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

[agusto]

Not me!

 

Aww man, i made such a nice philosophical comment and you are making fun of it .

[sburke]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i_2mWhfOhGU Edited June 21, 2015 by sburke

[ASL Veteran]

One day we' ll all die. You will die, i will die, slysniper will die and one day our sun will die and mankind as a whole with it. And if that isnt enough, one day the universe will come to its end, and as space and time as we know them cease to exist, everything everyone will have ever done will lose its meaning as causality breaks apart. All the things we do to stay alive as an individual and as a species, like eating, drinking and having sex are hence nothing but futile attempts to delay the inevitable, though i would not want to live a single day without them, or would you?

 

 

I get what you are saying, but at the same time you have to face reality and that reality is that most players aren't going to give you very much feedback on what you are doing.  What matters is what you decide to do when you reach the point where a nap is more appealing than placing another building.  Most choose the nap and that's why the amount of community created content is what it is.

[kohlenklau]

I have this concept in my mind I call the "Forest of Unfinished Scenarios" and it is dark and spooky and the lightning is flashing.

My handful of scenarios is not much of a data point but for those scenarios and projects that I did not finish, it was more a writer's block issue than anything I can blame on lack of feedback or whatever.

Using Jon's nap vs map example....I would stare at the map and be stymied on what to do or it just didn't look right for what I did do and I lost the way forward. No nap was taken. I might have busted open a 6 pack though!

[GreenAsJade]

An obvious thing that would go a long way to addressing a lot of the concerns here is a good "Scenario Depot".    

 

For a really decent amount of time, GJK's Scenario Depot delivered the goods on providing a place where scenario designers could give each other feedback, and get input from users.    

 

Unfortunately (to augusto's point) all good things come to an end.   GJK made a couple of unfortunate decisions in how the thing operated.   BFC's own repo started to draw scenario traffic away.  Downwards spiral.  CMx2 came out and GJK didn't support it.  The End.

 

 

It is conceivable the new Repo might open the possibility of some of the features/benefits of TSD being provided again.    I have my eyes on this, as we are navigating our way through the Mirkwood of Initial Configuration.

 

GaJ

[LongLeftFlank]

One observation from someone like yourself who prefers hIstorically faithful DIY to actually playing others' scenarios:

Of the half dozen scenarios I have released in my (alas truncated) CM2 career, the one that got more DLs than all the rest combined is a Tiny sized platoon recon action for CMBN.

So if you're looking for audience, the demand is for "manageable force" fights vs the AI that are playable in a single sitting.

Even though the true magic of BFC's game system is to put you authentically in the boots of a battalion or regimental CO, the majority of players -- grogs included -- are generally looking for a gaming experience. No disrespect to them, just how it is. I think only CoPlay will ever change that.

[MikeyD]

Forget about feedback, forget sharing with the community and grand plans. I wonder how many folks posting here have made scenarios for their own gratification?

Actually constructed a map, placed units on it, and got the AI to move them around in a coherent manner. I don't care if you shared them, if they were historical or fictional,  if the locations were real or even if the scenario was any good. All I care about is if you've made-your-own then had fun playing it afterward. If you haven't done that at the very least then you're just talk.

[GreenAsJade]

Mikey, that's just so much bollocks it's hard to know where to start.

 

The proposition that you have to have made a thing in order to make an assessment of its performance is clearly bollocks.  This is the case for cars, wine, scenarios and mods, among many other fine things.

 

The idea that you have to have gotten the AI to perform, while making a scenario, is also bollocks: what about scenarios for H2H?   Your inclusion of "you must have gotten the AI to work" in your assessment of what qualifies someone to comment on scenarios just shows your own limited perspective on scenarios.

 

I really don't know what elitist goal you have in trying to rule out posters in the discussion as being "just talk" based on your high falutin "Nyah nyah I've designed a scenario and you haven't" criterion, but its patently ludicrous.    

 

Folk who _use_ scenarios are eminently qualified to comment on whether those scenarios meet their needs, and designers who are doing their work for those folk (not all are, but many are) value their feedback.    What on earth motivates you to close that discussion down?
 

GaJ

Edited June 21, 2015 by GreenAsJade

[slysniper]

Mikey, that's just so much bollocks it's hard to know where to start.

 

The proposition that you have to have made a thing in order to make an assessment of its performance is clearly bollocks.  This is the case for cars, wine, scenarios and mods, among many other fine things.

 

The idea that you have to have gotten the AI to perform, while making a scenario, is also bollocks: what about scenarios for H2H?   Your inclusion of "you must have gotten the AI to work" in your assessment of what qualifies someone to comment on scenarios just shows your own limited perspective on scenarios.

 

I really don't know what elitist goal you have in trying to rule out posters in the discussion as being "just talk" based on your high falutin "Nyah nyah I've designed a scenario and you haven't" criterion, but its patently ludicrous.    

 

Folk who _use_ scenarios are eminently qualified to comment on whether those scenarios meet their needs, and designers who are doing their work for those folk (not all are, but many are) value their feedback.    What on earth motivates you to close that discussion down?

 

GaJ

 

 

Oh, don't get mad at him, The funny thing is. Pretty much everyone posting appears to have tried designing. So his rant goes out to no one really.

[GreenAsJade]

I'm not mad at him.   I'm just pointing out that his assertion is bollocks.    Folk who have an opinion about scenarios should have a channel to provide that opinion, in a constructive fashion, whether or not they have designed a scenario themselves.    Designers typically would welcome that feedback.     And folk that want to provide that feedback should be welcomed into a discussion - like this was - about ways to make it happen.     

GaJ

Edited June 21, 2015 by GreenAsJade

[slysniper]

One observation from someone like yourself who prefers hIstorically faithful DIY to actually playing others' scenarios:

Of the half dozen scenarios I have released in my (alas truncated) CM2 career, the one that got more DLs than all the rest combined is a Tiny sized platoon recon action for CMBN.

So if you're looking for audience, the demand is for "manageable force" fights vs the AI that are playable in a single sitting.

Even though the true magic of BFC's game system is to put you authentically in the boots of a battalion or regimental CO, the majority of players -- grogs included -- are generally looking for a gaming experience. No disrespect to them, just how it is. I think only CoPlay will ever change that.

This is a very true statement, if you are looking to please the masses. This is where more focus should be set.

 

But as been mentioned in many statements, most everyone actually is designing for their own interest, not for what others want. So most designers are not into this.

 

On another thread I bring up the point that designers should be rewarded with a small cash incentive for downloaded scenarios. I really think a charge of 50 cents for a downloaded scenario should occur. I think money motivates, even if it is just a small amount.

 

All I know, if I could make a few hundred dollars for each small scenario I create. I think I would find the time to do all the extra work to get it to a state that makes it a quality work to submit to others for general use.

[slysniper]

 

One day we' ll all die. You will die, i will die, slysniper will die and one day our sun will die and mankind as a whole with it. And if that isnt enough, one day the universe will come to its end, and as space and time as we know them cease to exist, everything everyone will have ever done will lose its meaning as causality breaks apart. All the things we do to stay alive as an individual and as a species, like eating, drinking and having sex are hence nothing but futile attempts to delay the inevitable, though i would not want to live a single day without them, or would you?

 

 

 

I am so touched, I have brought you to say such deep thought provoking words as to life. 

 

I am a little sad that I must die as part of it. I had been going through life so far thinking I was Peter Pan, But the Mirror is telling me that is all a lie within my head.

 

But again, I do not think death brings a end to things, so I see nothing as wasted or of no value, because I believe everything we do has a eternal impact on us.

 

So even more reason to do things in behalf of others and to give something of yourself to your fellow man

[slysniper]

I'm not mad at him.   I'm just pointing out that his assertion is bollocks.    Folk who have an opinion about scenarios should have a channel to provide that opinion, in a constructive fashion, whether or not they have designed a scenario themselves.    Designers typically would welcome that feedback.     And folk that want to provide that feedback should be welcomed into a discussion - like this was - about ways to make it happen.     

GaJ

Well, since you are on here, I have a question for you. Why always with your own site

 

Is there no way to get involved with BF and help them make their site more user friendly like what you have done in the past at the scenario depot. I keep hearing they want to make improvements, but that is not their focus.

 

Why would they not use your services if offered

[ASL Veteran]

Mikey, that's just so much bollocks it's hard to know where to start.

 

The proposition that you have to have made a thing in order to make an assessment of its performance is clearly bollocks.  This is the case for cars, wine, scenarios and mods, among many other fine things.

 

The idea that you have to have gotten the AI to perform, while making a scenario, is also bollocks: what about scenarios for H2H?   Your inclusion of "you must have gotten the AI to work" in your assessment of what qualifies someone to comment on scenarios just shows your own limited perspective on scenarios.

 

I really don't know what elitist goal you have in trying to rule out posters in the discussion as being "just talk" based on your high falutin "Nyah nyah I've designed a scenario and you haven't" criterion, but its patently ludicrous.    

 

Folk who _use_ scenarios are eminently qualified to comment on whether those scenarios meet their needs, and designers who are doing their work for those folk (not all are, but many are) value their feedback.    What on earth motivates you to close that discussion down?

 

GaJ

Although it pains me to defend him   , I think that perhaps you may have misinterpreted what Mikey is saying because what you are interpreting doesn't really fit his typical comments on scenario design.  I think that what Mikey is saying is that scenario creators are making things too difficult and complicated for themselves because all you have to do is plop a few buildings down on a map, toss a few truppen on there, and presto you have a scenario completed in an hour or two.  His comments are more in line with LongLeftFlank's perhaps.

[kohlenklau]

Group hug?

[sburke]

sure........... hey who grabbed my a**, that was inappropriate touching!!!!

 

I don't find MikeyD's minor rant off base either.  Only someone who has designed can truly discuss their motivations, what feedback means or not to them etc.  If you have never done it how could you know?  I have designed 4 stock ones and a few that are strictly mine for something I want to do, but haven't quite figured out how to do yet.  Even with that, despite fitting the bill for MikeyD's position, I still do not feel I can speak for folks who crank out scenario after scenario for release after release.  I do not have the energy, motivation or creative energy for that.  No amount of feedback good, bad or indifferent is gonna change that.  Frankly I am in awe of what some of these guys do and that is despite me actually even having done some.  I guess the few I have done have given me a little more appreciation of just how creative these people are and appreciation for what it takes.  Someone as MikeyD noted who has never even opened the editor does not have that appreciation for the effort.  Doesn't mean they can't comment on whether they liked a scenario or why, but it does affect their ability to comment on the mechanics of it or to truly appreciate what goes into it.

 

 

[kohlenklau]

Uh oh....the childbirth analogy?

[kohlenklau]

Speaking of which...Happy Fathers Day guys.

[GreenAsJade]

Although it pains me to defend him   , I think that perhaps you may have misinterpreted what Mikey is saying because what you are interpreting doesn't really fit his typical comments on scenario design.  I think that what Mikey is saying is that scenario creators are making things too difficult and complicated for themselves because all you have to do is plop a few buildings down on a map, toss a few truppen on there, and presto you have a scenario completed in an hour or two.  His comments are more in line with LongLeftFlank's perhaps.

 

This would make sense.   If someone said "it's easy to make scenarios" and Mikey's post was a response to that, then I'd be backing him all the way.    You can't comment on the ease of making something unless you've done it yourself.

 

I thought this thread was about "how to get feedback and encourage designers", and must have missed the part where someone said scenario design is easy.

 

GaJ

[sburke]

pfft scenario design is easy!

 

Good scenario design is a whole other thing

[Battlefront.com]

pfft scenario design is easy!

 

Good scenario design is a whole other thing

Well put

Steve

[PanzerMike]

Another group hug! This time with Steve. And no a$$grabbing this time!

 

Feedback or no, appreciation or no. Let's all just contribute. Why? Because we can. Onwards comrades!

....

Okay that was kinda cheesy...

[Bud Backer]

I find this discussion very interesting because it made me examine my own motivation and desires for what I create and share online. It's not just about scenario or map design, it's about anything one does without recompense and gives freely to others.

I have yet to share the maps I've made but I intend to. What I have shared are my Comic AARs, which are each 100+ hours of work. I did them for fun, because I could. I did them because I genuinely enjoyed doing them. But were I unable to share them - say for lack of a venue - I doubt I'd bother after the first one, when the novelty is over. I do them because I do wish for reaction, feedback - not just appreciation, though of course this is most welcome - but because I want to have the feeling that the effort itself is in some measure appreciated or recognized.

I can't speak for Umlaut, but he may feel this resonates:

-it's not about getting $0.99 per comic or map or scenario. Sure if one could make a living off it legally it might be another matter but then it's a business and not a gift to the community or something done for oneself.

-it's not about getting "ratings" such as a star rating or whatnot. Certainly getting a high rating in any system is a nice thing but if that was the limit of the feedback, I don't think I'd be as enthused as I am when someone asks me if my story is going in one direction or another, or that I changed some graphical style and why, or telling me my German was slightly off in a particular panel.

What I think it's about - for me - is engaging with the community, having a dialogue about what I've done, offering suggestions, giving me something to think about. The appreciation certainly is a huge part of that, but if every person who read my comics were to say "nice job" and leave it at that I would be grateful but still feel something lacking. I do want to interact, and not just collect praise.

I think this is something one sees when one is designing a scenario or map and posts WIP screenshots. One gets ideas, discussion and contribution and it's no longer simply a passive affair. Once the scenario is done, as has been noted, the interaction stops and I think it's natural for a designer to want it to continue.

So it's not that anyone is right or wrong in this discussion - certainly designers want something in return for their effort because these creations are a huge amount of time and effort and thought. But those who say design for yourself and you'll be less disappointed are correct in part as well - I do make things for myself, but I'd likely stop were I to operate in a vacuum because how many times does one wish to repeat the same task.

What this says to me is that I make things because I want to, I'm inspired, I'm curious, I'm excited to explore something and want to challenge myself, but that it does not end there. I share what I create because now I want to see if my vision, my creation, matters in some way to anyone else. Only the most dedicated and passionate about their craft will bother to work for hundreds of hours on something purely for themselves; others will stop, feeling that nice as it is, they have made a masterpiece only to shove it in the attic, and that is a pity and a loss to the community, in my view.

Edited June 22, 2015 by Bud_B

[agusto]

But those who say design for yourself and you'll be less disappointed are correct in part as well - I do make things for myself, but I'd likely stop were I to operate in a vacuum because how many times does one wish to repeat the same task

 

If i just designed for myself, i wouldnt write briefings, make tactical, operational, etc maps, those are things i make exclusively for others. I simply wouldnt need those, as the designer i know everything about the scenario anyways.

[Bud Backer]

If i just designed for myself, i wouldnt write briefings, make tactical, operational, etc maps, those are things i make exclusively for others. I simply wouldnt need those, as the designer i know everything about the scenario anyways.

Yes, that's a valid point too. Unless you derive satisfaction from adding those touches.