Armada II Files - Submissions -1 reply

Please wait...

Flash525

The Carbon Comrade

50 XP

14th July 2004

0 Uploads

15,103 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

[color=black]POTD, Files and News![/color] [color=black]I[/color][color=black]'ll start with POTD's - Why are there so many rubbish ones around? - Some people, (not all, but some) post them up and when there image is shown they say 'I didn't think it would get posted' - Then why the hell submit it? - If it’s that rubbish then why submit it in the first place.[/color] [color=black]Then again, Surely the person who validates POTD's has a 'general idea' of what the A2 community wants - When your viewing the submissions do you simply not delete the ones that aren't all that good? - It very much seems that way![/color] [color=black]Maybe some admin could have the rating as 0 - 10 instead of 1 - 10 (for certain images).[/color] [color=black]Secondly, Files, Firstly why post a File without a picture, and secondly why post ships / stations with such high poly counts!? - I know the poly count issue has been mentioned before, but it is right to be mentioned. Simple - Whoever validates the file, check the Polly's first (give it a limit... - if its over that limit then simply don't upload it for downloading - some files could do with removing as they are so low - or, if this isn't the case, have a separate area of the website with high poly models only)?[/color] [color=black]Getting to the news, I believe that some people need to use a dictionary before they post news! If the news is that important, and you want people to take that much notice does it not hurt to run it through with a spell checker first?[/color] [color=black]Sorry if this seems like its being directed at anyone, but its something to be thought about.[/color]

  • No Rubbish, Repeated, Non-A2related POTD Images
  • No Files over a certain count (up to the community to decide) - Also must include in-game shot (or image of some kind that relates to file)
  • Check Spelling



The Joelteon7

The cake is a lie.There is no cake.

50 XP

13th November 2004

0 Uploads

3,926 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

Hmmm, I would actually agree with you on the poly count idea, maybe as a suggestion to admins is to categorise each model into a category: 0-1000 = low, 1001 - 2000 = mdeium and 2001 + = High?




Elrond1982

Good to be back

50 XP

19th October 2004

0 Uploads

1,487 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

I agree with this altogether. A lot of mispellings, high poly models, bad potds (two of the same in a row).




simie

Hmm...

50 XP

5th March 2005

0 Uploads

77 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

I definatly agree with the potd idea




Achilles

I stole fire from the lighter!

50 XP

13th January 2003

0 Uploads

1,596 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

hmm no I think Higher poly models should be available, like 2500 plus and not in a separate area, but a poly count on each submission should be made, and I dont think it is up to file posters to do so, same with file screenshots.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

356,406 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,654 Posts

779 Threads

#6 13 years ago
SupaStarAsh[color=black]I[/color][color=black]'ll start with POTD's - Why are there so many rubbish ones around? - Some people, (not all, but some) post them up and when there image is shown they say 'I didn't think it would get posted' - Then why the hell submit it? - If it’s that rubbish then why submit it in the first place.[/color] [color=black]Then again, Surely the person who validates POTD's has a 'general idea' of what the A2 community wants - When your viewing the submissions do you simply not delete the ones that aren't all that good? - It very much seems that way!

[/color] If you think about it, it makes sense. There would be no point having a rating system if they only put up works of art, would there? You have to have the bad to appreciate the good! Besides, one person's idea of a good PotD might be completely different from another person's. I've thought pictures are great when everyone else has been saying how crap they are, and vice-versa. You could end up with a PotD submitter who likes modern art and has a fetish for nails submitting only the crappiest ones he/she can find because he/she actually thinks they are good. They have to try and remain unbiased when doing this -- though, I think there are limits. For instance, I doubt they'd bother uploading a picture which just had... space... and nothing else... [color=black]

Secondly, Files, Firstly why post a File without a picture

[/color] That gets on my nerves too. Maybe they just can't be bothered? Maybe they want people to download it and see for themselves, rather than just looking at a screeny and deciding from that? I know I've done that once or twice -- rated and even commented on a ship I haven't downloaded. Although I'm even less inclined to download a ship with no picture at all, as I can't see how worthwhile it is. I don't think that it should be omitted from being uploaded just for that, though -- it's their problem if nobody downloads it, after all. [color=black][/color] [color=black]

and secondly why post ships / stations with such high poly counts!? - I know the poly count issue has been mentioned before, but it is right to be mentioned. Simple - Whoever validates the file, check the Polly's first (give it a limit... - if its over that limit then simply don't upload it for downloading - some files could do with removing as they are so low - or, if this isn't the case, have a separate area of the website with high poly models only)?

[/color] Some of us have computers powerful enough to process higher-poly models. Some of us lack the power to process even the stock models. It's all relative, and people may get higher-spec computers in the future and want to download high-poly models, only to find that they were never uploaded. I think that rather than splitting them up or simply not uploading them in the first place, the reviews themselves should just incorporate useful information like polycounts so that people can make up their own minds as to whether they can run it or not. If they can't get a hold of those (and I don't expect reviewers to dismantle the models and figure it out for themselves -- they're only volunteers and they work hard enough as it is), they could post the basic system specs they tested it on, and the performance they had, so people would have a basic idea of how demanding a particular ship is. I've always been of the opinion that reviews across the board could use some reform. I'd split them into two parts -- an objective, bullet-pointed summary of all the mod's features (including useful info such as polycount, if possible/applicable), and below that the subjective opinions of the reviewer responsible for it. There's only so much information you can get from 'OMG I love this mod you should DOWNLOAD IT NOW!', if you ask me. [color=black]

Getting to the news, I believe that some people need to use a dictionary before they post news! If the news is that important, and you want people to take that much notice does it not hurt to run it through with a spell checker first?

[/color] Yes, I agree. This is a corporate website with thousands of users, a little more effort should go into these sorts of things. And not just the news, either. I've noticed some reviews which could use a little sprucing up in the spelling/grammar/formatting areas -- and the staff write those. I'm sure my post has many grammatical errors, so I'm obviously not after perfection. But for things going up on a website, it couldn't hurt to just run them through a spell checker like MS Word or Google toolbar firsthand just to get the basic typos out of the way.




Elrond1982

Good to be back

50 XP

19th October 2004

0 Uploads

1,487 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

The potd idea is the best. And the high-med-low poly count downloads idea is also something to definitely consider.

New File Submission rules could be implemented, for example: 1) Game that the mod is compatible with (Armada 1, Armada 2, or both). 2) Name of Mod/ship/whatever. 3) If there is a model in the mod, indicate the poly count. 4) Screenshot if one is applicable (for some things, screenshots may not be possible - for instance, a file that has a special weapons that disables an enemy ship's systems may not have a screenshot(s) if there is no weapon sprite that it uses). 5) When submitting a file, making sure that it hasn't been done before and resubmitted, as this is the worst thing possible. 6) Some mods are odf mods that modify something small. For example, some odf mods can just have a simple readme tutorial that tells someone how to do it - that would be placed in a tutorial section. For example, if a mod is just an odf file that, I don't know, adds the command "disableShieldsOnTransport = 1", then there could instead just be a simple tutorial placed in the mod's readme file that says, "hey, put this command in a ship or station's odf file to make it so that the shields don't go down on transport." And that would be put in the tutorial section since it would just be an odf enhancement. Though there are some odf enhancements/modifications that are needed if, say, someone submits a ship with an odf file that doesn't quite work out right, and then they submit an update patch for that odf. Then it would be in the ODF modification section. 7) * If the submission is to the potd archive, then I fully agree with SSA. And when someone submits a picture and then when it goes up for potd, they shouldn't say, 'ouch, it got posted - omg, not good!' Grr. 8) * If the submission is a news item, then yeah, the spelling should be at least possible to read through. If it's possible to clean up the spelling errors, then the news poster would edit that spelling. I've done that before when submitting news items. One thing I can't stand, eventhough it's not a capital offense, is when there is NO CAPITALIZATION OR PUNCTUATION! Some news I've submitted had these errors and it was a little - weird - to have to try to find where a sentence begins and ends. If a news item is way too messed up, then an email is sent to the sender of the original news item to correct their many errors in the news item, then resubmitted (like a do-over). I don't know what else - there's more definitely, but that's pretty much the things that should be followed. The poly count thing may be split into sub-categories - 0 to 1000 polies (0? actually I don't think that's possible at all unless it's just a model that has some joints that specify sprites or something like that) is placed in the low-poly section, 1001 to 2000 is in the medium, and so on. Pretty much what Jolt said. :) All-in-all, I agree with everything about what SSA said. I've been guilty of perhaps one or two of those violations (such as in the potd, I said one time, "oh it got put up" and in posting a file I was unable one time to post a screenshot, so none was posted for a day or so).




simie

Hmm...

50 XP

5th March 2005

0 Uploads

77 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago
Elrond1982 6) Some mods are odf mods that modify something small. For example, some odf mods can just have a simple readme tutorial that tells someone how to do it - that would be placed in a tutorial section. For example, if a mod is just an odf file that, I don't know, adds the command "disableShieldsOnTransport = 1", then there could instead just be a simple tutorial placed in the mod's readme file that says, "hey, put this command in a ship or station's odf file to make it so that the shields don't go down on transport." And that would be put in the tutorial section since it would just be an odf enhancement. Though there are some odf enhancements/modifications that are needed if, say, someone submits a ship with an odf file that doesn't quite work out right, and then they submit an update patch for that odf. Then it would be in the ODF modification section.

Does that command acctually work?:confused:




simie

Hmm...

50 XP

5th March 2005

0 Uploads

77 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago
simie
elrond19826) Some mods are odf mods that modify something small. For example, some odf mods can just have a simple readme tutorial that tells someone how to do it - that would be placed in a tutorial section. For example, if a mod is just an odf file that, I don't know, adds the command "disableShieldsOnTransport = 1", then there could instead just be a simple tutorial placed in the mod's readme file that says, "hey, put this command in a ship or station's odf file to make it so that the shields don't go down on transport." And that would be put in the tutorial section since it would just be an odf enhancement. Though there are some odf enhancements/modifications that are needed if, say, someone submits a ship with an odf file that doesn't quite work out right, and then they submit an update patch for that odf. Then it would be in the ODF modification section.
Does that command acctually work?confusedx.gif

well does it?




Elrond1982

Good to be back

50 XP

19th October 2004

0 Uploads

1,487 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

Yeah it does. Check it out. Put that command in any ship or station's odf file and they will transport without losing shields.

disableShieldsOnTransport = 1