Mission Makers Hell

[igor drukov 0]

Keep the mission simple - almost everyone loved the steal the car mission -

Steal the car is all but a simple mission : it looks so to the player, but if you take a look at its architecture, you'll see that it's a little jewel that must have taken time to design.

That's where it hurts, imho : even simple missions (with full briefing, objectives, and different endings at least) are incredibly, and unconspicuously, difficult to design.

[Commando84 0]

i think it gets boring to play with original addons everytime i play ofp, thats one of the reasons i quit playing half-life counter-strike clan just same sounds , same views, same tactics that failed when our team did them and so on

i like ofp and all the freedom and addons it offers.

When i recomend ofp to new people i always point out its "modabaility" and not its realism and stuff like that

i do missions and i usually try to have 5-10 addons involved to make it easy for players to play the mission quickly as possible

[philcommando 0]

I get what u mean, Commando84....but for mission makers, i guess if they wanna share a great mission, it would be best if they use the BIS standard units, then we can all play it and replace it with our favourite addons.

If some talented guy from this community here can make WINPBO, i am sure someone else can create a dialogue for easy replacement of units in a mission, although its pretty easy to do so now - just go to mission folder, open the mission in notepad, use Find/Replace command from the menu and hey presto!, soldierWB becomes HYK units!

[redface 1]

too many addon makers and config customizers are killing OFP

though an avid mission-maker myself, I uninstalled OFP a few weeks ago because I grew tired with the current situation;

in the end I spent most of my time searching for & downloading addon packs.

+ even though I have everything carefully organized into addon folders, my computer couldn't take the high poly units & overly detailed islands no more: addon makers simply don't pay attention to mission makers needs.

I respect the hard work that people put into ever new retextures of HYK units etc., but this has got nothing to do with playing OFP anymore. addons and missions are too separate worlds, they don't go together.

[philcommando 0]

Glad u got that figured out, redface!

Missions are game concepts.

Addons are game enhancements.

Both are different worlds. You dont create missions base on enhancements but you can create a mission based on a concept of play you would like to introduce to the community.

Dont give up on mission making for it doesnt need the latest addons - a soldier is still a soldier no matter how he carries his gun or how much increased in polygons he has - he will still perform. A BIS su is evenly matched with a BIS a10 and when replaced, i am sure users will know which unofficial plane to use for even matches.

So lets leave the addon makers to their enhancements, for they only seek to bring a new level of atmosphere and experience to the game.

With this, i end my foray here least someone says i got no life and should limit my posts to 1. Cheers!

[General Barron 0]

I think a way to solve this is to

A) Use such replacement mods like FDF, Y2k3, EECP, Flash FX etc

or

B) Organise some 'expansion modules' similar to the way VBS is. Basically organise all the addons for a single purpose (opfor, marines, etc) and config, texture fix 'em, etc and put em in a pbo or two and release it. But that's A LOT of effort, and once again, the human race, and pretty much all animals, are lazy.

So basically, you're saying mission makers should either:

(a) don't use any unofficial addons? or

(b) only use addons that come with lots of stuff; i.e. sebnam, FDF, etc?

The first "solution" completely defeats the purpose of addons, and is completely absurd (unless you only think of addons as "eye candy", and don't give a darn about gameplay).

The second solution is more along the lines of what I would like to see: that is, instead of people releasing addons that only have a single thing (i.e. one m4, a single unit or vehicle type, etc), addonmakers should release USEFUL addons packs.

-------

But the funny thing is, even when someone releases a tiny, essentially useless addon, there is still 10x more interest in it from the community, than when someone releases an actual mission (judging from post counts).

For example, 3 days ago in the addons/mods complete forum, someone released an IED (bomb) addon. This is something that could easily be scripted in a mission, and thus seems like basically a "useless addon", since it doesn't really add anything new or useful to the game. Yet, in 3 days there have been 1918 views and 48 replies in the thread. Now, what if someone actually used that "addon" in their mission? The very same people wouldn't play it, because they would complain about having to "hunt down an obscure addon" that they were so crazy about just a few weeks before.

Compare that with "The Black Gap", a mission released in the User Missions board about a month and a half ago. This mission undoubtably took WAY more time and effor to make than an IED "addon", yet it only has been viewed 479 times, and only has 72 replies.

That mission doesn't even require any addons; yet there are many, many times more people interested in downloading and talking about an IED "addon" than an actual mission by an excellent author.

Basically, the community (or the official forums community at least) doesn't seem to care about missions. It has nothing to do with "using too many addons" in a mission, because even addon-free missions are ignored. Hence the term "mission maker's hell" seems to fit. The community only seems to care about downloading the latest m4, playing around with it for a while, then throwing it away when the next m4 is released.

[General Barron 0]

Whoops, just saw the other page of replies. I'll make a short reply to that.

First off, if I'm going to make a 'nam mission, I want 'nam units. I'm not going to make a mission with default units on the BIS island, and then "hope" that the player will have a replacement config that will change the units to look like 'nam ones.

Basically, it seems like PhilCommando and others are saying that addons are only graphical improvements of what we already have. It seems like most addonmakers share his view; hence the reason why we keep getting more of the same. If that is all you think of addons as being, then yes, I could understand the argument that only BIS units should be used, and then replacement configs will change the graphics.

However, as a mission editor, I see addons in an entirely different light. I believe that addons should add something NEW to the game. That means, something that was never there before, which cannot be added via mission editing or scripting. That is why I can't make a 'nam mission without addons: because a 'nam island is NEW to ofp; because an m79 (?) grenade launcher is NEW to ofp; because many of the helocopters are NEW to ofp. Simply changing the graphics of an AH1 via the game config won't make it into a huey.

When a mission maker searches for addons to use in his mission, he is usually looking for just that: something NEW to add to the game. 95% of addons are not that, so the editor has to use "tons of obscure addons", because he has to grab a new shotgun here, a new civillian there, a new building there, etc.

You know what I think is one of the best addons out there? Lester's invisible targets addon. It adds something in that is so USEFUL for editing, because there is NOTHING like it that comes with ofp. IMO, that is a real addon. The ironic thing is, you can't take a screenshot of it, so I doubt most people would even think of it as an addon. Certainly it isn't one under Philcommando's definition.

[MrZig 0]

Quote[/b] ]So basically, you're saying mission makers should either:

(a) don't use any unofficial addons? or

(b) only use addons that come with lots of stuff; i.e. sebnam, FDF, etc?

What I'm saying that a way to solve this problem of so many addons for one mission is to organise addon packages (not as big as fdf) and then mission makers use those in their missions. So instead of a list of:

Quote[/b] ]HYK units

LSR weapons

VIT APC pack

Combat HMMWV

Combat m113

INQ M1a2

IED

Middle East units

EDGE's retextured guerrillas

Radar Tower

Invisible targets

It'd be like:

Quote[/b] ]U.S. Pack #1

OpFor Pack #1

Mission Editor Pack #1

Seems simple, but it's a lot of work that doubtfuly a lot of people are up to.

[General Barron 0]

I agree, these types of efforts would be great to see. That is why I like the idea of the Wx3 (?) object pack. Basically, they put together a bunch of great addons that added new buildings/objects to the game, and put them together into a single addon (instead of having to download one bunker here, one building there, etc). But then you would still run into the problem of: "I want to have a Javelin in my mission, so I have to use an addon; but that means you have to download 100mb of other crud just to get that 'obscure addon'".

[Acecombat 0]

I agree with everything Barron said

[sanctuary 19]

Quote[/b] ]So basically, you're saying mission makers should either:

(a) don't use any unofficial addons? or

(b) only use addons that come with lots of stuff; i.e. sebnam, FDF, etc?

What I'm saying that a way to solve this problem of so many addons for one mission is to organise addon packages (not as big as fdf) and then mission makers use those in their missions. So instead of a list of:

Quote[/b] ]HYK units

LSR weapons

VIT APC pack

Combat HMMWV

Combat m113

INQ M1a2

IED

Middle East units

EDGE's retextured guerrillas

Radar Tower

Invisible targets

It'd be like:

Quote[/b] ]U.S. Pack #1

OpFor Pack #1

Mission Editor Pack #1

Seems simple, but it's a lot of work that doubtfuly a lot of people are up to.

Personnally i would love to see something like this vbs module thingy, it should help to prevent a mission player to go through all that hell that is caused by addons dependancies (i never really found fun that to test 1 good looking island by example i had to download near to hundred of mega octets additional addons, thanks to dependancies in cascades, addons calling other addons multiple times...)

But problems would be

-securing a permission of each addon makers to edit configs of addon <s>packs</s> module to prevent addon dependancies and correct bad or uncomplete cfgpatches definitions

-selecting exactly what addons to make a coherent pack , as people have different taste and would certainly prefer to not put too many mega octets of .pbo they will never use because they don't like a specific unit ?

-Under what ballistic/armor/damage etc... basis ?, as i noticed when looking at their own config.cpp that addon makers have really different views on making their units skills/armor weapon ballistics/damage/accuracy , sometime near to BIS standard, but sometime totally different.

If , let's have for 2 seconds an utopian dream , there could be a common work on such <s>pack</s> module to make something bug free , coherent in every way, having a common standard in ballistic/damage/skills/etc... , that would be really interesting and would open the way to downloading missions without having to care about the addon finding hell.

But that's utopia isn't it ?

[.pablo. 0]

edit: my original post got deleted for being too long, so i'm going to repost it on the next page

[deathsai 0]

We just need a hell of a lot less addon-makers and a hell of a lot more mission makers. Making an addon is one thing, using it is an entirely new (and usually harder) concept.

And we don't need 20,000 AH-64s, 15,000 M1 Abrams, 30,000 XMSes and XM-177E2s, etc. unless they actually add something to the damned game, such as a crapload of scripts. I can't stand the excitement of everyone screaming "OMG OMG NEW LONGBOW OMG OMG NEW ABRAMS AS IF WE HAVENT HAD ONE SINCE CWC WAS FREAKING RELEASED!" and then having only a few replies on the latest missions.

[crashdome 3]

I think the problem is rooted elsewhere.

It's not the add-ons problem, the lack of mission-makers, etc..

I've been making missions, developing a complex script mod, and scripting unusual ideas since 2001. You won't find but maybe 1% of my missions that are full-tilt missions with briefing, etc.. I use maybe 1% of the addons out there in my missions and about 1% of my time is spent mission making in general. I may not be average, but I can be damn well sure that of all the people who have EVER made a mission only a few developed a complete and working, add-ons or no addons mission. Why? The editor sucks, scripts are riddled with work arounds and bugs, and performance hits on fully developed missions/maps can sometimes be jaw dropping even on a Pentium 4/AMD Athlon. Mission-making to me has become the pure essence of OFP in an art form. Plan on making a 'public' or 'high-quality' mission? Good Luck!! You'll need it. I have a list of... (lemme count...) 111 missions in my current user/missions folder. NONE of them work worthy enough of even a beta release. I must confess I attempt to go the extra mile and script unique features in my missions which usually result in only a partially functional mission. However, I have enjoyed playing those 111 missions on my own or with buddies because I can at least insult my bud's criticism of my mission without being banned.

I believe it is similar to this within every circle of OFP mission makers. Additionally, in an attempt to provide more sharing of scripting for easy access to incredibly simple script ideas, I started a little site called "OFP Source Exchange" awhile ago... I got zero-to-no feedback after 3 days of it going live. Mission-making is not like add-ons, there is very little competition to improve upon missions and there is no teams of mission-makers to provide that competition.

Missions are also hard to come by because it is purely very HARD to do... I would even go as far as saying it is probably more difficult to create an in-depth (working!) mission than a single re-textured M4 or working Helo add-on.

[philcommando 0]

I was playing around with BAS rangers and had a thought.

Ofp is a strategy and tactics game. Strategies and tactics are universal, be you a east or a west unit. Its the circumstances that are different that will lead u to use the universal tactics. Therefore shouldnt mission making revolve more around the 'cirumstances' as it is more interesting than the addons or tactics used?

[The_Oakster 0]

I agree that a well worked mission would be harder to create than an addon, there is so much that needs to be done to make a mission captivating.

When I d/l an addon, I know what I am getting, its going to move a certain way, its going to look how I expected, and will do what i expect.

And every time I use it I know exactly how its going to work and because its an addon it doesnt matter, thats what I expected.

But expectations for missions are infinitely higher.

Not only have they got to be different, they have to be completely bug free, (addons survive bugs and work arounds, missions dont seem to), they have to be 'real' which I find a hard concept to understand for 2 reasons, firstly, I doubt that there are that many military personnel playing this game who have combat experience, and secondly, as far as I am aware, modern warfare relys on superior force and I know If released a mission that had 3:1 friendly forces aginst the AI it would be slated as far too easy. It has to have an intro and an outro and cutscenes...No it doesnt I hear you say...well it does. How many missions on OFPEC get a low score because the cutscene wasnt very good, or it didnt have an outro (or even more bizarrely, the picture hadnt got a border ) It has to have music and it has to be entertaining.

But all this hard work is wasted after one event, and happens in every single mission ever created. Players die. So now that sniper you had hidden is located, or that mine field is found etc etc. So all the hard work is revealed as players re play and re play over again.

In my mind this is good because each time the player dies the mission maker has out smarted him. But for the player, every time he dies is tallied up in his brain and the more he restarts, the easier the mission seems to him, beacuse he can take out all the surprises. So when he eventually gets to the end, he thinks its easy. It doesnt seem to matter that it took him x amount of tries all he remembers is that he finished it.

Even with random positions and probability of appearance, there is only so much you can set with out compromising the actual workings of the mission.

It seems to me that the mission maker has very little chance of ever creating a publicly accepted mission. How many really good missions are there? And how many of them have been created lately? None and thats the whole point of this thread...

Another problem I see, and this crosses over to addons as well, is that instead of accepting what gets released and accepting that thats how it is, and the same for addons, people constantly want them changing to suit them, so almost all addon releases, and I expect missions would to but they don't get released , go like this:

"Today I announce the release of the new microwave addon, it is really good and cooks all animated food evenly, etc etc"

and within 2 posts someone says :

"Can you make one in black"... or "can it say 850 watt on mine because I once saw one that had that on". Or "well, my real life one cooks food much quicker than that"..etc etc.

And what makes it worse is that the maker then goes and changes it and changes it and the community just expects that to happen all the time. On the other hand if an addon or misison has bugs then it shouldnt have been released anyway, and releasing it as a beta is almost irrelevant nowadays as everyone will d/l it ang and highlight all the mistakes without understanding what a beta is.

I dont know what can be done, I think its something that will only change itself, but missions are what make Flashpoint what it is. Addons are just tools that assist mission players and provide a bit of eye candy.

[honchoblack 2]

this evolved in a real interesting thread, and all posts speek of comon sense how ofp mission making is right now

in my eyes the real solution to this is allready said:

stick to bis default units while mission making, design it on the island of your choice but for the core of the mission stick to the bis units, there are enough replacement mods out there to try the mission out, making three (or even more with own replacement mods) missions out of one

i just started making my own missions, and my first approach was to use a static set of addons for all my missions, kind of like the pack idea in vbs,

but soon had to realize, if i ever want to release a mission of mine, that it wouldnt be played alot, because people dont like to search the addons for just one mission (me neither)

so this situation soon led to the idea to stick to the bis default units, and let the player decide on the units to use by the mods they use

anoter positive aspect from this approach is that i started working on my own config, with the pack i originally planed the missions for, so i can still play the missions like they were ment to be

greets Honcho

[Chris Death 0]

Just my two cents:

How can somebody complain about addon makers being to

hasty with first releases of their addons (because of required

updates 1 to 7 days after first release)?.

A mission maker who come in troubles because of exactly that

reason has been IMHO way more hasty than the addon maker

Why somebody needs to quickly build up a big complex (later unchangeable) mission with addons, right after their first release?

There are already a lot of good (by almost the entire comunity accepted) addons out, to make missions with. And

so will for sure follow other addons, but to move the fault

onto addon maker's side is for sure in no way an excuse, for

being to hasty in using new addons for a new mission

~S~ CD

[Winters 1]

My thoughts on this "decline"...

I'm not sure exactly why, but the OFP community seems very focused on addons, but generally doesn't show much interest in missions. (Also, check to poll on ofp.info for interest levels).

Compare the activity on the addons: discussion or addons: complete boards to user missions. Most addon threads get pages of discussion, but user missions don't seem to get much response. It can be disappointing to spend time on a mission only to be met with chirping crickets.

Maybe people are bored with the same old mission types? If so, what kind of missions to people want?

The poll states that only 6% are making addons/islands/scripts and that 18% are making missions.

So, where are all these missions hiding?

[iNeo 0]

My thoughts on this "decline"...

I'm not sure exactly why, but the OFP community seems very focused on addons, but generally doesn't show much interest in missions. (Also, check to poll on ofp.info for interest levels).

Compare the activity on the addons: discussion or addons: complete boards to user missions. Most addon threads get pages of discussion, but user missions don't seem to get much response. It can be disappointing to spend time on a mission only to be met with chirping crickets.

Maybe people are bored with the same old mission types? If so, what kind of missions to people want?

The poll states that only 6% are making addons/islands/scripts and that 18% are making missions.

So, where are all these missions hiding?

Like someone said, people have too high ambitions with missions or get tired of the scenario, and don't finish them. Addon making requires more skill and more dedication, that's why fewer do it, and why most of it gets released for the public.

[The_Oakster 0]

I have had another think about this and I have come to another conclusion

I think it is the mission makers that can, and have to, solve the problem.

For missions to be a success they need the newer addons, if it uses the old units or old versions of units then either eventually, or immediately, the mission fails.

It is easy to avoid the NEWEST addons so that updates in quick succession can be avoided, but addons are needed.

So going along with, but slightly twisting, the idea set forth by Mr Zig. I propose that mission makers should come up with mission packs.

Where the mission maker decides on what addons he would use with his missions and then releases an addon pack containing all the addons they will use and then stick to them addons.

If newer versions of addons are released, this system gives the mission maker time to wait for the final final release and then incorporate it into their missions. Older missions that truly rely on one particular addon will have to be updated on public request. If their just isnt the time or the need to update it then mission makers and players should accept this.

This system wouldnt be damaged by addons being released prematurely, or being updated a gazillion times in the first week. It is completely seperate.

I understand this is far from THE solution, but it is A solution. Yes, players will still need to download a pack of addons, but at least subsequent missions will use them same addons. Overtime, the addons will get updated but it stops the problem of 100 missions using 100 different addons.

[deathsai 0]

When I make a mission one day, you'll be quite lucky to see me working on it ever again.

[The-Architect 0]

If any of you have seen my work, you'll know that I almost exclusivly work on missions. I've been wrestling with the Addon vs Mission problem for a long time.

When I started I used only the BIS stuff, but as I got more involved with various sites I found that the community is full of people who crave realism and accuracy. After all, that's why most of us play the game. There are of course those people who either don't know or don't care about that sort of thing.

I started to try and make my missions as accurate as I could. This meant reading and researching.

I want to use the correct units, vehicles etc for every mission I make. unfortunatly there are a lot of people out there who just want a quick download.

I would get conflicting comments where people would moan about things not being accurate and other comments saying there were too many downloads. I made missions with no external addons at all but found that people still weren't happy.

Now I do what I want. If I want a mission with no addons I make one. If I want a mission that's accurate I use all the addons I need. I don't give a damn about the whingers anymore. There are more important things to consider, like making sure that a mission is tested right.

I do have an idea on what could revive the mission making community though. Perhaps we could set up mission mods like the BAS people for instance. Instead of addon though, we could concentrate on churning out high quality missions for the community. We could pool our respective talents and if enough people get on board we could have a community which could rival the addon makers.

That's my tuppence.

[crashdome 3]

Quote[/b] ]I think it is the mission makers that can, and have to, solve the problem.

No offense, but ytf do I HAVE to solve anything? I'm enjoying my missions and so are my friends...

Quote[/b] ]I do have an idea on what could revive the mission making community though. Perhaps we could set up mission mods like the BAS people for instance. Instead of addon though, we could concentrate on churning out high quality missions for the community. We could pool our respective talents and if enough people get on board we could have a community which could rival the addon makers.

I honestly think this is the only solution with potential. If there was no BAS, FDF, WGL, etc... the add-on community would be in the same boat. However, good luck trying to get some mission-makers to gather together. I've tried... there was even a group called Joint-SomethingOrNother that also tried the idea. Sadly, never made it too far.

I'll even spot for any resources needed if you can do it... problem is there are not too many 'dedicated' mission-makers out there. Most are dedicated scripters who dabble with making a few public missions or working with add-on teams already.

I still advocate for a site that is devoted simply to mission making. For example: Someone can post a mission idea and others can opt to develop for it by browsing through the 'needs' the designer has listed. i.e. a voice actor can submit a recording that the mission designer has said he 'needs'. or perhaps a scriptor submits a script for helicoptor extraction that the mission designer said he 'needs'. This way the source isn't available and does not ruin any surprises but the designer (or designers) can get the help they need for a quality mission.

Again, I'll do whatever needed to get a team of mission-makers together... I've dreamt of that for awhile.

[Hybrid 0]

I have been designing missions and making scripts ever since i first bought this game. My squad and Mission Editing are what take up the bulk of my time in OFP. I spent most of my time working on Multiplayer missions and scripting, and so far they have been turning out pretty good.

With addons, i usually use the required addons for my squad, and work from there. But i will occasionally use an addon not in the list if i feel the mission would benefit from the use of that addon. And i will also cut useless addons from missions.

With the comments i receive from the players, i will usually fix all of the mission bugs, and with suggestions, i will take them into account, but what i feel is better in the mission i keep. I dont just change certain parts of the mission, because player A wants more enemies or player B feels that vehicles are in to short supply. But the general working of the mission itself always comes first.

The idea of creating a sort of Mission Mod is a very good idea. I would glady contribute any services as a mission designer and scripter to this type of community.

Lets pull our resources and see what we can come up with.