I wonder if Cryptic will give authors the power to remove "user reviews" from a mission.

It would also be nice to "opt out" of mission reviews. When you get something like "Map design is basic"... well its the Foundry... you cannot do massive amounts of customization so its a bit stupid to get that comment. Everything in the foundry is regulated to be stuck to Cryptic based maps, you cannot even make custom interior maps and the object placing system is difficult to see without having to go preview the mission every five minutes.

Pedantic little comments made for the sake of looking for something "wrong" is annoying and subjective. There are too many trolls in this game to actually consider doing something for serious critical appraisal.

"Disjointed Plot", Guess Cryptic would know all about that then, wouldn't they.

It might be a better idea to have a "Submit Review to GM" button instead, for those comments like "wtf" and "I WANTZ MOAR BATTLEZ" that really don't reflect your Foundry missions.

For example: I released a testing version of a mission I last worked on two months ago. I've gotten a 1-star review for "Really should list it as a Ground Only match" (that was by a user named Fredenburg - if you're seeing this, remember my mission is in the alpha stage, it's not even halfway done yet).

There should also be a "clean slate" button for reviews - some people re-release their missions to cover up the old mistakes, but still suffer from low reviews.

My main comment was it was funny having a Cryptic Mod telling me I had a "disjointed plot" and it "didn't feel like Undine at all"... I was so biting my tongue and almost said "Did you even watch "In The Flesh" (Voyager: Season 5) and "Well, Cryptic would be the expert on disjointed plots, wouldn't they?"

Insulting comments just to be pedantic and insulting are just childish, especially coming from one of the leaders of this community.

Not the first time I've seen this... and I am not the first person this kind of thing has happened to. It was just another example of what I was saying beforehand. If its not "Cryptic-timeline", they are not interested.

First off let me say that the person you're talking about, beyond being a Community Moderator, isn't affiliated with Cryptic or PWE as he states in his sig.

Secondly I attempted a playthrough of your mission the other night, your plot meanders and is inconsistent within itself. A prime example is that you start by referring to the Undine as Species 8472 then seemingly randomly switch to Undine halfway through the mission.

Also on your comment of you can't create detailed maps in the Foundry, I direct you too Keeping up with the J'Sens by Castmodean, it's a spotlighted mission making it easier for you to find.

The maps entire 3 indoor sections onboard the Freighter were made by hand by Castmodean and are incredibly detailed and well done even if the lack of map makes it difficult to see how to get to your objectives.

Try reading the tutorials on StarbaseUGC.com about making custom interiors if you want to find out how these are done.

The hardest thing for any creator to accept is the awareness that they aren't brilliant.

But I do support the idea of being able to send the hate spam to a GM just because I don't like that sort of player and would like to see them even more miserable.

It's one thing to be able to report abuse to a mod.

Another thing entirely to allow foundry authors to pick and choose which ratings and comments are applied to their work.

The work stands or falls, in this regard, on player feedback. Simply allowing an author to remove the negative feddback means we may as well allow them to write their own reviews and pick their own rating.

First off, can I say that yes, there might be problems, it is a rough draft, doesn't mean it will be perfect straight away, however that is no reason to be so sarcastic and downright rude.

Secondly, I deliberately refer to the Undine as Species 8472 because the Undine is a fan made name and not the actual name of the species. I'm sorry if you don't like that but I've never considered expanded universe canon.

Like I said, that mission was a rough draft that was going to get continually polished. A mod basically saying "this is a pile of s***"... effectively damns me from even getting good reviews on the mission once it has been improved. I only have a limited period of time to work on them during the day because I work.

So basically, what is the point of doing the foundry if people are just going to slag things off not because of the mission but because they don't like you. I could quite easily go on a Captain Revo mission and pick the story apart.

First off I never said I didn't like your referring to them as Species 8472, personally I think Undine is a weak name as well, the problem is that how you refer to them through the mission is inconsistent between dialogues, also it's entirely possible for you to rename the Undine mobs to Species 8472 making it even more consistent.

Secondly we're not slagging you off, we're trying to help you improve as an author, yes I understand that a review of "disjointed plot" might not be the most helpful thing in the world, but I'm positive that had you approached Syberghost and asked why he felt it was disjointed then he'd have been happy to try and point out why he felt it was disjointed.

However instead of asking this you came onto the forums and started to rant about how insulting he was and then started to rant about how he's forever damned you from receiving positive reviews. (Seriously, just add an updated on <date> into the description and most people will ignore reviews prior to that date.)

Unfortunately all I'm getting from you is that you don't want to improve and feel your missions were absolutely perfect how they were. If that is the case then your free to continue as you please.

If you want to improve, follow the advice in my "Joining the Shadowy Author Cabal" thread and try sending PMs to people who leave short bad reviews on how they feel your mission can be improved. You'll be surprised how much it can help.

I recall that the OP said this in another thread :


I'm sorry that he feels that way. Receiving criticism from others can be difficult, but it can be extremely useful in making one a better author. Every author gets negative reviews. I hope Warbird hangs in there and can use those criticisms instead of being discouraged by them. Many people on the internet actually want to help and give good advice, and mistaking that for being elitist would be a shame.

In essence, what the OP is suggesting is that only positive reviews be allowed. It's a laughable idea, but not terribly surprising given the source. Good authors, who have properly proofed their missions, will garner fewer negative reviews. Community reviews are a tool, for both mission authors and the gaming community. Use the comments and ratings to improve your mission construction. I am a regular Foundry player and frequent tipper. I always leave feedbackand it is always fair and constructive. I do this as a service to both the author and the STO community. Good authors and good missions deserve to be rated and rewarded. However, bad authors and bad missions deserve to be identified and constructively critiqued to improve the project as a whole and spare the community from junk.