Simple Fix imo is Fun or Not being not retarded.
Right now Fun or Not = Most Popular. It should have different logic that includes:
- Not in top 3 pages of Most Popular
- Games that has been voted NOT FUN for so many times by majority should not show up anymore. This could mean the map is not even finished yet or still in testing.
- Games that has been voted FUN for so many times and has shown up in the top 3 pages of the new Map pool of UPCOMING, should no longer be included in FUN or NOT
- Thus, the list of UPCOMING will not include Most Popular. and all the good hidden new maps will show up in the UPCOMING tabs.
- Now after X amount of time, as the number of good maps in the pool has increased, the criteria will change from Not in top 3 pages to Not in top 4 pages., then Not in top 5 pages etc. etc. Until Pop Reset, go back to Not in top 3 pages
I think this is the simplest fix we could wish for...
What are you talking about? I'm saying that your screenshot is no different than what we have now, aside from showing the lobbies. Showing the lobbies makes no difference if you still have to walk through the entire list of popular maps to find the map you'd like to play.
I wish people on this forum would actually learn to think like a designer or developer before complaining like idiots. Everyone here is just really inept and their suggestions are terrible. It's obvious why Blizzard listens to none of you. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about or how to design features for a UI or a game.
What are you talking about? I'm saying that your screenshot is no different than what we have now, aside from showing the lobbies. Showing the lobbies makes no difference if you still have to walk through the entire list of popular maps to find the map you'd like to play.
What entire list of popular maps? The ones that get hosted, filled up in seconds, started and then removed from the list you are viewing ? Maybe you don`t understand the concept of "active lobby"?
Again. That picture was not made by me, it is outdated, and I only posted it as a solution for "same map spam filling up the screen", is it hard to visualize the exact same war3 lobby system with the sole exception that all lobbies of the same map get placed into a folder that can be minimized/maximized? leaving space for other folders of the same nature. It has nothing to do with popularity. Popularity should be a category of its own, of 2 pages, that is available to someone who wants to host (a most popular tab if you will) Second part of your post I wont bother with, its childish flame.
I thought the old old original model was the best idea. The one everyone thought it would be when they heard blizz was adding popularity and rating to maps.
A list of latest games hosted, like with war3, but with more info next to each map such as popularity and rating. What they could have:
A NEW tag if the map has been released within past week or so.
A User Rating, how people rate the map 1-5 stars.
A popularity, how often the map is hosted/played.
A last 5 comments left. Ppl could leave reviews/comments for people to read. They could also Up/Down the comments thus removing trash and upping good helpful insightful comments.
The main problem of W3, each game having its own name, wouldn't exist here. In SC2, the way it's designed, only 1 name will appear. Who cares if there's 50 active games of DotA, it would appear only 1 time, as "DotA".
Really, a "need players" list would solve everything, because top 1 would be maps needing 1-3 players, and you would start playing right after download. You would be able to effectively join rare unpopular custom maps, too.
The whole point is that they are always going to have a list of available maps, and this list will be generated by the entire list of uploaded maps. Not the ones currently hosted. This is not going to change.
So listing which lobbies exist for maps in the popularity list will not change anything.
I don't understand how you people are so dense. The backbone of this current system will not change. You all sound like you're standing right next to a wall and screaming at it because it's in your way.
The whole point is that they are always going to have a list of available maps, and this list will be generated by the entire list of uploaded maps. Not the ones currently hosted. This is not going to change.
So listing which lobbies exist for maps in the popularity list will not change anything.
I don't understand how you people are so dense. The backbone of this current system will not change. You all sound like you're standing right next to a wall and screaming at it because it's in your way.
At least we try to find a solution? ¬¬'
The point of showing lobbies waiting for players is to:
Start games fast
Have a list that shows what's being played NOW, no matter the popularity
Be able to get players easier (If I host an unpopular game, no one will join if I don't start spamming chat channels)
If you're so wise and undense, then you sure can see the bad part of the idea, nope? I don't see it, and I'd love to see what's making you see it inviable.
All we can do, as a community, is give out suggestions and try to agree on a solution so that whoever has a communication channel to blizzard can present it. Ultimately it is their choice what they will and will not do, as are the consequences. Until then suggestions... as it is clear that none of the mapmakers in the community are perfectly happy with the current state of things.
I'm sure all they see is a mass of static coming from the community. It's likely they've given up listening to anyone except perhaps a few key people. It's painful attempting to talk about design with people that don't know how to approach it intelligently. Making suggestions and whining doesn't do anything.
Lonami, I was pointing out that it doesn't fix what people are complaining about. In the sense of it being a nice additional feature (it could be nice to be able to name your lobby so people will join when you want specific rules), then it is a good thing.
But showing lobbies that are being played now.. well, it will likely look identical to the list of maps that currently exists. There's really no point.
The way they designed it, I find hard to see any "join by name" implemented.
I'm not sure about what complain every single person, but my problem with the system is that my map has no fair chance of being on page 1 of any of the join game options.
But yeah, for modes they should go back to what they first showed before beta, and public games shouldn't let people change the mode (2nd only if 1st was done, ofc).
Edit: There would be a point, since only 1 of each would appear. Of course, first pages could be full of the same, but there's a simple solution: make only games with 1 minute in lobby, or games with an activated option by the host, appear on that list.
The point of having a LFG tool like that is to show games needing people, not games filling up in 5 seconds, because popular maps are full house in 30 seconds most of the time.
Zarakk's image is good but then what's the difference? Now we just have 10 'dotas' hogging the list forever. Atleast in the old system if I did host some random map people would join even between 9/10 dotas.
It'd be great to get a war3 listing option back, but it would 'stack' game lobbies of the same map under one heading perhaps... and would still allow people to name games.
HEY GUYS LETS TALK ABOUT THE POPULARITY SYSTEM TROLOLOL.
Just kidding.
But on a not-kidding note, I'm excited about the possibility of a marketplace as long as Blizzard doesn't end up raping me for 90% of my profits. All this time spent on making maps might actually pay off. I think this is a more worthy topic of discussion than the popularity system. I don't think it's been explored very much by the community either.
The only thing that matters is the way maps are ordered, and where the lists of maps are placed. That is the only thing that they will change.
They might also change the information available about the map (such as ratings or reviews). But they will not overhaul the way lobbies work themselves.
Changing where maps are placed, and how the list is ordered, as well as the number of maps in a particular ordering makes a huge difference.
I don't understand why they don't make many, many more categories. This should have been the first step.
Yeah, why there's no RPG, Hero arena, MOBA, Escape, Minigames and more genres is simply out of logic. Maybe that's too many fields for the retard customers they aim their game at.
I think you don't understand my idea, I think it's good. In part, it may work as a efficiently-working Up & Coming category.
A lot of you say in WC3 any map could get players despite the DOTA spam, but I remember you would have to wait ages in the lobby for most non DOTA maps, over 10 or 15 minutes.
At least with the current system theres a good 15ish maps you can play rather than DOTA and any semi popular map that someone decided to host if you were lucky (It seemed half the people couldn't even host on WC3 due to port issues.)
Yes its really frustrating to get new maps played but going back to WC3 is not the answer.
Really? The maps I wanted to play I could get pretty fast because a lot of people wanted a breath of fresh air from dota. But this is a few years ago...
Simple Fix imo is Fun or Not being not retarded. Right now Fun or Not = Most Popular. It should have different logic that includes:
- Not in top 3 pages of Most Popular
- Games that has been voted NOT FUN for so many times by majority should not show up anymore. This could mean the map is not even finished yet or still in testing.
- Games that has been voted FUN for so many times and has shown up in the top 3 pages of the new Map pool of UPCOMING, should no longer be included in FUN or NOT
- Thus, the list of UPCOMING will not include Most Popular. and all the good hidden new maps will show up in the UPCOMING tabs.
- Now after X amount of time, as the number of good maps in the pool has increased, the criteria will change from Not in top 3 pages to Not in top 4 pages., then Not in top 5 pages etc. etc. Until Pop Reset, go back to Not in top 3 pages
Easy fix for fun or not, change it to the cyclic list. Did people ever see it in action? Its a list that constantly cycles, so new maps pop up all the time. Becuse they are in page 1, people click to join. And because you can see the name of the map before you join, you can avoid playing maps you know you won't like. Fun or not is stupid because people are always ninja quitting to avoid maps they don't want. Otherwise, fun or not is a great system.
Certain maps like popular tds and pudge wars etc would fill up quickly but unknowns could take ages.
I've been having a little think about all this, the advantage of the current sc2 system is you don't have a load of people hosting the same map all waiting for people to join when if they were all in the same game they could be playing.
Perhaps join games should only show games with lobbies, then if you create a game that already has a lobby (created in the time its taken you to check the game list or if you were to lazy to :) ) it offers you the choice to join it or start your own lobby (maybe for a private game or something).
I don't understand the complaints about the current popsys.
It's very efficient. No redundant game lobbies, no single map dominating the whole front page (WC3) and the best maps are kept at the top.
The current system gets you from the lobby to playing much faster than the WC3 system, and it does it fully automatically. You can join what you want, and just tab out until your game loads.
A real fix for the popsys would be to have quality control on custom maps, or perhaps a second map list section with only quality approved maps listed. The maps beyond page 1 generally aren't worth playing, and this would ease that issue somewhat. People might actually look beyond page 1 if the maps down there were generally decent.
All the suggestions in this thread so far are horrible for people who actually want to play fun maps. The current system ensures quick play and better map variety than WC3, but has the downside of keeping more obscure maps out of sight. The latter isn't reason enough to scrap the whole system to an alternative that would break the first two.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Simple Fix imo is Fun or Not being not retarded. Right now Fun or Not = Most Popular. It should have different logic that includes:
- Not in top 3 pages of Most Popular
- Games that has been voted NOT FUN for so many times by majority should not show up anymore. This could mean the map is not even finished yet or still in testing.
- Games that has been voted FUN for so many times and has shown up in the top 3 pages of the new Map pool of UPCOMING, should no longer be included in FUN or NOT
- Thus, the list of UPCOMING will not include Most Popular. and all the good hidden new maps will show up in the UPCOMING tabs.
- Now after X amount of time, as the number of good maps in the pool has increased, the criteria will change from Not in top 3 pages to Not in top 4 pages., then Not in top 5 pages etc. etc. Until Pop Reset, go back to Not in top 3 pages
I think this is the simplest fix we could wish for...
@malkavianVision: Go
What are you talking about? I'm saying that your screenshot is no different than what we have now, aside from showing the lobbies. Showing the lobbies makes no difference if you still have to walk through the entire list of popular maps to find the map you'd like to play.
I wish people on this forum would actually learn to think like a designer or developer before complaining like idiots. Everyone here is just really inept and their suggestions are terrible. It's obvious why Blizzard listens to none of you. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about or how to design features for a UI or a game.
@sandround: Go
That list was also not brilliant.
What entire list of popular maps? The ones that get hosted, filled up in seconds, started and then removed from the list you are viewing ? Maybe you don`t understand the concept of "active lobby"?
Again. That picture was not made by me, it is outdated, and I only posted it as a solution for "same map spam filling up the screen", is it hard to visualize the exact same war3 lobby system with the sole exception that all lobbies of the same map get placed into a folder that can be minimized/maximized? leaving space for other folders of the same nature. It has nothing to do with popularity. Popularity should be a category of its own, of 2 pages, that is available to someone who wants to host (a most popular tab if you will)
Second part of your post I wont bother with, its childish flame.
I thought the old old original model was the best idea. The one everyone thought it would be when they heard blizz was adding popularity and rating to maps.
A list of latest games hosted, like with war3, but with more info next to each map such as popularity and rating. What they could have:
The main problem of W3, each game having its own name, wouldn't exist here. In SC2, the way it's designed, only 1 name will appear. Who cares if there's 50 active games of DotA, it would appear only 1 time, as "DotA".
Really, a "need players" list would solve everything, because top 1 would be maps needing 1-3 players, and you would start playing right after download. You would be able to effectively join rare unpopular custom maps, too.
The whole point is that they are always going to have a list of available maps, and this list will be generated by the entire list of uploaded maps. Not the ones currently hosted. This is not going to change.
So listing which lobbies exist for maps in the popularity list will not change anything.
I don't understand how you people are so dense. The backbone of this current system will not change. You all sound like you're standing right next to a wall and screaming at it because it's in your way.
At least we try to find a solution? ¬¬'
The point of showing lobbies waiting for players is to:
If you're so wise and undense, then you sure can see the bad part of the idea, nope? I don't see it, and I'd love to see what's making you see it inviable.
All we can do, as a community, is give out suggestions and try to agree on a solution so that whoever has a communication channel to blizzard can present it. Ultimately it is their choice what they will and will not do, as are the consequences. Until then suggestions... as it is clear that none of the mapmakers in the community are perfectly happy with the current state of things.
I'm sure all they see is a mass of static coming from the community. It's likely they've given up listening to anyone except perhaps a few key people. It's painful attempting to talk about design with people that don't know how to approach it intelligently. Making suggestions and whining doesn't do anything.
Lonami, I was pointing out that it doesn't fix what people are complaining about. In the sense of it being a nice additional feature (it could be nice to be able to name your lobby so people will join when you want specific rules), then it is a good thing.
But showing lobbies that are being played now.. well, it will likely look identical to the list of maps that currently exists. There's really no point.
The way they designed it, I find hard to see any "join by name" implemented.
I'm not sure about what complain every single person, but my problem with the system is that my map has no fair chance of being on page 1 of any of the join game options.
But yeah, for modes they should go back to what they first showed before beta, and public games shouldn't let people change the mode (2nd only if 1st was done, ofc).
Edit: There would be a point, since only 1 of each would appear. Of course, first pages could be full of the same, but there's a simple solution: make only games with 1 minute in lobby, or games with an activated option by the host, appear on that list.
The point of having a LFG tool like that is to show games needing people, not games filling up in 5 seconds, because popular maps are full house in 30 seconds most of the time.
Zarakk's image is good but then what's the difference? Now we just have 10 'dotas' hogging the list forever. Atleast in the old system if I did host some random map people would join even between 9/10 dotas.
It'd be great to get a war3 listing option back, but it would 'stack' game lobbies of the same map under one heading perhaps... and would still allow people to name games.
HEY GUYS LETS TALK ABOUT THE POPULARITY SYSTEM TROLOLOL.
Just kidding.
But on a not-kidding note, I'm excited about the possibility of a marketplace as long as Blizzard doesn't end up raping me for 90% of my profits. All this time spent on making maps might actually pay off. I think this is a more worthy topic of discussion than the popularity system. I don't think it's been explored very much by the community either.
@Lonami: Go
The only thing that matters is the way maps are ordered, and where the lists of maps are placed. That is the only thing that they will change.
They might also change the information available about the map (such as ratings or reviews). But they will not overhaul the way lobbies work themselves.
Changing where maps are placed, and how the list is ordered, as well as the number of maps in a particular ordering makes a huge difference.
I don't understand why they don't make many, many more categories. This should have been the first step.
I wish people understood this.
Yeah, why there's no RPG, Hero arena, MOBA, Escape, Minigames and more genres is simply out of logic. Maybe that's too many fields for the retard customers they aim their game at.
I think you don't understand my idea, I think it's good. In part, it may work as a efficiently-working Up & Coming category.
A lot of you say in WC3 any map could get players despite the DOTA spam, but I remember you would have to wait ages in the lobby for most non DOTA maps, over 10 or 15 minutes.
At least with the current system theres a good 15ish maps you can play rather than DOTA and any semi popular map that someone decided to host if you were lucky (It seemed half the people couldn't even host on WC3 due to port issues.)
Yes its really frustrating to get new maps played but going back to WC3 is not the answer.
@Mildawg: Go
Really? The maps I wanted to play I could get pretty fast because a lot of people wanted a breath of fresh air from dota. But this is a few years ago...
Simple Fix imo is Fun or Not being not retarded. Right now Fun or Not = Most Popular. It should have different logic that includes:
- Not in top 3 pages of Most Popular
- Games that has been voted NOT FUN for so many times by majority should not show up anymore. This could mean the map is not even finished yet or still in testing.
- Games that has been voted FUN for so many times and has shown up in the top 3 pages of the new Map pool of UPCOMING, should no longer be included in FUN or NOT
- Thus, the list of UPCOMING will not include Most Popular. and all the good hidden new maps will show up in the UPCOMING tabs.
- Now after X amount of time, as the number of good maps in the pool has increased, the criteria will change from Not in top 3 pages to Not in top 4 pages., then Not in top 5 pages etc. etc. Until Pop Reset, go back to Not in top 3 pages
@Maknyuzz: Go
Easy fix for fun or not, change it to the cyclic list. Did people ever see it in action? Its a list that constantly cycles, so new maps pop up all the time. Becuse they are in page 1, people click to join. And because you can see the name of the map before you join, you can avoid playing maps you know you won't like. Fun or not is stupid because people are always ninja quitting to avoid maps they don't want. Otherwise, fun or not is a great system.
@OneTwoSC: Go
Certain maps like popular tds and pudge wars etc would fill up quickly but unknowns could take ages.
I've been having a little think about all this, the advantage of the current sc2 system is you don't have a load of people hosting the same map all waiting for people to join when if they were all in the same game they could be playing.
Perhaps join games should only show games with lobbies, then if you create a game that already has a lobby (created in the time its taken you to check the game list or if you were to lazy to :) ) it offers you the choice to join it or start your own lobby (maybe for a private game or something).
I don't understand the complaints about the current popsys.
It's very efficient. No redundant game lobbies, no single map dominating the whole front page (WC3) and the best maps are kept at the top.
The current system gets you from the lobby to playing much faster than the WC3 system, and it does it fully automatically. You can join what you want, and just tab out until your game loads.
A real fix for the popsys would be to have quality control on custom maps, or perhaps a second map list section with only quality approved maps listed. The maps beyond page 1 generally aren't worth playing, and this would ease that issue somewhat. People might actually look beyond page 1 if the maps down there were generally decent.
All the suggestions in this thread so far are horrible for people who actually want to play fun maps. The current system ensures quick play and better map variety than WC3, but has the downside of keeping more obscure maps out of sight. The latter isn't reason enough to scrap the whole system to an alternative that would break the first two.