You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Scenario Design and Discussion
Moderated by HockeySam18

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.943 replies, Closed
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Scenario Design and Discussion » Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
Bottom
Topic Subject:Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
« Previous Page  1 ··· 10 11 12 13 14 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-22-10 09:35 AM CT (US)         


Here you may request a review for your file or for another's, whether it be because you would like a second opinion or because you believe a certain file is rated unfairly or is even over-rated. To do so simply leave a comment and the Thread Reviewers here will take a look at it. Please be patient as a skilled review can take some time to write.

BECOMING A THREAD REVIEWER


If you would like to help out with the community and become a Thread Reviewer, you need just four approved reviews. Please post your request in this thread or send a mail to panel@heavengames.com, naming your last review. You do not have to review regularly, but keep in mind that if you have not posted or updated a review within three months you will be put on inactive. To become active again, simply find your name below and post a review. If your name is not listed inactive anymore, your last review will have dated before 01/01/09 (DD/MM/YY) and you may re-enter the thread after one posted review only.




ACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of number of reviews)
* = Official Reviewer

169 Possidon*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
107 Lord Basse*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS
92 Mashek*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
80 Sword_of_Storm (Jatayu)*: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
45 Panel*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
35 alekshs: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, Recorded Games, RMS, AI-Files
30 dragonslayermcmx: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Sarn: Single Player, Mod Packs
18 Mayank Sharma: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities
9 RladalFatih: Single Player, Non-Playable Scenarios
6 Dead_End: Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
4 HockeySam18: Single Player

CURRENT INACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of time of inactivity)

11 Leif Ericson: Single Player, RMS, AI-Files
55 Popeychops*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
26 Julius999*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios
25 Dtrungle*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
09 joshua4missions: Single Player, Mod Packs
10 Fanica: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
05 Jecon: Single Player, Utilities
08 hailstorm65: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Cilibinarii: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
23 FuzzyFurry25: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
16 Guthan: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS

OFFICIAL REVIEWERS


Mashek
Lord Basse
Popeychops
Julius999
Jatayu (aka Sword_of_Storm)
Possidon
Dtrungle
Stephen Richards
Panel

HALL OF FAME


231 Tanneur99
95 Lord_Fadawah
92 BrandNewCar
61 clayperboy
54 rwilde
31 Stephen Richards*
30 zyxomma100
25 Magnum Zero
24 RF_Gandalf




REVIEW LIST

The list below consists of a number of requests and/or downloads recently rated by thread reviewers. Requests are marked R and updates U. Thread Reviewers are free to review whichever file they want, but should be aware that the designers at the top of each list are waiting the longest for a review. Files that have received a review in the time of request in this thread (whether by a thread reviewer or not) will be removed from the list unless a second opinion is requested.

AI Files: None

Utilities:
R Notepad++ AI Editor, by beladar; No Reviewer
R Enchanced Editor, by GeneralR; Reviewer: panel 3.3
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: panel 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Units, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Buildings, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
Advanced Genie Editor 2, by Keisari Tapsa; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
SLP Editor 2.2.5, by Hawk_Ruralist; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: Possidon 5.0


Mod Packs:
U Age of Vampires, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewer: Mashek 4.0, alekshs 5.0
Explosive Turtle Ship, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: panel 4.0
AH-64 Apache Armed Helicopter, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: Lord Basse 4.3
Archery Range Pack, by Rageofempires; Reviewer: Mayank Sharma 2.8
Transformers BUMBLEBEE, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 3.3
Oriental shield king, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 4.3

Cinematic Scenarios:
ACSC10 - The Last Samurai - Blood Memories, by Sebastien; Reviewer: Mashek 4.6, Lord Basse 4.4
A Tribute To RU42, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: panel 4.6

Single Player:
R A Mans Home is His Castle, by joshua4missions; No Reviewer
R Sir Spart on Trench Shores, Demo, by Algren t l s; No reviewer
R Brotherhood of War (updated 1.3 version), by kahn1969; Reviewer: Panel;
R The Arabian Nights, by Jackrum; no reviewer
R ICE AGE ICE MAZE, by Xylon Draganthus; Reviewer: Panel 3.2
The Jaguar Gold, by Lord Basse; Reviewer: Sarn 4.8, dragonslayermcmx 4.8, Possidon 4.6
R Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, by Celebi Megatron; Reviewer: panel 4.4
The Conquest of Kent by Andrew W; Reviewer: Sarn 3.8
Phoenix (Unfinished), by Teotl; Reviewer: panel 4.2
Demon Town, by Devastator; Reviewer: panel 3.8
the TWO KINGS by Genghis, by Pro_Designer; Reviewer: Alekshs 3.0
Britannia Colonia, by Yekkelle; Reviewer: Sarn 3.0
Treasure Predator, by Devastator; Reviewer: Sword_Of_Storm 3.8
Helm's Deep by Magnus, by Lord Magnus; Reviewer: Sarn 2.4
MGC12-An evil "surprise", by Alekshs; Reviewer: Sarn 4.0
MGC2012 - The Siege of the Fort, by Mephiles5; Reviewer: Sarn 2.8

Non-Playable Scenarios:
R Forest, by Dragonslayermcmx; panel 4.0
The Jungle Thinghy, by IsuckatXbows; panel 1.5
R District of Allin, by Algren t l s; panel 3.0

Random Maps:
R Fertile Crescent, Revision 1, by OtmShankIiI; no reviewer

Multiplayer:
R Compilation of Multiplayer Games, by jburnell; No Reviewer
R Persia - Non Random Map, by Lakayaa; No Reviewer
R UDP - Deathly Cliffs - V3.2, by Heroes; No Reviewer
R Battleships, by TheReal_Hunter; No Reviewer
R The Seas of Egressa RP, by Guthan; No Reviewer
R city catastrophe(complete version), by bigboy37731; No Reviewer
R UDP Prison Break, by Alevo; No Reviewer
R Paradise Lands, by sathcooperation; No Reviewer
R SAVE YOUR @$$ (beta2), by rohit021089; No Reviewer

Recorded Games:
DM 1 vs 4 Hardest.mgx, by zebratangozebra; Reviewer: Alekshs 1.5





FILE UPDATES AND OBSELETE REVIEWS

Please edit your review after an update. A designer can ask for the removal of all reviews after an update if he feels that they do not represent the actual version of his submission. Reviews that address issues that are fixed, altered or ameliorated do not serve the visitors of our site. A review has to be a valuable tool for the designer and the downloader.

RECENT UPDATES/ REVIEWS TO EDIT
(In order of date of the update)

10/23/11 Roots to Noah's Arc, by Pancho Villa 347; Reviewer: Mashek
11/25/11 Age of Vampires - Blood Reign in Transsylvania, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewers: Mashek




Please read the REVIEW GUIDELINES

Without trying to enforce the Review Guidelines as something as law, they are still a very important part of the review system here at Age of Kings Heaven, and are used to create consistency between reviewers at the Blacksmith in order to establish fairness and equality for reviews. With the Review Guidelines’ recent update all reviewers need to take into account the new addition of rules when reviewing. However, Angel SpineMan’s primary objective for reviewing in the Old Guidelines still applies today:

“This article will provide a description of how to write quality reviews for Age of Kings Heaven that are scored consistently between reviewers and are helpful to both the file's creator as well as the potential downloader.”

In some cases, a small percentage of reviewers tend to review files according to their own rules, leading to inconsistency between reviews at the Blacksmith, which is neither helpful nor fair to anyone. To have reviews at the Blacksmith that are fair and helpful, reviewers have to follow some rules to score consistently.

If you have any questions about reviewing, please do not hesitate to post in this thread!




Single Player Campaigns and Scenarios


There are many invaluable lessons to learn when becoming a good reviewer, and a few other things besides that will result in a good and fair review. Some things are self-evident when reviewing a file; in general, do not review game styles you do not enjoy and review files according to the date of its release. There are many files back in 2000-2002 that received a score of a high 4, which would not fit the standards of today. You have to take into account the standards of the day, and rate accordingly. In addition, if the scenario is designed for original Age of Kings, review it playing AoK.

Below you will find a general breakdown of each category from a review for your convenience.

PLAYABILITY is about the fun you had while playing a scenario, and here you need to mention what affected your enjoyment in a positive and/or negative way.

BALANCE is about how easy or difficult a scenario was for you. You should mention which difficulty you played on when reviewing, although this is not mandatory. A good approach to reviewing a file would be to start with moderate and later change to standard, to see if the scenario was too easy or too hard or well-balanced overall; before ending off with hard difficulty. However, reviewers will need to take into account that not all files are difficulty-level-dynamic. In general, remember that you are rating the file according to your own skill level and not that of others.

CREATIVITY covers every aspect of a scenario. Remember that a file does not need anything new to achieve a high score.

MAP DESIGN scores compared to a random map which rates 2.0. Anything worse or better than a random map may be rated up or down accordingly. Some tips for rating this category is that you rate what you see during game play, which means no Marco and Polo. The map size and how much of the map was used should not affect the rating.

STORY/INSTRUCTIONS is a little more interesting than some. Probably the most common detail reviewers tend to overlook is that this category covers two aspects of any scenario, story and instructions. Not just one or the other. If the file is lacking in one then you can make note of that in the review and mark down accordingly. However, this does not pertain to multiplayer scenarios, whereby a story is not mandatory. In general, the presence of a functional story (while not necessarily being a good story) with instructions should be midpoint, a 3. From there you should be able to give an accurate overall rating for this category.

Non-Playable Scenarios

For files such as those where playability is void and map design is the only feature of the file (e.g. entries to the Totally-Terrain Contest), the category should therefore be used to take a look at the technical and creative qualities of the map design, while referring to how that design pushes the boundaries of realism in an AOK environment. One particular thing to note here is that just because the file is all about pretty map design, that doesn’t mean it cannot feature any creative features that might breathe life into the design, such as towns brought to life by wandering villagers, people going about their everyday lives, and other unique devices besides. Basically, anything that goes into making the map more alive and as such realistic should be taken into consideration. As the file will likely feature little anything else other than map design, a single overall rating between 1 and 5 will be fine.

Scenarios without Fighting

An exception to the balance category is when the author of a particular file did not intend any fighting, or very little of, to feature in the scenario. From the review guidelines:

One important note about scoring the balance category for scenarios is that where no fighting takes place, such as some puzzle scenarios and some RPG-style scenarios, is that just because the player cannot die in such scenarios, that doesn't mean the scenario isn't balanced. Difficulty can also be present via puzzles or other devices, and the balance of these should be taken into account.

For files such as the Pretty Town Contest entries whereby there is a great degree of walking and nothing else much, reviewers should therefore take into account the author’s intention. If it was intended that you walk around and gaze at the beauty and wonder of a landscape, then you need to rate on that account.

Rating Cut-scene Style Scenarios

Cut-scenes rate like any other scenario, the only difference is that most cut-scenes do not allow any interaction for the player, requiring only that the player sits down and watch as the story unfolds. Cut-scenes are a mixed bag of lollies; some designers appreciate them, others however do not. The purpose of a cut-scene is to tell a story, to continue or conclude a project, like in Ulio with the old man in the forest and the two travellers. In the general sense of the word Playability, we rate the fun we had while watching the cut-scene and how playable it is.

The very definition of Playability denotes many errors, some already obvious. In Tanneur99’s words, the previous Blacksmith administrator and owner of this thread, “playability is a bastard word. It does not exist in the English language and separating the word into play and ability gives an incorrect meaning for the category. Ability to play would be listed under balance, the ability of a player to play a certain difficulty level of a file. It is a common error to believe that cut-scenes are unplayable. Gordon Farrell wrote that you play a cut-scene in the same sense as you play a CD on your CD player. If the CD has scratches and/or is dirty it is less playable to unplayable. A cut-scene is less playable to unplayable when we encounter bugs and/or lag. In closing, rate the fun you had watching the cut-scene and deduct for bugs and lag.”

For rating Balance in cut-scenes, the review guideline gives us this description:

for scenarios with no interactivity, such as cut-scenes, this category should be used to examine the flow and technical merits of the cut-scene: did it run smoothly? Was everything technically put together well

This means that reviewers can now rate down in this category for all those dodgy timing sequences, overlapping music, and anything else that would not necessarily affect one’s enjoyment but the technical aspect of a cut-scene. This also gives balance in cinematic scenarios more depth and meaning, and contributes more to the overall rating of a review than previously attained. Every technical aspect is to be taken into account, and what happens on-screen should generally correspond smoothly with dialogue and the overall transition of the story. Generally speaking, the less the cinematic leaves up to the viewer’s imagination, the higher the quality of the presentation. In saying all that, a cinematic should never feel rushed or sluggish, but proceed from scene to scene as the atmosphere and story suggests.

Demos, Teasers, Unfinished Scenarios

Unfinished files, demos and teasers are common at the Blacksmith and make up a great percentage of submissions. Many designers, like writers, look for feedback on their work: to help get past a certain point in their project where they might be hindered from progressing, or to catch up on any bugs that might be bothering them. Some authors return to the file and provide the Blacksmith with a complete update of the file as a result of the feedback.

When reviewing unfinished files, it’s important not to discriminate because it is an incomplete work. There’s no reason to knock down points just because somebody put Demo or Teaser in the title to get some feedback to know what he/she could improve on in an update. Rate a demo as if it is a finished product. This will achieve the best possible feedback for the author of an unfinished file.

Multiplayer

The Official Review Guidelines is the directive for rating single player scenarios and multiplayer scenarios, with an exception to Balance only. When judging BALANCE in multiplayer scenarios, you rate nothing else but the starting positions of each player, which should be equal for all to achieve the highest rating. For more on this please read post 264 of the previous thread.

Random Map Script


AI-Files

The first question to ask when rating an AI-File is what is the AI intended to do and how well does it perform in that specific area? There are AI-Files developed for many intents and purposes: for scenario design, training, specific maps (e.g. Arabia), death match, tournament, defensive/ aggressive files, water maps or land maps only, etc.

If the AI-file is developed for Age of Kings test it playing Age of Kings only. Rating an AI according to your own experience might be biased unless the AI cheats. Cheating AI-files, as forbidden for tournaments, are meant to play against human players. A good way to test a non-cheating AI is against the standard AI. If its performance compares to the standard one, it is average and the minimum rating should be a 3. In general, rate the AI-file according to its time. Many AI-files were developed to beat another specific one. It would be unfair to knock off points of an AI developed in 2000 because it loses against a more recent one.

Modification Pack Script

A Modification Pack Script (MPS) is mainly an item for the player, which has a limited use for designers; the content will not always suit a designer’s endeavours in scenario design and is very limited to its audience. Keep this in mind when you rate mod pack scripts for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. The main categories are USEFULNESS and QUALITY for the overall rating of a MPS. Use NOVELTY and INSTRUCTIONS to correct the category rating. Still, for a perfect rating the MPS has to excel in all four categories.

Utilities

There is no official guideline for reviewing utilities, but for some ideas you can go here. A utility is a tool for the designer and has hardly any use for the player; keep this in mind when you rate utilities for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. Often you cannot rate the novelty factor because the file is another eye candy map of Lord of the Rings, a Volcano, Waterfall, Trigger Guide, Tutorial or collection of battle sounds. In other words, nothing new. Originally the fifth category was Creativity but this was too close to Novelty, better to have the two rated together if possible. When you feel Novelty does not apply, you can replace it with Creativity. The four categories are of equal importance for the overall rating of a utility.

Recorded Games

The value of a recorded game is highly subjective depending mainly on the purpose for which the submitter uploaded it. A recorded game must have a specific and defined purpose so the viewer can gain knowledge and/or entertainment value from the game. The submitter must specify exactly what to look for, what the point of the upload is.

It is up to the reviewer to check if there was any purpose and how well the recorded game met the intended goals. If it is supposed to be an example of a rushing tactic but no attacks happen until 30 minutes into the game, it is a bad example of the tactic. The rating is not about how well everybody played, if the teams were equally strong, you can mention that but it should not affect the rating.

The questions to answer: What is the purpose of the record? How well does the game show the intended goals? Is it entertaining and/or can the viewer gain knowledge from it?




Review Thread History

Luke Gevaerts started the Review Request Thread 03/30/2002. Tanneur took over 11/30/2002 until 7/11/2009. I (Mashek) have since taken over and updated the thread as best I can (disputable) to feature more relevant information according to today’s guidelines.

[This message has been edited by Dead_End (edited 05-18-2012 @ 07:04 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
Possidon
Slayer
posted 03-09-11 02:05 PM CT (US)     386 / 943       
Just wrote a short review for Achesun's Little John unit giving it a 4.0. I am planning to a few TTC entries and a few projects in the upcomming days.
Khan Ivayl
Squire
posted 03-09-11 11:58 PM CT (US)     387 / 943       
I have just fixed some of the anchors in my mod, I hope this makes it more attractive to review...

I only improved the anchors of buildings, since the floating effect somehow fits with the ghost units I did not improve their anchors...
Draconian Devil
Squire
(id: DraconainDevil)
posted 04-06-11 07:59 AM CT (US)     388 / 943       
TheAmericanRevoultion is the first campaign i have made at a
moderate level i would like if someone could give it a review
please...thanks!!
Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 04-09-11 03:27 AM CT (US)     389 / 943       
I have reviewed Carlos Ferdinand's scenario, The Mediterranean Drizzle, and I've given it a 4.0.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Possidon
Slayer
posted 04-09-11 06:18 AM CT (US)     390 / 943       
AKFrost
Squire
posted 04-09-11 07:04 PM CT (US)     391 / 943       
Request Review on this
Carlos Ferdinand
Squire
posted 04-10-11 08:43 AM CT (US)     392 / 943       
Thanks for the review, mate!

I liked it, and hope more people will be encouraged to download and play my scenario.

CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE

MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY
CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire
Lord Basse
MI6 Scenario-Making Machine
posted 04-16-11 02:51 PM CT (US)     393 / 943       
On an unrelated topic, how is that promised prize review coming along Mashek?
It's been two months, thought I might ask again.

__[]_________
|||||||||||||||||
The ||||||||||||||||| Hus
OF | [/ \] |¯| [/ \] | ME
______________________________________________________________________________ |__ _ |¯|____|_______________________________________________________________________________
The Relics of Athalën (5.0) | AoK Opus - 95,000+ downloads | StormWind Studios | "I consider the conversion of Basse to be one of the great triumphs of my modding crusade" - Matt LiVecchi

[This message has been edited by Lord Basse (edited 04-16-2011 @ 02:52 PM).]

Uremovich
Squire
posted 04-24-11 10:11 PM CT (US)     394 / 943       
I would like to get a review for my first person scenario "Fall of Acre."
Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 05-06-11 04:24 AM CT (US)     395 / 943       
Reviewed raganzei's Kingdom of Astoria, giving it a 4.5
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-13-11 01:44 AM CT (US)     396 / 943       
My sincerest apologies Lord Basse, but I've been burnt out the last few months, simply from the work load as staff. It's hard to find time to actually enjoy the hobby these days... The review's half written up, I'll see what I can do in the next few days.

Actually, Turty's been gracious enough to cover for me all these weeks.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 05-13-2011 @ 01:45 AM).]

Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 05-14-11 06:18 PM CT (US)     397 / 943       
I also have a half-written review that I should be able to finish up as well.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-15-11 06:04 AM CT (US)     398 / 943       
After a quick edit, we have only three active (more or less) thread reviewers.

I just reviewed Lord Basse's My Fair Princess, giving it a 4.6. My apologies LB for the delay!
Lord Basse
MI6 Scenario-Making Machine
posted 05-15-11 07:12 AM CT (US)     399 / 943       
Thanks a lot Mash!

__[]_________
|||||||||||||||||
The ||||||||||||||||| Hus
OF | [/ \] |¯| [/ \] | ME
______________________________________________________________________________ |__ _ |¯|____|_______________________________________________________________________________
The Relics of Athalën (5.0) | AoK Opus - 95,000+ downloads | StormWind Studios | "I consider the conversion of Basse to be one of the great triumphs of my modding crusade" - Matt LiVecchi
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-15-11 09:47 AM CT (US)     400 / 943       
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-16-11 09:47 AM CT (US)     401 / 943       
@Lord Basse,

No worries.

I just noticed your custom title finally got changed. I'd been waiting months for that, before contacting sly/Leif about it. Tetsuo has a new custom title too. Many thanks to the one responsible!
Lord Basse
MI6 Scenario-Making Machine
posted 05-16-11 11:10 AM CT (US)     402 / 943       
Shame they spelled it "M16" and not "MI6" though.

__[]_________
|||||||||||||||||
The ||||||||||||||||| Hus
OF | [/ \] |¯| [/ \] | ME
______________________________________________________________________________ |__ _ |¯|____|_______________________________________________________________________________
The Relics of Athalën (5.0) | AoK Opus - 95,000+ downloads | StormWind Studios | "I consider the conversion of Basse to be one of the great triumphs of my modding crusade" - Matt LiVecchi
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-16-11 10:24 PM CT (US)     403 / 943       
Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 05-17-11 05:43 AM CT (US)     404 / 943       
At least now it rhymes.
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-17-11 06:13 AM CT (US)     405 / 943       
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-17-11 10:00 AM CT (US)     406 / 943       
offwo200
Squire
posted 05-20-11 03:37 PM CT (US)     407 / 943       
Requesting review for Eclipse AI: http://aok.heavengames.com/blacksmith/showfile.php?fileid=10765]
But I understand how many review items you have here lol
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-26-11 07:34 AM CT (US)     408 / 943       
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-26-11 09:05 AM CT (US)     409 / 943       
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-26-11 09:37 AM CT (US)     410 / 943       
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-26-11 10:17 AM CT (US)     411 / 943       
That took too long. Just updated/ cleaned up/ rewrote parts of the thread. Should look a little nicer now.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 05-26-2011 @ 10:18 AM).]

Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-26-11 10:24 AM CT (US)     412 / 943       
Nice job Mashek. just one thing.

You have made a section about balance in a Scenarios Without Fighting as regard to judging balance due to how hard things like Puzzles are.

What about Scenarios like PTC Entries where there are no puzzles or fighting to be done? Its just waltz around and view the scenery.
Basse
Squire
posted 05-26-11 10:25 AM CT (US)     413 / 943       
Aren't PTC under "Non-Playable"?
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-26-11 10:44 AM CT (US)     414 / 943       
Basse
Squire
posted 05-26-11 11:14 AM CT (US)     415 / 943       
Still, there is no playability, right?
Possidon
Slayer
posted 05-26-11 01:01 PM CT (US)     416 / 943       
I too was confused about this but Mashek was adamant that PTC should remain in Single Player Scenarios.
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-27-11 01:17 AM CT (US)     417 / 943       
What about Scenarios like PTC Entries where there are no puzzles or fighting to be done? Its just waltz around and view the scenery.
Good spot. The previous guidelines covered this but the revisions all but overlooked submissions such as those for the PTC. If I remember I covered this a little while ago.

Found it. From comment 368:
Before the review guidelines were "revamped", there was a description for such files. Someone got it confused with the description that pertains only to cinematic files and removed the former.

Basically, there's no reason to deduct from BALANCE just because the player was not faced with the challenge to survive. Instead, you need to take into account the author's intention. This makes it a little more flexible than a more complex description, and all you need to do is look at the file as a whole. If it was intended that you walk around (such as in a PTC entry) and gaze at the beauty and wonder of a landscape, then you need to rate on that account. If however the author, against all the odds, manages to fail even in that quarter and goes against his own intention, you may mark the file down in that regard.
Kind of sounds a little silly in hindsight, but if you can come up with anything else, I'm all ears.
Aren't PTC under "Non-Playable"?
To be honest, I discussed this with the Co-Seraph and we are both unsure as to whether the PTC entries should go to the new category or stay where they are. By any means, a single rating system would perhaps make it easier to review PTC entries and give PTC entries their own unique place in the Blacksmith. However, reviewing PTC entries under Single Player Scenario review guidelines is still a viable option. I also fear that moving the PTC entries over to the new category would make any review they've received in the past obsolete.

In saying that, feel free to argue for your opinion. The more contribution the easier we can sort this out. I myself am probably leaning toward sending PTC entries to Non-Playable Scenarios.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 05-27-2011 @ 01:26 AM).]

Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 05-27-11 01:35 AM CT (US)     418 / 943       
Hmm, I just had a thought. A year ago when you guys reorganized the Blacksmith, did you ever move files that had reviews on them? Did the reviews move with the files? The fact that PTC entries might lose their reviews was the reason why I thought they might stay in the Single Player Scenarios category.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 05-27-11 01:46 AM CT (US)     419 / 943       
The reviews move fine, it's just that the differences between the rating system of single player scenarios and non-playable scenarios are enormous. The former rates by a 5 category system, whereas the latter only by a single overall rating.
Leif Ericson
Seraph Emeritus
posted 05-28-11 01:57 AM CT (US)     420 / 943       
So, the problem is that the PTC entries would have been reviewed according to a different criteria. That one couldn't be fixed I suppose.

I guess we can only leave it to the community to decide whether the shift is worth it.

~`o´~|\  Join the fresh and exciting AI Ladder for its fourth season!
´ `  |_\
       |    Learn the joy of AI scripting in my guide: The World of AI Scripting
______|______
 \        /
   .....Hinga Dinga Durgen! - SpongeBob
  `-=<.__.>=-´
« Previous Page  1 ··· 10 11 12 13 14 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames