Missions criterias to pass to ensure quality

[Batstat 10]

Hi community,

To ensure the quality of coop missions, I like to share the  criterias my clan NoPryl try to review missions after.

It's difficult to say a lot about what a good mission is. It’s easier to state what a good mission normally not contain. It may help in making better missions.

I will update the list, if new good point comes in. I also will consider deleting from the list if good arguments come forward.

Criterias:

1. No Kill Them All:

A good Coop mission should not be based on "the kill them all" concept.

* Running down AI solders who has fled the area is a show stopper.

* The need for checking large urban or forest areas for living AI soldiers is also considered unnecessary.

2. Clear objectives

The missions should have one or more clear objectives, described in the mission plan. Normally it should be known where in the map your team start from.

3. Working triggers

A finished missions should not have serious trigger errors. This is crucial for objective ending triggers. In public beta maps this should also be considered a bug who deserves attention.

4. Transport time/distance

It should not be required to be in transport for more than 10 minutes before the action starts.

5. Dynamic AI

AI behavior should be dynamic. If more than 50% of the AI stays in one spot during the mission, it will normally be considered "not good".

6. Loadout

Mission where you can choose from all the weapons produced in the game will normally be considered to have a serious design flaw.

7. Cutscenes

Don't make Long unskippable cutscenes (esp in MP) - Orlok

Template for validating:

Info

Mission name

pbo name <file name>

Description

Number of players & side

Criterias 1 - 6 passed or not

1. passed

2. passed

3. etc ..

6. failed

...

Conclusion

The mission is ..... The option to choose between all weapons in this mission is considered a nice feature, because...

Passed"" YYYYMMDD - <name>

[Batstat 10]

NoPryl have reviewed some missions based on the criterias above.

Link: http://www.nopryl.com/phpnuke....start=0

Sure not all ppl will agree upon the criterias, else there would not have been so many missions that fail many of them.

Snippets to ensure you can choose from all weapon in the game, is considered cool by many. In my opinion it's ok for testing purpose, else not, I dont like to wait 5 min before all are ready do go, with super weapons from the other side, and where you can't find any more ammo in the mission.

If we finish reviewing one day, we will provide a link over the missions we have approved.

A discussion about criterias who recognise a lousy mission is maybe easier to discuss than the opposite. Criterias who define a good mission tend to take away the creativity.

[OrLoK 20]

Hello all

I too, was thinking along the same lines as these, but was more a guide as to what NOT to include in a user made mission.

And was also geared twards the more "realistic" mission types.

ie.

1.Don't make Long unskippable cutscenes (esp in MP)

2.Don't give immediate access to every weapon under the sun, make the character work hard and they'll enjoy winning the mission more. You can always give them "submissions" to pickup/loot for thse groovy weapons.

3.Sudden Death Zones. One of the best things about ofp/arma is the fact that one can tackle a mission in a way the creator didn't plan for. Don't hamstring the player into only using part of the map, or not being able to skirt round an objective. If it's that important that they dont go to a certain aea, put enemy troops/mine fortifications etc to discourage them. Then if they still want to, well, let them.

4.Limit incoming Arty. Don't use it to nuke the battlefield evey 5 seconds, it's much more exciting to have a limited (perhaps moving) bombardment.

5.Give the player a chance to use tactics/vehicles etc! Don't overwhelm players with floods of enemy forces in one place. It's much nicer to get involved with a number of short, intense firefights, rather than a 3 hour turkey shoot.

Theres a big island out there, use it.

Just thought of these off the cuff and again ,these are just my humble opinions and some things wont apply in certain situations.

I know its ever so slightly offtopic to your heading, but perhaps a guide to "good mission making practices" could sit alongside your oideas, with feedback from the community.

Scuse the rambling, but im on the phone whilst i type this.

Rgds

LoK

[Jack-UK 0]

EDIT: Nevermind, sorry.

[kroky 1]

@Batstat

I like the guidelines for the missions. I checked the website and there are a lot of missions tested. But where are the download links?

[Batstat 10]

Hi,

Good points Orlok, when I think about grand scale or long lasting games your list is well thought through.

I updated the first post with your remark about Cutscenes.

Your nr 3. Sudden Death Zones, I also agree on, but with my limited experience I haven’t seen many missions who fail with your criteria. Same goes for nr 4.

I also agree with your number 5b “Don't overwhelm players with floods of enemy forces in one place. It's much nicer to get involved with a number of short, intense firefights, rather than a 3 hour turkey shoot.†But I also recognize this as a controversial statement, where I bleive the community will divide in at least two factions. One loving this kind of missions, and one hating them, and a group between who plays them both for the sake of variation.

I have tried to reduce the list too what NOT to do, but your point 5a is very good. "5.Give the player a chance to use tactics/vehicles etc!" Not sure where it belongs and it is difficult to be precise in how this should impact the mission design. Not so difficult to review and make up an opinion regarding if the mission maker has succeeded or not. Hard to design, easy to review.

Your point 2, is covered under loadout, but you expressed the sentence better

Regards

[Batstat 10]

@Batstat

I like the guidelines for the missions. I checked the website and there are a lot of missions tested. But where are the download links?

Well theres isn't any link yet, we are not done reviewing. My post is in that regard premature, sorry for that.

[OrLoK 20]

hello there,

I think, as you say, that any set of guidelines will always have one set of folks up in arms about why they do or don't agree.

But I do like your list

Hopefully some good "Quality Assurance" will weed out the awful broken misions (remember how many there were for ofp? too many!.

Keep up the good work.

rgds

LoK