Something to consider when thinking of ideas

[xx7xx]

Basically, I read tons and tons of ideas that people come up with, and most of them are complete crap. Why? Because they are too derivative, make something in the game obsolete, or duplicate an existing items functionality.

The notable exception to this is the bulk of Hayoo's work, but even then some of it IMO (medevac units) isn't worth exploring because of a cost/benefit issue within the game's design framework. I.e. why would you need a medic to hassle with a medevac unit when it would be more effective time wise to just respawn?

Anyway, not to get bogged down with specific examples, we need to examine how an idea would integrate into the existing gameplay framework and think about how it will add a new and unique feature to the game without making any of the above mistakes.

If your idea does duplicate an existing item, or make it obsolete, then maybe we need to consider replacing or modifying the existing item, but putting in something along side of an existing piece of equipment that varies in function by just a little bit is a huge waste of time and resources IMO.

Furthermore, every effort should be used to try and come up with ideas that require as little resources as possible, while providing the greatest player benefit as possible. Greatest player benefit meaning benefiting the largest amount of players the highest amount of time. These design ideals will lead to designs that will be more likely to be considered by the devs, rather than the typical response of "yeah, that's a great idea, but it's never going to happen".

Can you guys think up some more design guidlines to follow that would help cut down on the redundant and unoriginal ideas?

Examples of weak ideas: bigger/better anything of a particular class (guns, vehicles, etc.), gimmicky equipment (max catapults anyone?), stuff with ridiculous requirements/over complicated (outfit cruisers), specialized vehicles for every little job (aircraft gunships, air superiority fighters, etc.)

IMO it's all about bang for the buck- if you can design one unit, then have it customizable for different roles, or build in multiple features so that it can be used for many roles, then it's going to have a lot more merit than just taking something that is already in the game, modifying it a little and calling it 'new'.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here for the most part, but I still think this needs to be addressed.

So anyway, anyone care to add to this? IMO we should make a sticky with design guidelines. Kind of like a FAQ or seach feature on a forum so that people can check to see if their 'brilliant idea' has already been discussed to death. I.e. if a person reads the design guidelines thread and sees "please don't ask for something that is already in the game, but just a little better or different", then that (hopefully) will cut down on the "omg, we should make an anti-tank aircraft just like the A-10 Thunderbolt II because it's the coolest IRL OMG OMG W1N !!!1111ONEONEONE11".

[Hayoo]

Originally posted by xx7xx

I.e. why would you need a medic to hassle with a medevac unit when it would be more effective time wise to just respawn?

But that's going under the assumption that a newly respawned grunt can simply get their usual equipment from an AMS, but that wouldn't always be the case, as stated in the concept. ;)

Can you guys think up some more design guidlines to follow that would help cut down on the redundant and unoriginal ideas?

While those are good guidelines to think about before making a post, I actually want people to freely express their ideas here, whether they are weak, minor improvements, or otherwise. We've done pretty well so far, nurturing weaker ideas into stronger ones, or toning down the obviously over-the-top stuff through give and take discussion. I'm not averse to combining threads or redirecting redundant ones either. If duplication or outlandish concepts becomes a problem later on as more members sign up, I can update the forum guidelines, but I don't think curbing suggestions is such a good idea at this stage.

I.e. if a person reads the design guidelines thread and sees "please don't ask for something that is already in the game, but just a little better or different", then that (hopefully) will cut down on the "omg, we should make an anti-tank aircraft just like the A-10 Thunderbolt II because it's the coolest IRL OMG OMG W1N !!!1111ONEONEONE11".

I won't tell someone not to ask for improvements on existing assets (as they see them). On the official forums that would probably help, just because of the sheer number of people posting, but Idealab is small enough that design discussions can be more open and forgiving. Naturally, silly posts like the one you exampled will be dealt with accordingly, but telling someone how to post won't be necessary. Top-notch, solid ideas will be placed in an Idea Emporium Gallery all their own for all to see. Ideas that happen to match my personal concepts on PS can be posted on Idealab along side them should the author wish it, but that's entirely up to them.

I believe the Wishlist forum should remain a free-thinking location. We shouldn't try to make every idea suggested presentable to the Devs. We're here to get away from the chaos on the official forums, where good ideas get quickly trounced by whine posts. Here, once an idea is fleshed out well enough, it can be granted special status and displayed appropriately.. :)

edited for clarity

[Cass]

Yes this is nothing ofical if you dont like the idea or think it would be the end of PS just dont post/repond to it talk about the ones you like insteed of the ones you dont. I like the idea of a guid but like Hayoo said it is kinda a open forum.

Now that i think about it by posting this im going agenst one of the things i just said.

[RogueGenesis84]

When i think up idea, i try to follow three rules:

1.Keep it simple, stupid

And not too... you know... unreal. something that would take a shit load to change.


also, what does it add to the game on a tactical level? does it improve the effects of Ambushs? does it make masking the size of your force easier? does it bring the fights away from the bases and out into the field?

I think the one idea that best fights this is the post below..

I would think that it would not kill the devs to put some new CE stuff in, even though i am not a combat eng on any server, i would like to see it.

I have heard people request a deployable bubble like on the AMS, personally, why do you need a bubble when something else can hide you from enemy radar with out given you more graphics and thus more lag in the game?

make it a simply jamming tower, the same design as the motion sensor so you dont have to add in a new model.

the jamming tower cannot be seen through scopes *to make it fair and in a radus a little bigger then the motion sensor will protect you from being seen.


The second would be a trap mine.

The trap mine does not cause any damage to vehicals, nor ground troops, what it does do is make the vehical that comes into contact with it to a complete and total stop.

This would be great for ambushing LLUs and mods, it would have great impact on convoy ambushes, and even tanks would find them annoying.

the only thing is. Combat engs can only lay one trap mine at a time, *other wise, vehicals would go to hell) and also have a very wide area around them where you cannot put another mine. in this way they would not be all other the place, and drivers have to only worry about running into one or 2 of them, not like 5 in a row.


making the Trap mine both stop a vehical and jam its gun would be overpowered... just make it stop the vehical, o, and the vehical can start to gain speed again as soon as the driver steps on the gas, there is no engine failure for like 2 seconds or something, stopping the vehical is enough.

Tanks have really bad start up power, so trap mines are best used against them, something like a harrasar can get through a trap mine with little or no trouble.

I can also see a trap mine being bigger then a normal mine, trap mine would be 3 times as wide as a normal mine, and take up that much more space, so putting one on one side of a road would mean that people would have to avoid that entire side. you can see a trap mine a bit better then a normal mine, chances are, that if you see a trap mine and slow down, you are doing what the owner of the trap mine wants you to do anyway.


I fail to see why the jammer tower is overpowered, perhaps you could tell me why... all it does is mask your postion on radar from enemy forces much the same why a AMS bubble does, expect with out the invisablity thing, they can still SEE you, but you will not show up on radar.

[Redford Blade]

I agree that we should follow some of these guidelines when we are thinking up something we seriously hope to show the Devs, but some concepts are just therapeutic to post about. I don't really expect to see the Sanctuary Fortresses/Cities within the next two years, if ever, but I still enjoy posting my ideas for their designs and decorations.

Also, I would say that if we see a concept that we think would be terrible for Planetside (I would have said no to Core Combat, had I known what it would really be like), we should neither ignore it, nor flame it. We should offer our honest criticism in the most constructive way possible. Underneath balancing issues and story-line inconsistencies, there is often a beautiful idea waiting to be revealed.

That is why I say we change the name to Concept Collective, because we offer our suggestions and criticisms to refine ideas. The final results are products of our cooperation, and are stronger for it.