Forums » Suggestions
Missions filtering and grouping
Hey community,
first of all, as a very new vendetta player i would like to say that i'hv been quite surprised by this game and its community, which are both, above the average.
Now the actual suggestion:
After i have passed my first test yesterday i'hv been surprised by how messy the missionboard is. It would look much better with, as stated in this post, a better organization of the mission by:
- showing the type of mission instead of the $$ icon or grouping the missions by type (so we can expend or collaps a type menu)
- showing exactly what you can gain by doing that mission (experience, money, items)
- Showing by a little icon to determinate if a mission have already been done (even if you can replay it whenever you want)
- Adding a 'mission level' could be cool aswell eventho i'm not sure how hard will be the next missions, as im still in my 8 hours-trial.
Here is a crap screenshot to image my ideas (there might be many incoherence :P):
(image's direct link here)
-
first of all, as a very new vendetta player i would like to say that i'hv been quite surprised by this game and its community, which are both, above the average.
Now the actual suggestion:
After i have passed my first test yesterday i'hv been surprised by how messy the missionboard is. It would look much better with, as stated in this post, a better organization of the mission by:
- showing the type of mission instead of the $$ icon or grouping the missions by type (so we can expend or collaps a type menu)
- showing exactly what you can gain by doing that mission (experience, money, items)
- Showing by a little icon to determinate if a mission have already been done (even if you can replay it whenever you want)
- Adding a 'mission level' could be cool aswell eventho i'm not sure how hard will be the next missions, as im still in my 8 hours-trial.
Here is a crap screenshot to image my ideas (there might be many incoherence :P):
(image's direct link here)
-
Great post crawazaky, I agree. You said what I didn't want to touch in my recent crazy huge post.
I've heard people voice this in game as well. At the least, a way to see the exact rewards before accepting a job is elementary. Secondary, grouping them in the menu would be pimp.
-Dirty Cash
I've heard people voice this in game as well. At the least, a way to see the exact rewards before accepting a job is elementary. Secondary, grouping them in the menu would be pimp.
-Dirty Cash
You may find this plug-in from mr_spuck useful:
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/9/17115?page=4#239253
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/9/17115?page=4#239253
Hi, let me quickly respond on this specific topic, to explain why things are how they are, and how they're going to change.
The "concept" of mission availability is going to evolve over the coming timeframe. Basically, missions are going to become available from "anywhere", a great universal list of all missions available in the universe, all at once, on a single interface. With many of our existing missions, the gameplay mechanics may remain the same (you'll need to go to the offering station to start the given mission), but others will allow you to "sign up" from deep space or.. whereever.
Obviously, there are going to be a whole lot of missions to display, which will necessitate the next-generation mission interface: allowing people to sort or limit by category, by distance, by difficulty, as well as a bunch of other obvious parameters (faction, payout, time requirement, etc). Category was added into the PCC mission editor a few months ago, and includes: General, Training, Combat, Trade, Mining, Manufacturing, Reconnaissance, Research, and Clandestine. Plus, there will be specific parameters for common cases, like "Hive", "Group", etc.
I expect this to take shape as an assortment of radio buttons, with checkable boxes, allowing people to "drill down" into the available missions as quickly as possible, to find what they want and bring it to the top.
Ie, I want a Hive mission that will help me gain Xang Xi faction standing. The user could potentially check "Hive" missions and select Xang Xi for faction, and see a list of all of them available, which by default would be sorted by distance (nearest to farthest), but could also be sorted by difficulty, priority (faction's need), etc.
Think "Ebay for Missions", except without the obvious searching, mostly categories, checkboxes and sorting parameters.
Into this mix, user-missions will be added, allowing people to post their needs for their player-owned stations (ie, you need 982942 cu of Blah Ore to manufacture new engines for your capship, you post a mission from your station and it goes out to the general populace.. and may be answered either by another player, or by an NPC).
I hope this makes some sort of sense. Anyway, in the meantime I agree that the mission interface is a bit confusing, and I may do some quick short-term tweaks to improve that, but this is our eventual direction.
The "concept" of mission availability is going to evolve over the coming timeframe. Basically, missions are going to become available from "anywhere", a great universal list of all missions available in the universe, all at once, on a single interface. With many of our existing missions, the gameplay mechanics may remain the same (you'll need to go to the offering station to start the given mission), but others will allow you to "sign up" from deep space or.. whereever.
Obviously, there are going to be a whole lot of missions to display, which will necessitate the next-generation mission interface: allowing people to sort or limit by category, by distance, by difficulty, as well as a bunch of other obvious parameters (faction, payout, time requirement, etc). Category was added into the PCC mission editor a few months ago, and includes: General, Training, Combat, Trade, Mining, Manufacturing, Reconnaissance, Research, and Clandestine. Plus, there will be specific parameters for common cases, like "Hive", "Group", etc.
I expect this to take shape as an assortment of radio buttons, with checkable boxes, allowing people to "drill down" into the available missions as quickly as possible, to find what they want and bring it to the top.
Ie, I want a Hive mission that will help me gain Xang Xi faction standing. The user could potentially check "Hive" missions and select Xang Xi for faction, and see a list of all of them available, which by default would be sorted by distance (nearest to farthest), but could also be sorted by difficulty, priority (faction's need), etc.
Think "Ebay for Missions", except without the obvious searching, mostly categories, checkboxes and sorting parameters.
Into this mix, user-missions will be added, allowing people to post their needs for their player-owned stations (ie, you need 982942 cu of Blah Ore to manufacture new engines for your capship, you post a mission from your station and it goes out to the general populace.. and may be answered either by another player, or by an NPC).
I hope this makes some sort of sense. Anyway, in the meantime I agree that the mission interface is a bit confusing, and I may do some quick short-term tweaks to improve that, but this is our eventual direction.
This sounds like a great upcoming feature, but I have reservations. Is this change coming due to the PCC stuff recently announced?
The way it is now, missions are pretty clearly tied to stations (except the hive skirmishes) and you are planning to untie all missions from stations proper. At first glance this seems like a really good idea. And here's the rub. I think that sort of interface might remove any sense of discovery and separation of "areas". As an example, for me as a new player, the big fun really hit when I finally left the the safe zone of my faction and entered gray space and found all these new factions which offered different things.
(Sort of related, this is what caused me to have to refer to the wiki to continue as posted here: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/19453 )
If you can pick up missions anywhere you dilute that distinction of space "territories." I think those distinctions are important. They are, maybe, not so much right now because space is relatively small in VO and the player base is very small. But in terms of scaling if/when the player base grows these distinctions should become more important and not less. I know from watching /100 that people groan when Eve Online comes up, but there are serious lessons to be learned there. Pick what they did right and scrap what they did wrong. Forcing a distinct difference between areas is one of the things they totally did right. And their "universe" is way bigger than the size of the one here -- yet it's still very manageable and clear where you are playing at all times.
To make a "universal mission board" I think is a mistake. It would probably be great for folks who have been playing for years who know all the ins and outs and the best way to min/max but for the average player I think there is a definite need and fun factor to have a progression where its not obvious "whats coming" so to speak. If you remove all mystery you remove all interest in the long run. Assuming, of course, that the goal to get to those rail guns or Atlas X is clear when the goal is reachable.
I guess what I'm getting at is you need to dangle the carrot, which brings in the subscribers, and then keep that carrot dangling. As soon as the carrot is no longer an incentive you lose a subscriber. So, in my opinion, it's a huge mistake to give up everything up front. Let some of those missions be exclusive to folks who put the time in and let the rewards be exclusive to them. That way you cover their carrot and the carrot of the new folks to get to that place at the same time.
Anyway this quickly became a wall of text. The thoughts just kind of poured out when I started thinking about it, so kudos if you got this far. These are pretty much my insights as a brand spanking new player who is having a boatload of fun right now (minus the ion storms which deserves a whole post by itself!).
So I hope you find my viewpoint useful even if you don't agree. This game really needs way more exposure! I can't believe I never heard of it until recently! Its way too addictive to be legal. ;)
The way it is now, missions are pretty clearly tied to stations (except the hive skirmishes) and you are planning to untie all missions from stations proper. At first glance this seems like a really good idea. And here's the rub. I think that sort of interface might remove any sense of discovery and separation of "areas". As an example, for me as a new player, the big fun really hit when I finally left the the safe zone of my faction and entered gray space and found all these new factions which offered different things.
(Sort of related, this is what caused me to have to refer to the wiki to continue as posted here: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/19453 )
If you can pick up missions anywhere you dilute that distinction of space "territories." I think those distinctions are important. They are, maybe, not so much right now because space is relatively small in VO and the player base is very small. But in terms of scaling if/when the player base grows these distinctions should become more important and not less. I know from watching /100 that people groan when Eve Online comes up, but there are serious lessons to be learned there. Pick what they did right and scrap what they did wrong. Forcing a distinct difference between areas is one of the things they totally did right. And their "universe" is way bigger than the size of the one here -- yet it's still very manageable and clear where you are playing at all times.
To make a "universal mission board" I think is a mistake. It would probably be great for folks who have been playing for years who know all the ins and outs and the best way to min/max but for the average player I think there is a definite need and fun factor to have a progression where its not obvious "whats coming" so to speak. If you remove all mystery you remove all interest in the long run. Assuming, of course, that the goal to get to those rail guns or Atlas X is clear when the goal is reachable.
I guess what I'm getting at is you need to dangle the carrot, which brings in the subscribers, and then keep that carrot dangling. As soon as the carrot is no longer an incentive you lose a subscriber. So, in my opinion, it's a huge mistake to give up everything up front. Let some of those missions be exclusive to folks who put the time in and let the rewards be exclusive to them. That way you cover their carrot and the carrot of the new folks to get to that place at the same time.
Anyway this quickly became a wall of text. The thoughts just kind of poured out when I started thinking about it, so kudos if you got this far. These are pretty much my insights as a brand spanking new player who is having a boatload of fun right now (minus the ion storms which deserves a whole post by itself!).
So I hope you find my viewpoint useful even if you don't agree. This game really needs way more exposure! I can't believe I never heard of it until recently! Its way too addictive to be legal. ;)
Hi ,
A universal missionboard would be, indeed, a mistake imo but restrecting it to atleast, a faction's space, would make it quite better. Just think of the game's communication interface which makes evryone able to talk to each others (even stations' NPCs talk about it when giving a PDA's mission, so i assume it's a part of both the gameplay and the storyline).
A variant could be a 'relay' in evry station which interact with your PDA wherever you are in your home faction's space. You would still need to get to this station, at least for 'secret' missions. On the other side, minning or simple trading missions could be communicated anywhere in that 'home faction's deep space'. Could even make pirating funnier if those communications could be intercepted :P.
Anyways, im happy to see that the game is going to evolve, even if it brings some mistakes it will never be too late to correct them.
A universal missionboard would be, indeed, a mistake imo but restrecting it to atleast, a faction's space, would make it quite better. Just think of the game's communication interface which makes evryone able to talk to each others (even stations' NPCs talk about it when giving a PDA's mission, so i assume it's a part of both the gameplay and the storyline).
A variant could be a 'relay' in evry station which interact with your PDA wherever you are in your home faction's space. You would still need to get to this station, at least for 'secret' missions. On the other side, minning or simple trading missions could be communicated anywhere in that 'home faction's deep space'. Could even make pirating funnier if those communications could be intercepted :P.
Anyways, im happy to see that the game is going to evolve, even if it brings some mistakes it will never be too late to correct them.
Could only list missions at stations that have already been visited.
I really like the idea of a universal mission board.
Here's the fundamental issue: Awareness of Game Content.
Having "exploration" be a factor that pushes people to seek out "new missions" in different areas of the galaxy was always brought up as a counter to the universal interface, and I get it.
However, we have long suffered from a problem of newer players not being able to find game content. Basically, VO requires a patient sort who will hunt around to find something they want. It's improved since we at least have missions telling people where to go to find.. other missions, but it's poor at best (and still fails to mention a lot of other game content that comes at higher levels).
Additionally, the player-driven mission system I mentioned earlier will effectively require this sort of thing. Otherwise people will not be aware of the mission postings, and they'll languish in some peculiar corner of the universe until someone happens to visit (or, instead, all of them being filled by NPCs, because players never take them). People aren't following carrots, they're getting bored really quickly and asking "what is it I'm supposed to be doing?" on 100. For every one who asks this (and there are a lot), 10-20 probably log off without doing so. We burn through about 100 newbies a day.
Factional requirements and other fundamentals will still apply in this system. Itani people will not be seeing Serco missions, and visa versa.
This has nothing to do with any recent PCC changes, and pre-dates the entire concept of the PCC.
There is also no reason that it has to be an "all-or-nothing" approach. Basically, a newbie starting out under the newer three-tiered approach (newbie sector, capitol system, then nation space.. before being allowed "out").. would be exposed to progressively larger fields of mission availability. Ie, they see some demonstration missions in a sector, then they gain access to all missions in the system, then eventually all missions within their nation.
In addition, these missions will basically be posted only to those who fit the parameters desired of the entity offering the mission (exactly as it is now). So, it would be entirely logical to have an "introduction" process with other factions. Ie, they have to get to know you.. perhaps you fly out to their space and run a few baseline missions for them, before they start including you in their "people ok for missions" list, and you start seeing their postings globally. This includes both an evolving process as well as the eventual result of global mission accessibility.
Finally, with player stations (as with "player missions", mentioned above).. it's really a requirement. I don't know exactly how player-owned stations are going to play out. Perhaps we'll have a few, perhaps we'll be inundated.. most likely the latter (at least for awhile). But will people visit all these little stations off in the corner of some random sector? No, not likely. And the entire Manufacturing system is going to be based on people needing to deliver raw materials or goods to various stations to allow them to produce.. which would be optimal if it's possible when the player owning the station is offline. Ie, they post the mission, posting a laundry list of ores and minerals, tell their manufacturing gear to "produce as soon as requirements are filled", and then can log off to attend to real life. Then maybe a day or two later they get an optional email notice saying "Hey, your stuff has been manufactured!", and can then log back on to post a mission asking if someone would like to trade it for them to some other area with higher demand (or carry it there themselves, etc). Think of it as a trading endgame.. managing entire fleets of vessels, with participation of both player characters and NPCs.
Anyway, all this sort of stuff requires people to be *aware* that missions are out there and new. I mean, as it is right now, I can post a PCC mission and only a handful of people will realize it over a week. We need much faster and broader notification to allow some of these newer gameplay types to evolve.
Having "exploration" be a factor that pushes people to seek out "new missions" in different areas of the galaxy was always brought up as a counter to the universal interface, and I get it.
However, we have long suffered from a problem of newer players not being able to find game content. Basically, VO requires a patient sort who will hunt around to find something they want. It's improved since we at least have missions telling people where to go to find.. other missions, but it's poor at best (and still fails to mention a lot of other game content that comes at higher levels).
Additionally, the player-driven mission system I mentioned earlier will effectively require this sort of thing. Otherwise people will not be aware of the mission postings, and they'll languish in some peculiar corner of the universe until someone happens to visit (or, instead, all of them being filled by NPCs, because players never take them). People aren't following carrots, they're getting bored really quickly and asking "what is it I'm supposed to be doing?" on 100. For every one who asks this (and there are a lot), 10-20 probably log off without doing so. We burn through about 100 newbies a day.
Factional requirements and other fundamentals will still apply in this system. Itani people will not be seeing Serco missions, and visa versa.
This has nothing to do with any recent PCC changes, and pre-dates the entire concept of the PCC.
There is also no reason that it has to be an "all-or-nothing" approach. Basically, a newbie starting out under the newer three-tiered approach (newbie sector, capitol system, then nation space.. before being allowed "out").. would be exposed to progressively larger fields of mission availability. Ie, they see some demonstration missions in a sector, then they gain access to all missions in the system, then eventually all missions within their nation.
In addition, these missions will basically be posted only to those who fit the parameters desired of the entity offering the mission (exactly as it is now). So, it would be entirely logical to have an "introduction" process with other factions. Ie, they have to get to know you.. perhaps you fly out to their space and run a few baseline missions for them, before they start including you in their "people ok for missions" list, and you start seeing their postings globally. This includes both an evolving process as well as the eventual result of global mission accessibility.
Finally, with player stations (as with "player missions", mentioned above).. it's really a requirement. I don't know exactly how player-owned stations are going to play out. Perhaps we'll have a few, perhaps we'll be inundated.. most likely the latter (at least for awhile). But will people visit all these little stations off in the corner of some random sector? No, not likely. And the entire Manufacturing system is going to be based on people needing to deliver raw materials or goods to various stations to allow them to produce.. which would be optimal if it's possible when the player owning the station is offline. Ie, they post the mission, posting a laundry list of ores and minerals, tell their manufacturing gear to "produce as soon as requirements are filled", and then can log off to attend to real life. Then maybe a day or two later they get an optional email notice saying "Hey, your stuff has been manufactured!", and can then log back on to post a mission asking if someone would like to trade it for them to some other area with higher demand (or carry it there themselves, etc). Think of it as a trading endgame.. managing entire fleets of vessels, with participation of both player characters and NPCs.
Anyway, all this sort of stuff requires people to be *aware* that missions are out there and new. I mean, as it is right now, I can post a PCC mission and only a handful of people will realize it over a week. We need much faster and broader notification to allow some of these newer gameplay types to evolve.
So... the new universal interface is going to let you see unique and interesting content out there. As long as a player will be able to find it naturally without knowing what he's looking for, as long as it doesn't get burried amidst for example the common missions that are available at every station... then I think this would be great. I mean, you can give players the tools to find new content, but that's not exactly the same as giving them direction, or actively breadcrumbing/carroting them, as you touched on. As derisive as these terms sound, this is huge for my game experience to prevent me from becoming bored. I need a game to continually give me challenges that I can routinely conquer. If I have to make up my own challenges for myself, I don't feel as in touch with the game, I don't feel like the game is telling me "you're doing a good job, keep it up". I know, I'm so shallow aren't I?
In regards to what the player "initially sees": we will definitely need to spend some effort on the "defaults" of a universal interface. Prioritizing things like distance (locality) and new mission postings come to mind, but it would all have to be tested and tinkered-with to come up with a reasonable result. Even building a "preferences" picture of the player, based on their past mission history, and using that to help prioritize is a possibility (a-la, say, Amazon). I don't really know the specifics of how the total mechanism should work, but I am confident that there is a vision that will fulfill our needs, and we'll work towards it.
On more general subjects: I think there are merits to both bread-crumbing as well as wide-banding, and we will attempt to make use of each in turn. I understand that the perception of the mission system is based on its current state, as one of the few (or only) sources of content that is region-specific.
The intended goal of the system is much broader, as I mentioned previously. But this does not rule out other channels of region-specific content.
For instance, the "Bar" was initially created for exactly this purpose. Allowing a forum in which a player may interact with PC or NPC characters and gain local tips, information, missions, or other special localized content. NPCs that come and go, show up only at special times, offer special missions, and so on.. would all be aspects of this. This works as a more interesting "breadcrumb" delivery method than the general mission system (I think), as it involves more characterization and immersive story properties. We also used to have actual persistent NPCs that would give out content of various sorts (the Marshals were put in place to give entry to the "bounty hunter" system, which had to be yanked for money-hole reasons, but will be revived before long). Specialized NPCs will also hand out specialized missions, and so on. I foresee great potential for many different ways of driving users to discover new "breadcrumb" gameplay.
But, I also understand that the current mission system is seen as the main mechanic for this. The best I can simply put it is: expansion and evolution to allow us to improve on all fronts. The universal mission system really will be required for some of our gameplay paths, but I definitely do not think this will negate other philosophically-different progression styles.. only cause them to evolve into new forms.
On more general subjects: I think there are merits to both bread-crumbing as well as wide-banding, and we will attempt to make use of each in turn. I understand that the perception of the mission system is based on its current state, as one of the few (or only) sources of content that is region-specific.
The intended goal of the system is much broader, as I mentioned previously. But this does not rule out other channels of region-specific content.
For instance, the "Bar" was initially created for exactly this purpose. Allowing a forum in which a player may interact with PC or NPC characters and gain local tips, information, missions, or other special localized content. NPCs that come and go, show up only at special times, offer special missions, and so on.. would all be aspects of this. This works as a more interesting "breadcrumb" delivery method than the general mission system (I think), as it involves more characterization and immersive story properties. We also used to have actual persistent NPCs that would give out content of various sorts (the Marshals were put in place to give entry to the "bounty hunter" system, which had to be yanked for money-hole reasons, but will be revived before long). Specialized NPCs will also hand out specialized missions, and so on. I foresee great potential for many different ways of driving users to discover new "breadcrumb" gameplay.
But, I also understand that the current mission system is seen as the main mechanic for this. The best I can simply put it is: expansion and evolution to allow us to improve on all fronts. The universal mission system really will be required for some of our gameplay paths, but I definitely do not think this will negate other philosophically-different progression styles.. only cause them to evolve into new forms.
For the time being we could group missions together and list an expanding branch called 'hive missions', 'escort missions' and the like. That is currently entirely doable.