The Gameday Problem

[Trotim]

Whoa there. Players are not our slaves. You, as the creator of the map, should know of possible points you may change in the next few builds and as such should watch the flow there. You can see possible clipping problems and where areas of high attention are (and move details accordingly). I think you just need to pay more attention to the non-text feedback.

By the way... telling players you weren't happy about their comments is kinda rude. Be thankful for every second they spend playing your map - they're doing it for free, for no real gain.

 

[J4CK8]

By the way... telling players you weren't happy about their comments is kinda rude. Be thankful for every second they spend playing your map - they're doing it for free, for no real gain.

Thanking players for "this map sucks" "can we switch map" etc is not helpful. And they're doing it for free, but also for fun. Most players don't choose to test a map, they choose to play it, two completely different things really.

 

[Nutomic]

When a round ends, use motd to display the server welcome page only this time, it leads to the maps "feedback page" on the forum (no registration required, dunno if it's possible to do this) where people can give the map a score, and leave comments. Something simple and clear.

^this

 

[tovilovan]

I don't think we should expect public players to be our slaves - rather we need to be more active on gamedays ourselves. As it is right now maybe there's like two or three people I know from the forums on gamedays, the rest are random pubbers. While we need to find a way to make pubbers give THEIR feedback, mappers can point out things that the generic TF2 player can't see.

A command that allows the mapper to start a vote would be interesting, but maybe hard to implement? Also, a Yes/No poll rarely gives you the answers you need. I'm often looking for what people feel and think when they play, rather than what areas are too sniperfriendly/what spawntimes are too long etc, those things I can find just by watching the demo.

 

[Sgt.Sausage]

There are more than a few, but most of them dont stay long, or have different names.

 

[tovilovan]

At least they're not active providing feedback :O

 

[Sgt.Sausage]

True, but yah their a re way to many pubbers in their who see alpha maps and think they suck.

A password before gamedays would be good.

 

[h3r1n6]

True, but yah their a re way to many pubbers in their who see alpha maps and think they suck.

A password before gamedays would be good.

Without pubbers the servers might be too empty. It just needs to be clear for them what is happening, that that is a map test, so they know what to expect and what they are getting.
If the server fills with forum users only though, password is fine.

 

[Sgt.Sausage]

Without pubbers the servers might be too empty. It just needs to be clear for them what is happening, that that is a map test, so they know what to expect and what they are getting.
If the server fills with forum users only though, password is fine.

I didnt say no pubbers, but have a password before gamedays. So people who were playing joined to play officials (map is often changed to official maps before gamedays so users dont have to download maps before the first map) would not show up. And once gameday started pass be turned off so only people who want to play customs would join. Again this is just my opinion.

 

[h3r1n6]

I didnt say no pubbers, but have a password before gamedays. So people who were playing joined to play officials (map is often changed to official maps before gamedays so users dont have to download maps before the first map) would not show up. And once gameday started pass be turned off so only people who want to play customs would join. Again this is just my opinion.

Makes sense, I thought you meant password all the time.

 

[Sgt.Sausage]

Oh no i dont think that is needed, that would cause low player counts.

 

[ChronoTriggerFan]

If after playing I can come up with a list of suggestions on what would benefit the gameplay, I see no reason why the mapper would not.

 

[YM]

If after playing I can come up with a list of suggestions on what would benefit the gameplay, I see no reason why the mapper would not.

this. Gameday for me has always been about simply having a fullserver of people on your map. it doesnt matter what they say to a large extent, if you have fun on it, you're doing something right. if you dont enjoy it, you got something wrong.

 

[MoonQuake]

Thing is, not every mapper knows what to look at and where to look at possible problematic areas to improve their maps. Not everybody has played the game for 500 hours, has a level designer background or has even ever made a map before. So just looking at a bunch of people play isn't obvious to them.

When it's your first map, you sure as heck would like to read into people's mind, but having a glimpse of their thoughts about your map already is better than a big bag o' nothing.

People do this for fun, they're not paid and they don't want to spend too much time providing feedback (most people) so, again, they should be free to come in, see the welcome message, free to leave a comment (but still forced to see the prompt) to maximize feedback.

It could just be a message saying:

"The next round will start in 30 seconds, type in the chat what you liked and disliked about the map so far so the maker of the map can read your comment."

Dunno if the server can freeze the players or the timer at the end of a round, but that would be nice and a good opportunity to collect feedback.

 

[lana]

Look at the demo multiple times from multiple players' perspectives.

 

[absurdistof]

Hm. I like moonquakes idea, where a text popup comes with the end of the round asking for the players to type in suggestions to chat.

Another big thing I don't like is when I don't have a mic (yes, I know... ), and I type something, often people don't see it, so how about giving players colored text to make their comments pop out more. There could also be something like !suggestion and then whatever they wanted to say in a colored text.

 

[Bob Ross]

i agree this needs to be fixed. i dont have time to read this whole thread as it is late but i will not submit anything to gameday for awhile because i got no feedback whatsoever except its too sniper friendly (established in the first 5 minutes) and that its "unbalanced for engies" because there was a cluster of five sentries. so class limits could go a long way to help as well in my experience.

 

[absurdistof]

Demo > Feedback nowadayss

 

[Terr]

1. Again, I think the fundamental problem is gamedays seem to have become more about "We'll play, mapper just watches the strategic flow of the map, and we'll speak up only if it's a real strong opinion". This isn't bad, but it's not the same as "Please explore this map and try to find things which are wrong, rather than killing each other".

These are separate needs which need separate labels. Trying to combine them both under "Gameday" means neither is truly accomplished.

2. If the mapper isn't actually there, directly asking questions and shepherding the process, then that's a problem. There's a certain level of proactivity required.

3. On gamedays, what if the map author had a special plugin power: While a spectator, he can talk-to and listen-to both teams. Handy for following people and saying: "Why'd you do that? You could climb over. Was it too hard to climb?" etc.

 

[lustygoat]

I like the idea of a 'suggested comment time' at the end of a round. I'm not sure voting is effective, a lot of people just hit a number for the sake of getting the voting menu off their screen. (Or at least, I do... I'm a spastic voting button-masher.)

I don't think anything that might reduce the number of players on the server is a good idea, but I like seeing maps tested with full teams. Being able to kick pubbies for mapmakers that want to get on would be nice but a full server seems more important to me. Maybe encourage more people to test? Give them a "maps tested" statistic in the forum? I dunno.

To the original poster, as far as interpreting what happens during gameday, personally I try to be data-driven. How long does it take for people to accomplish objectives, how many points do various classes rack up, where are people dying without getting a chance to participate in a fight, etc. If someone says "too sniper friendly" but there are snipers on both teams who aren't scoring a lot of points, and people aren't switching classes to sniper... well... the evidence isn't there to start panicking and rearranging everything. This is why getting and watching demos is such an important part of mapmaking.

Also having a good internal filter is important. If someone says something useless, ignore it. If someone criticizes something, ask yourself "is that true? is there evidence for that conclusion?" Honestly evaluate their statement, try to put yourself in their shoes. Maybe they have a point that you haven't thought about. Or maybe they're wrong. The comments that make you think "Yeah that's totally true, I just hadn't thought about it that way," are the most valuable.