51 replies to this topic

[Firewuff]

Heres the thjng. Maps yes. Great idea. There are qa issues and much of this bedsto be done in house before the community sees it. Ui... No possible, at the moment the underlying code base for the ui is too closely ties to to the underlying data struftres. The whole point of UI 2.0 is to break these dependancies and make future changes much easier. Either was you would need to build a full skinning frame work which is a lot of work for ****** all benefit.

Open source and crowd source is not without risk and has all sorts of IPissues especially when the content becomes core rather than a mod. There are lots oof downsides including qa is a nightmare and a large number of staff are required to curate it. The idea is not without merit but also not wish out risk and cost to pgi

[Corvus Antaka]

Firewuff, on 04 January 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:

Heres the thjng. Maps yes. Great idea. There are qa issues and much of this bedsto be done in house before the community sees it. Ui... No possible, at the moment the underlying code base for the ui is too closely ties to to the underlying data struftres. The whole point of UI 2.0 is to break these dependancies and make future changes much easier. Either was you would need to build a full skinning frame work which is a lot of work for ****** all benefit.

Open source and crowd source is not without risk and has all sorts of IPissues especially when the content becomes core rather than a mod. There are lots oof downsides including qa is a nightmare and a large number of staff are required to curate it. The idea is not without merit but also not wish out risk and cost to pgi

These are good points.

I would simply think that a universe with 1000's of planets and a history of so many modders might potentially have the power to take gaming to the next level by harnessing the power of the community.

Given the expected future of gaming, and the scaleable potential of cryengine & F2P/these type of future games, occulus, etc, imagine how huge MWO could be with 100's of maps and such.

[Rebas Kradd]

Victor Morson, on 04 January 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

89% positive so far, and only one No vote. Definitely seems like people are on board with the idea so far.

You should probably consider that voting "no" on this kind of proposal makes a person look like kind of a troll.

I personally voted no. Most people don't really have a clue how to build balanced maps, and the effort even to just review community content would cost PGI more than it's worth. Not that it wouldn't be a nice shot in the arm to the game if it did happen, but considering that 2014 is supposed to have plenty more tangible content than 2013, it's not hard for PGI to go "We have plenty coming to keep everyone busy, modding isn't necessary".

[Victor Morson]

Rebas Kradd, on 05 January 2014 - 12:38 AM, said:

I personally voted no. Most people don't really have a clue how to build balanced maps, and the effort even to just review community content would cost PGI more than it's worth.

I entirely disagree. You could eliminate most of the problems by simply dedicating a single forum moderator to having people vote for their favorites based on screenshots, before they even get submitted to PGI. That's one thread. The community is going to vote maps in that look good, and again, I'd be more than a fan of a "buck stops here" decision with PGI.

There are bad maps, and there are simply ones that are not professional enough to be included (even if fun). I get that, and I understand that. However, there are also a lot of maps that the community could create easily on par with what we have.

As for the professional team, every asset, texture, etc. they make is just one more asset the community can utilize, on top of ones they could provide. Again, Garth (Community Manager) could appoint any moderator to pre-vet out the trash before they even have to load a map file.

Worried about bugs? Terra Therma has hidden "kill spots" that destroy your 'mech if you pass through them. I think the bar isn't set impossibly high.

Edited by Victor Morson, 05 January 2014 - 12:48 AM.

[NextGame]

Community maps are absolutely the place to start with this as its going to be a very limited community warfare with 8-10 maps on offer. All it really needs (maybe?) from PGI's end is configuration for the cryengine 3 sdk, a bunch of art assets to play with (PGI's strong point, I think we can all agree) and 1 guy approving x maps per month and adding them to the game.

As point of interest for general community engagement pertaining to design decisions: here is the design decision archive forum for elite 4 which is currently in development: http://forums.fronti...isplay.php?f=36

You will notice there (for those who bother to read, I don't blame you if you don't, it is very content heavy compared to what we are furnished with here.) that some of the topics are in line with the way in which some features for MWO are discussed. The difference for that game however is that the community feedback is very much taken on board and the topic is often revised 2 or even 3 times before the design for a feature is final.

There are even some decisions being fed in by the community on parts of the business model for the game, with a current vote pertaining to cash only cosmetic features ongoing, with a previous item around how they should be priced having already been fielded. You wouldn't find something like that here in a million years perhaps due to PGI's general lack of enthusiasm for actually engaging with (and perhaps even disdain for) MWO's customer base.

The fact is, if you put effort into a gaming community you will generally get something positive back out. With MWO there is a clear sense that any feedback on anything, particularly feature design, is simply ignored outright, it just disappears off into a black hole. There's not even any real pretence at community interaction, just a bunch of devs who would rather stick their head in the sand, and a couple of jokers who seem to almost randomly close and move threads who wouldn't be allowed to operate in such a way in practically any other official community forum. PGI should really take a leaf out of Frontier's book for this type of thing as it could only make for a better game that we would all want to play rather than be at odds over.

Edited by NextGame, 05 January 2014 - 01:14 AM.

[Kaeseblock]

I really like the Idea of letting the community contribute more to MWO. Though I would limit it to commiting and evaluating new maps. As Egomane stated this needs to be managed by PGI, so workforce has to be adressed. But if PGI takes a clever approach, I think the workforce they need to assign for that is significantly lower than the workforce needed to do everything alone.

Spontanous ideas for what could be done:

• PGI could accept user created objects (vehicles, buildings, containers, etc) for map-development

• PGI could use the Public-Test servers to let the users roam around new (maybe user created) maps to gather data faster

• PGI could allow the community to commit maps which can then be further edited (and maybe implemented in MWO) and release the resources that the community is allowed to use to create these maps (well, this idea has been around for some time now )

EDIT: Edited to correct typo

Edited by Kaeseblock, 05 January 2014 - 01:25 AM.

[anonymous161]

Victor Morson, on 02 January 2014 - 10:44 PM, said:

This is a long shot. But here's the situation as described by PGI right now: They lack the manpower to do everything they are trying to do and it's cost them greatly. Also they are suffering from a huge PR backlash due to their misunderstandings with the community. It's fostered a bad atmosphere.

Let's wipe it out.

PGI has a problem: They need more manpower, they don't have the money to hire that manpower. And to that I say: BRING IN THE COMMUNITY. Stop shutting us out. There's a ton of people here that are professional mappers, modelers, you name it. That are willing to donate their time to improving this game.

My point: You have a pool of hardcore BattleTech fans that are willing to pitch in and improve this game at an unheard of pace. For free. Because we love this franchise.

There is literally not a downside to you guys putting out some devkit tools and taking user submissions for maps. Star Citizen did a similar thing recently and only received praise for it. You guys obviously have to be the "bucks stops here" quality control, but I don't think that'd be a problem.

Would your customers like to start getting 2 new maps a month? What do you think? Absolutely! And if you start taking community submissions, you can have that and not pay a dime for it.

Obviously, it would be nice if these fine people got a little more say into things like gameplay balance, too. They understand the franchise. They love it, and some of them are quite good resources for it. Again, for free and absolutely no risk to PGI you can take care of the vast majority of serious, ongoing balance issues in maps & 'mechs in a way that satisfies the majority of your players.

There are programmers who would love to enhance that UI, one of the biggest issues encountered at PGI. There are map designers that would love to do new designs. There are modelers who could churn out a slew of support vehicles, turrets, or even 3D versions of concept art because they care about the IP.

You know what else? Going this route changes everything from a PR standpoint. You might even get press for really embracing such a long time, fanatic, and face it: Older and more tech savvy than some franchise audience.

Literally everyone wins. I will say what an awesome turn of events this was indefinitely, we might actually get a rockin' version of CW on time, and almost all of our complaints would no longer be valid. I know a lot of folks would reinstall in a heartbeat if that happened.

Again, this is the community that made Living Legends, which MW:O is based heavily on. This is the community that added four times the original 'mechs and guns to MechWarrior 4. I myself was the one to suggest Mektek add a grid to the minimaps, and when they did, it changed the way we play this game: You can't picture MechWarrior maps sans grids today.

Let's call a flat out truce for 2014 PGI. Let's start working together. The people will come back, new people will be interested, and the people that are here will have even more great content (that they will gladly pay for). At no cost to you guys.

This is a great change to put everything that's happened under the bridge and really kick the game off right this year. You've literally got nothing to lose by giving it a shot!

You got right right idea and message and I applaud it...BUT they do have plenty of money, they have been reaping tons of money since closed beta when that time of the game should really have been free, and without limits to the players, it's their distrust of us and lack of respect that has lead them to being mostly hated by the community. The community wants the game to be awesome but apparently pgi is too cheap to let us in on the fun of making the game as well.

mechwarrior 4 was a finished retail title this is not.

[Myomes]

There isn't a lack of manpower. There's a lack of resource allocation to MWO. take a look at tribes ascend. They completely stopped doing anything for T:A for 6 months while working on their other game title. then they left it with a skeleton crew. IGP and PGI aren't just making MW:O, you know.

[meteorol]

This is funny, i thought about creating exactly this thread for a few days, but didn't do it due to time issues.

What i wanted to suggest was the following system:

1) Community can create maps
2) There is some kind of forum section where you can show your map (screenshots, mapoverview, maybe youtube links)
3) We can vote for maps. Every month, 4 maps (or something like this) with the highest votes count get into the game (training ground only, or maybe a seperate testserver)
4) Community test the maps for 2-4 weeks and gives feedback
5) Bugfixes
6) Out of the 4 maps, 2 are voted into the game.

This way we could increase the output of high quality maps by 1000%.

I strongly disagree with the idea of giving the community influence on balance though. It's not like the community is incompetent regarding balance. But just take a look at all those balance threads around. Communitymembers slicing their throat over the tiniest balance suggestion. "TT numbers vs. this is a real time fps" arguments in every thread.

Right now we have general dissatisfaction with balance, directed towards the devs. Give it into the hand of the community and we will have split dissatisfaction between many smaller fractions who all have a different idea on balance. I think this would hurt the community more than it would help the game.

[Thorn Hallis]

I like the idea in terms of maps. It would finally bring more purpose to the public test server (still waitin' for the "offensive weapon balancing").

[Victor Morson]

Thorn Hallis, on 05 January 2014 - 06:42 AM, said:

I like the idea in terms of maps. It would finally bring more purpose to the public test server (still waitin' for the "offensive weapon balancing").

I think there's tons of room for small things, as well, like cockpit items and 'mech modifications, or camo patterns. These are things I KNOW that could be produced of PGI quality if they were open to accepting them. This might also free their main artists for more important endeavors.

Edited by Victor Morson, 05 January 2014 - 05:05 PM.

[Dirus Nigh]

I think at it's core this is a good idea. Allowing community created Maps, models for scenery (buildings, vehicles, ect), mech skins, cockpit items, and decals would be a good use of the fan base.

As others have said, with a proper approval system it can work very well.

[Darius Deadeye]

I support this, but it will never happen. I'm quite certain they've explicitly stated this somewhere.

[Corvus Antaka]

http://ca.ign.com/ar...onquered-skyrim

[Sephlock]

They'd be responsible if something went terribly wrong, though.

[Sudden]

this is a great idea if and when we get to planet capture, we would need lots of maps, for the diffrent planet types.i.e water,volcano,jungle ect. if they are going to do it is something else tho. i would like to hear pgi respond to this soon.not likely to happen tho

[Tezcatli]

I think this could have been a possibility. If they'd built for it from the ground up. Which would have been smart. Given how passionate everyone is about the game. But I don't think they would want to put in the work to make it possible. They'd just see it as more of a risk.

[Steven Dixon]

If there are any skilled programmers out there that would actually be willing to spend their free time to do this then I really hope that they organize. PGI probably isn't going to start this, very few companies would (I'm speaking about integrating mods into their core game not allowing community created content). There are several risks and costs and its easy for people to talk a big game (even if they mean it) but to quickly get tired or not follow through or be unable to follow through. Think of it from PGI's perspective: if it takes PGI months to make a map and hundreds of thousands of dollars and they have a dedicated and well trained workforce with all of the proper tools, how likely is it that some guy will make the same thing for a pat on the back? I'm absolutely not saying this is the case, I've seen some amazing mods, PGI probably has too, but they are making decisions based on people's livelihoods not just what they think is a good idea. So they probably need a bit of persuasion.

A poll like this can be very good at finding community members that are willing to help but probaly not very good at persuading PGI. If people really are willing to do this, again they should organize. Create resumes essentially to show what they know and what they can do. Create an formal game plan (or at least an outline) then present it to PGI. Garth could be a good conduit. Appoint a representative. Email Garth the basics and ask to have a chat with him at an appointed time on skype or the phone, ect. Layout what you want to do and see if you can persuade him. He in turn can act as a conduit to the real decision makers. Alternatively reach out to groups like NGNG that are respected by PGI. If you can convince them of your ability and make them your champions you would have a semi powerful voice. Or even try to talk to Russ or Bryan directly, if you (speaking to the theoretical representative of such a group) can come off as a serious professional then they just might listen to you.

Edited by Steven Dixon, 06 January 2014 - 01:02 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Egomane, on 03 January 2014 - 03:31 AM, said:

If they don't have the money why are there open job offerings?
http://piranhagames.com/#CAREERS

And while I support the idea of fan content, you forgot to mention that even fan content is not free for the company, that wants to implement it. There are quality and production standards that need to be met. So there needs to be someone who checks every entry for those. The more entries you get, the more personal you need to control them. That guy (probably more then one) needs to be paid as well. You can just as well hire a map designer for the money. Those quality checks can't be done by the community.

Easy fix, for any map created by the community (entered by some type of popular vote via a public map preview) can enter a very brief once over by even a single guy at PGI. This map then enters a test map pool that can be run in at any time through the public client in a new game mode called "map test"; similar to training grounds. The community can then compile a list of issues with the game using in game accessible things like the free floating cameras, and what little debugging tools and the map grid with F9.

Even those few tools are enough to create a very vast list of potential issues with the map where then after say a month period, the map is sent back to the creator(s) with X timeline to fix / improve the errors including framerate and performance errors. When done, the map is then submitted back to PGI for another pass over and then could be entered into the map pool.

Minimal effort on PGI's part for Dozens of maps to enter the game within a two month period.


Now, the ONLY thing I could see PGI saying no to, is because things like destructible environments, dynamic weather, and other odd-ball features like that hill climb, are not working properly on PGI's engine end of things. So what I'm thinking is, the true reason why this isn't being supported is because PGI isn't even in a position or shape to be able to support it even if they wanted to, because lets be blunt They're slow as molasses and game engine isn't even done.

Edited by mwhighlander, 06 January 2014 - 01:38 PM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Having done mapmaking in Counter-Strike, I can tell you that mapmaking is nowhere as easy as it sounds. And that's Counter-Strike, which, with a vast player-base hundreds of times the size of MWO, still managed to produce only a handful of maps that would get through a professional QA. Even if PGI did allow community mapmaking and make a guy available to run QA on them (and it's never a good thing to have just one guy making decisions on something), would the gain be worth it?

A few factors that come to mind right away:

* Tools. First PGI has to create and release devkit tools, which are another manpower drain and probably a good reason NOT to do it right now. They have other things to do.

* Community. While we do have some folks in the community who know how to create quality maps, for each such submission, PGI would probably have to wade through ten maps from amateurs. Only a few candidates would probably get a second look.

* Terrain. MWO's terrain is vastly varied and almost never level, in order to eliminate circle-strafing. Wide-open maps would just become ballistic/missile fests. And the first thing terrain seems to do is generate bugs even with professional developers like PGI, so again, what makes you think amateurs would do better? (No response needed here from the haters who just like to believe that PGI doesn't know how to buckle their own pants.)

* Strategy. Traditional mapmaking says that a symmetrical map with matching objectives needs three general routes with one or two smaller outlet routes. Also, the current maps are terrific at combining open and dense areas and creating mini-environments for smaller battles while keeping them well-spaced enough to not interfere with the routes. Choke points, support plateaus, sniping positions, approach vectors, rush balance, flanking dynamics...all issues I ran into in my brief career as a matchmaker just in CS. Here you have multiple game-modes to handle as well. This would escape a lot of amateur mapmakers and lead to a lot of thrown-out concepts.

* Engine demands. CryEngine is known for being able to support enormous maps, but it's also a very demanding engine - part of the reason there have been so many performance complaints in the game. The bigger you get, the more the engine labors, and also the bigger you need your textures to be. Also, assault mechs will get left behind and much of the map won't even get used except by that last Raven looking to hide. Some of the computational demands are usually worked around by using box canyons, but many don't know that trick. Also, enormous maps will simply get the "boring" label from the more impatient gamers (of which I'm one, quite frankly) if it takes five minutes for the opponents to reach each other. (Also, keep in mind that CryEngine maps have to be square.) And in general, while it's wonderful to see people's imaginations coming to the forefront, professional software guys usually don't agree. We'd end up with people trying all kinds of things that would crash the clients of a fair slice of gamers.

* Play-testing. No matter how much forethought and experience is put into a map, the only way to really test its viability is mass playtesting. Hidden behaviors just don't emerge until then. Basically, you'd need the whole community to test it. What platform will this be done on? PGI isn't going to put such maps on the servers until they pass QA (and then probably another inevitable round of debugging, a detail I just don't think we can get around), so we'd need another pool of testers. Preferably a BIG pool, including as many graphics cards, processors, and low-end users as we can scrounge up, and then the devs need to give us somewhere to test them - which essentially amounts to private matches.

* The community. I imagine we'll get a few good submissions for player-made maps that are balanced, creative, and work for everyone (although, again, the haters love to insist how small our player base is getting). But if we're talking about saving PGI some time and minimizing their work, we have to account for the fact that some people will just use community mapmaking as an avenue for personal preferences and for passive-aggressive gripes about the game's direction. I don't like a 12v12 sandbox, so I'm gonna make a bunch of objective-based MechWarrior-2 style maps in preparation for a single-player campaign someday. I want CW, so here's some heavily house/clan-themed maps. I don't like all this terrain, so how about a small, level, wide-open map. I don't like this and that about Frozen City, so here's a Frozen City clone with X and Y changed. Here's Caustic City Night, here's Terra Therma Day, here's Alpine Snowstorm. I'm sick of ballistics, so...you get the picture.


I guess I just see this as being a massive distraction for PGI. The number of hoops we'd have to jump through here, and the likely benefit, isn't worth the cost in manhours for me. It's not that it wasn't a good idea on the surface...I just want them busting their butts on CW and nothing else right now.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 06 January 2014 - 09:06 PM.