimal situation clearly.

Much has been said about the repository (lots of moaning and groaning that is). Yes, it is not exactly stellar, but not half as bad as many say IMHO. The number of downloads is the best indication wether your stuff is liked or not (or if an AAR is started, yeah ) I guess. Only a few percent of the users that download the scenario actually rate it or provide brief comments in the repository. Sometimes they respond in the initial generated thread in the maps and mods forum.

All in all, I have received quite a lot feedback on my stuff. Could it be better? Yes. But I'll take what I can get.

[Buzz]

"What system should be used for the care and feeding of volunteer help here?"

Ken asks the critical question. I don't have an answer but a major part is KISS... SIMPLE.

"Several posters here have stated that if I want feedback on my scenarios, I should start a tournament...." :confused:

I agree with you umlaut. Setting up a tournament, with your custom scenarios and custom mods and custom scoring and sure to be custom adjusting of parts and pieces = full time work.

"Quality of the feedback was rather mixed and sometimes I had to wait quite a while for it. But hey, it is all unpaid volunteer work..."

Good point PanzerMike. I am sure many Beta testers can give very constructive comments and have these organized with screenshots. The pre announcement threads Battlefront uses for new products are very, very entertaining. (Looking forward to the one for CMBS )

You are not going to find that level of feedback on average. I thank everyone (scenario designers and mod artists) with feedback mostly in the forum thread other times in PM. I often forget about the Repository rating not on purpose but because it may be weeks if not months before I get time to play the scenario and time to complete it. Then I would have to find the link in the Repository, post a rating, comment and would see essentially zero feedback. It kind of makes rating in the Repository ... a dead end .. except for the designers as there is little give and take in this form of communication.

*I use the Repository mostly when I see a new listing posted in the forum. Repository revamp would be greatly appreciated but if I had to use my business workforce wisely I would keep them creating new products and then get to the Repository.*

It is clear there are some very talented scenario designers and mod artists in this community. I think most people appreciate these talents.

If responding with feedback is not SIMPLE ... really SIMPLE ... the feedback is going to be little to none. This is true in more than CM design.

The 'volunteer feedback' that many public institutions, private business's get is often lacking or nonexistent ... unless it is a complaint

I don't have a solution as to how to make folks respond more fully to scenario designers and mod artists. Perhaps an example of what constitutes requested / desired feedback / comments might help organize the feedback that is produced.

Ultimately, it is the enjoyment and satisfaction of the creative process that drives much of the volunteer creation for CM.

Thank You All for making CM more fun and appealing.

[Nelson 1812]

Currently, the best of CM gaming is yet to come... the problem for scenario makers, and for some modders are the changes in the game fronts maybe to rapid?

By that, I mean the number of players per each module, and the different engines out there may be reducing the amount of players playing the scenarios.

With all these game and engine versions out there, how many scenarios are just downloaded and yet or never going to be played.

I am retired, and I have not had the time to play that many scenarios...

In-addition playing a scenario, now takes considerably longer than those CMx1 days. Players, after a month or two do not feel the need to search out the original post to add their comments, which also these maybe difficult to find.

I also enjoy building scenarios... , but by the time your completed one ... a new module is already out there. Interest has moved on...to another front.

Think it is good news that Black Sea is taking the limelight as it will give the WW2 players, and scenario builders time to catch up!

Please note this is not a criticism, looking forward to playing the bulge, Barbarossa, and the desert... just thoughts as why players do not leave their comments.

Perhaps, in future, if you as a player of a scenario want to leave a comment the place to do so should be on this forum... because how many players want to go back to the repository and search out a scenario...

[A Canadian Cat]

If the game included a debrief screen with a "star" rating, perhaps that would help? But that would require players opt-in to a system to upload their playing history. (For example.)

Finish a game and a screen pops up with 5 empty stars. Click on the one you think it earned. Then have an optional comments box. Whhoosh, up into the internet it goes, straight to the BFC feedback site.

That would be really nice. I imagine that would be pretty low on their list of feature work though. This is another case where having some ability for third parities to hook into the game would provide an opportunity for the community to enhance game play. If the AAR screen also produced a file with status on the game, someone could enhance their PBEM helper app to allow for a rating screen to appear a the end of a game. As just one example. And one that I had not thought of before. Before this conversation my goal for a hook like that would be for automatically compiling a player's stats.

This is a case where some work on BFCs part could be leveraged by others into many many other meta features to support their game.

Barring something like that, the feedback system is poor. I don't use the repository. I don't have much time to dig through the sorting system, nor do I have much time to find and use what's offered. I don't know what's there. If I hit the repository twice a year, I'd be surprised.

The repository has a sorting feature? I know it does it is just so bad my only real interaction with the repository is to download things that interest me when their announcement appears on the forum.

I have recently started visiting GaJ's CMMODs site. Much better organization (but still lacking a bit on ease of sorting/finding), but no feedback mechanism.

Indeed, much better.

I think the best source of feedback anyone could get, atm, is the number of downloads their work has garnered.

One other place you can look is theBlitz.org that link is for CMBN but if you click on the Scenarios link under the banner and then find the Combat Mission 2x section the other games are there too.

From there you can see the results for scenarios played on the ladder. Many have comments too and most have rating. I often use that when I am looking for a "balanced" scenario for H2H play.

One of the purposes of the Scenario of the Month is to crank up the stats on scenarios that have not been played to often.

[umlaut]

As far as the Factory Mod, it is phenomenal. It brings an incredible atmosphere to the game. However, how do you want to get feedback?

The feedback I am talking about is some sort of indication of that my work is being used: An AAR, some screenshots or perhaps even a scenario someone made from the map. I simply want to know if someone is using the map/mods/scenario - and preferably also: How?

It is extremely nice to hear that you find the my factory mod "phenomenal". Seriously. But I don´t know if your comments are based on the screenshots - or if you´ve actually played a game on the Bitvagorod map. Or perhaps even have made a scenario. That is what I´d like to know, because I need to know if my ideas are working when being put to the test of reality - or if they don´t.

That is what feeds my motivation for releasing scenarios. My "payment" for my work, if you like. You may find that needy, silly or whatever, but that is how things work for me. And not getting that feedback leaves my motivation dead as a doornail.

And so far the only tangible feedback I´ve had that someone is actually using the mod set is from JorgeMC who has tried (in vain unfortunately) to make a QB from the set and from sburke - and that is because he is one of the testers for the scenarios.

[kevinkin]

When re-starting this thread I was not asking for huge tournaments to provide designers with feedback - just too much work placed on a few members.

Two ideas came to mind since re-starting:

- Small 4 person round robins organized by the scenario designer. Should not be too much work once the 3 scenarios are ready. Although the email head to heads may take a lot of time for large battles. These quads are very common in chess - 3 rated games in an afternoon.

- Use of free survey software like survey monkey to ask 5 or six key questions of the players. This may take all of 30 seconds to complete and auto-send to the designer.

Plus, you can include an open ended text area for AARs.

Again, just ideas.

Kevin

[Lethaface]

Feedback usually contains critiques because human nature usually likes to point out areas of improvement.

This.

@Umlaut, I understand and respect your opinion and applaud the initiative starting a discussion, speaking out for a functional feedback system (because the repository isn't) and offering suggestions. Although, be careful what you ask for since, like Transporter has nicely written, feedback will in general be in a critical form. Not everyone is able to give constructive feedback. Many people will still complain about a small detail, forgetting how great of a time they had.

In general my life experience advice is literally: keep your expectations (of others) low and you wont be disappointed (easy). I am guilty too of not posting feedback on the repo, iirc I once tried to find a scenario I played but couldn't find it. I did however, at times, provide feedback on the forum. I have tried your scenario a few months ago but due to RL issues haven't continued it.

Until a in game rating function is available, best strategy would probably be to ask for feedback proactively by use of this forum (on a continued basis). While it takes some effort, there is result (as you can see from the number of posts in this thread).

I sincerely hope you will be continuing making scenario's available for the community. It is what drives a large part of it, imo. Perhaps you could try to let others help with writing briefings etc, to make the burden of work to release it for the public a bit less. Another lesson from my life is that if you want something changed for the better (even if you don't gain anything from it), you'll have to bite the bullet yourself. In general random people will only do something you want them to do if there is some direct incentive in it for themselves. So if you want feedback, go ask for it (again and again)! You could create incentive by starting a new thread about a fancy new scenario you are thinking about, but that you need more input from a current scenario with a link to it

Now I've written all this down I'm thinking how it is possible that I am still an optimist by conviction! Probably by nature

[sburke]

the gist of what I am getting from umlaut is he isn't even looking for feedback of a critical nature. He is just looking for any kind of info at all about how anyone is using it. As he explained even screenshots that someone is playing it.

In my case I am playing the scenario and I love the mod, but I am also altering the map to create a different battleground. I love the feel his mods bring to an urban landscape and I like the elevation techniques. The map is friggin art.