Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 81
03-16-2011, 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThetaNine
Look, let's make this simple: Don't use canon characters in any stories you create.

'nuff said
That's not what Stormy told us or what the EULA said.

It can't look like an actor or an attempt to resemble an actor.

But Q can show up looking like a Targ, for example.

And if Carol Marcus shows up as a generic "oldest woman you can make in the character creator", that's not an actor likeness.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 82
05-09-2011, 09:28 AM
I would suggest players, or testers try creating before they rip a part someones hard work. I've created some missions and read some reviews playing other missions that are outright hurtfull and mean, that would not be if the person spent any time in foundry. I know this because all you have to do to find a mission created by a player is type in their @ name and it will bring up all missions created by that individual. I have searched for player content by some of the players with the harshest reviews, and find nothing. I did a mission that took a week to complete and it still needed massive edits in a revision. Its not an easy process by any means, and most of us are still very much learning as we go.

Next time you submit a review on a USG you might want to understand what it is you are reviewing..

I will remind everyone that submits a review that people spend their own time on these missions, they are not getting paid by Cryptc or work for Cryptic, we do it because we love the game and want new fresh content.

Most of the missions I've played are very good considering they are created by Amatures, even the worst of the USG missions do not deserve the harsh ratings, I've yet to play a USG that was anything less than three stars.

With this said I as a USG publisher very much appreciate constructive feedback and learn a lot about my missions from the people that play them, things I would never see as the publisher, please continue this but keep it civil and real!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 83
05-09-2011, 03:39 PM
*bonks it with a shovel* Burying it in the back yard.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 84
05-09-2011, 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBrendan View Post
Next time you submit a review on a USG you might want to understand what it is you are reviewing..
Although it is a sentiment I can appreciate, I don't think that, for example, movie critics are required to have directed or produced a movie before they write their reviews. I'm sure that there are some things in UGC missions that are bugged, which is no fault of the author - but someone playing the mission will expect the author to have played through and changed buggy things. That might not be the main issue, however; if the issue is people rating things based on content and story, I don't have a problem with anyone ripping missions apart.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 85
07-03-2011, 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felderburg View Post
Although it is a sentiment I can appreciate, I don't think that, for example, movie critics are required to have directed or produced a movie before they write their reviews. I'm sure that there are some things in UGC missions that are bugged, which is no fault of the author - but someone playing the mission will expect the author to have played through and changed buggy things. That might not be the main issue, however; if the issue is people rating things based on content and story, I don't have a problem with anyone ripping missions apart.
I agree with you about not having to have created missions in order to review content. That would be silly. I also agree with you about ripping a mission apart. That is up to the individual reviewer and how they want to handle it. I try to submit a review that may help the author improve the mission. In the end I feel that will improve UGC missions and make the game better for everyone.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 86
01-19-2012, 07:39 AM
I did ask a solicitor friend about the image rights issue as I want to make a TNG mission and apparently if you fervently claim no rights to the characters or related material and especially helpful if you cannot financially benefit, you are allowed to "PARODY" characters in the game under Fair Use as a creator, you are using Star Trek as a medium so with so many tools already given to create Star Trek like missions, giving your favorite character a look that "REMINDS" you of the actor is legally okay, just not a blatant copy and the depiction must be in a good light, so not anything to depict them in a bad light (unless they are a baddy of coarse).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 87
01-19-2012, 07:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-P
I did ask a solicitor friend about the image rights issue as I want to make a TNG mission and apparently if you fervently claim no rights to the characters or related material and especially helpful if you cannot financially benefit, you are allowed to "PARODY" characters in the game under Fair Use as a creator, you are using Star Trek as a medium so with so many tools already given to create Star Trek like missions, giving your favorite character a look that "REMINDS" you of the actor is legally okay, just not a blatant copy and the depiction must be in a good light, so not anything to depict them in a bad light (unless they are a baddy of coarse).
That may work in general law, and I hope it works in the game as well, but you have to remember: when you use the Foundry, you are also agreeing to a specific set of rules, that may not include parodies (although it's been a LONG time since I've read the Foundry's terms of use).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 88
02-03-2012, 04:31 AM
To be honest I simply and utterly LOVE the non-canon character thing!

Coming from Fantasy and Shooter toolsets I was constantly confronted with "I'm going to create a remake/prequel/sequel/copy of <insert a well-known AAA game>".....and over time it became nearly unbearable that no one seemed to have ideas of his own.

In the Foundry people have to come up with something more creative than a lame replay of their favourite ST episode - and obviously a lot allready did. I appreaciate it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Greetings and Salutations;

I am known as Soleta, of 12th Fleet's Section 31 Division;

I'm a Silver player and although I've only been playing the game for about four (4) month's and in that time I've met some very Impressive and Important people! I'm enjoying the People involved in the foundry more than the game itself. I have yet to complete a faction feature episode :-), anyway over the last few weeks I've begun to see many of our visions and collaborations within the foundry community originating from these chance meetings become reality.
================================================== ================================================== ===============================

I would like to propose discussion on a Foundry rating System, I have taken much of what I've learned in my journey's through foundry missions and the forum's and would like your thoughts on the following.

The Cryptic Star rating System would split into two (2) levels of a three (3) star rating system. This is due to a growing void in the current star rating system to give a valid foundation to new Foundry authors when compared and measured against Experienced Founders. In this rating system an experienced Founder should never get a rating below Three (3), unless the work was totally below experienced community expectations. and a new beginning Founder would get a fair rating of Two (2), Unless the work was totally above average beginner or experimental level work. In this system if a beginner rates a 5 Star with their mission they will gain and deserve community celebrity status of "Accolade - Ascended". In this same system if a veteran rates a 2 Star with their mission they will gain and deserve community "Outcast" status, until they redeem themselves to a Four (4) star status or better, and maintain this level with their next two (2) or three (3) missions.

3 Stars is the middle ground it is an average rating for Level Two and above average for level one. Three missions at this rating for a 4 or 5 star rating Founder constitutes a falling from grace ("Accolade - Descended"). While three missions at this rating for a 1 or 2 star rating Apprentice constitutes a level 2 rating ("Accolade - Ascended").

Level One (Apprentice):
Rating system for Beginners, Average Founders and Daily missions (I like to leave room for growth)
No Star = Didn't Rate the story needs develop work, Only published to Flesh-out the story in real play.
1 Star = Good Effort: Needs work, Author needs to spend more time on Writing Techniques and/or Foundry Skills.
2 Stars = Very Good: well done could use more Depth of story and/or Foundry content (Actually 3 Stars for this level of rating)


Level Two (Founder):
Rating system for Experienced and Professional Founders(These Founders have a few published missions, are seriously into the Foundry as the life blood of the game and are working on Epic status).
3 Stars = Average: Was fun and entertaining but nothing Unique from the normal, or not ranking as Epic or Memorable within the STO Foundry Canon.
4 Stars = Excellent: Above average Story and Content, Author has a good storyline and foundry Skills.
5 Stars = Epic: Professional work, a Developer Level mission. Characters of Foundry mission are an important part of the story, and may even transcend the mission to become a memorable and popular figure within the STO Foundry canon.(Actually 3 Stars for this level of rating).

So in this rating System you actually have Six (6) Status's of Foundry Authors.
1 Apprentice (1 & 2 Stars)
2 Outcast (Fallen Founder)
3 Accolade (3 Stars)
3D - (Accolade - Descended)
3A - (Accolade - Ascended)
4 Founder (4 & 5 Stars)

NOTE 1: In this rating system only a Accolade or Founder, meaning only actual Foundry experienced Authors would be able to rate another Accolade or Founder below 3 stars and have it register as a statistic of the Mission/Author. All others will just register as Mission feedback, (If they leave a comment), rather than a Mission review.

NOTE 2: STO Foundry Canon = The growth of Stories and Characters developed by Star trek online Founders that have become memorable and popular within the Star trek Online Community, and has been set as part of the Star Trek online Community Canon.

this Ranking system can even evolve into a new aspect of In-Game Ranking and Title. I'd rather have a "Founder" title in my name in-game than "Diplomat" or Accolade lets people know I'm a Foundry Author.


Everyone should remember the Foundry is still in Beta and we all have a chance to mold it into the tool we want it to become.

Your Thoughts and ideals. Non Foundry authors negative Opinions will be ignored, as unknowledgeable babble.

I have stepped from the Shadows and revealed myself to you:

Solo - The Shadow Hunter
Live Long and Prosper
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 883
# 90
08-31-2012, 04:14 PM
Are there any reviewer "teams" who review STF- or fleet-style missions meant for multiple players? If not, how does the review process work for such team missions?
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:45 PM.