Generalizing the Campaign Server
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Generalizing the Campaign Server
The campaign server seems to have been a fairly popular feature: we have over ten campaigns on it, with over 10,000 downloads.
I think it'd be useful to generalize the campaign server concept to allow a variety of content to be easily downloaded and installed.
I think that the ability to get more content easily is a differentiating feature of Wesnoth, and our vibrant community has produced more content than I ever imagined would be available. I feel that the concept of getting more content deserves a place on the game's title screen: I think we should add a new button which says something like "More Content".
This should connect the game to the successor of the campaign server: the content server. Users would be able to choose to see a certain type of content, or simply see everything on the server: campaigns, multiplayer maps/scenarios, eras, unit collections, rule mod packs, themes, and so forth.
The user would then be able to easily download the content of their choosing and have it automatically installed, just like with the campaign server. We would also likely have a 'content manager' which would allow the user to disable (and later re-enable) content, as well as delete content.
As well as distributing content easily to users, this would allow for better testing: if someone proposes a unit, they can say "if anyone wants to try it out, I've added it to the content server."
Also, when playing multiplayer games, the game would work out the modifications the game creator is using, and then require all joiners to be using the same modifications.
If someone tries to join a modified game and they don't have the required modifications, they will be asked if they want to download the modifications from the content server. If they choose to, the content will automatically be downloaded for them, so they can join the game. This would have the implication of automagically downloading and installing eras and units that a game is created with.
You could create your own era, complete with your own new units, upload them to the content server, join the Wesnoth server, and start playing with your new units. (People participating in the game would be warned, of course, that the game uses custom content).
So, thoughts on this?
David
I think it'd be useful to generalize the campaign server concept to allow a variety of content to be easily downloaded and installed.
I think that the ability to get more content easily is a differentiating feature of Wesnoth, and our vibrant community has produced more content than I ever imagined would be available. I feel that the concept of getting more content deserves a place on the game's title screen: I think we should add a new button which says something like "More Content".
This should connect the game to the successor of the campaign server: the content server. Users would be able to choose to see a certain type of content, or simply see everything on the server: campaigns, multiplayer maps/scenarios, eras, unit collections, rule mod packs, themes, and so forth.
The user would then be able to easily download the content of their choosing and have it automatically installed, just like with the campaign server. We would also likely have a 'content manager' which would allow the user to disable (and later re-enable) content, as well as delete content.
As well as distributing content easily to users, this would allow for better testing: if someone proposes a unit, they can say "if anyone wants to try it out, I've added it to the content server."
Also, when playing multiplayer games, the game would work out the modifications the game creator is using, and then require all joiners to be using the same modifications.
If someone tries to join a modified game and they don't have the required modifications, they will be asked if they want to download the modifications from the content server. If they choose to, the content will automatically be downloaded for them, so they can join the game. This would have the implication of automagically downloading and installing eras and units that a game is created with.
You could create your own era, complete with your own new units, upload them to the content server, join the Wesnoth server, and start playing with your new units. (People participating in the game would be warned, of course, that the game uses custom content).
So, thoughts on this?
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
-
Breeblebox
- Posts: 209
- Joined: October 27th, 2004, 8:24 am
- Location: New Zealand
Excellent idea, a bit like what Steam was supposed to be for Valve. Could it also implement a 'content-sync' option whereby the content server is checksummed/ datesummed and synced with the local version. This would allow campaign developers to continue polishing their campaigns (and any other content for that matter) and have it incrementally distributed as and when its updated.
Re: Generalizing the Campaign Server
Wow, I think this'll be a big step forward for the Wesnoth community. It's this kind of innovation that will keep the game alive, and not constantly new and changing unit types etcDave wrote:I think it'd be useful to generalize the campaign server concept to allow a variety of content to be easily downloaded and installed.
[...]
We would also likely have a 'content manager' which would allow the user to disable (and later re-enable) content, as well as delete content.
As well as distributing content easily to users, this would allow for better testing: if someone proposes a unit, they can say "if anyone wants to try it out, I've added it to the content server."
[...]
So, thoughts on this?
! What I feel would be important for this feature (as well as the current campaign server with it's ever-increasing content) is to allow some kind of feedback mechanism. If the content creator disappeared and the content wasn't updated to work with the latest version then the server could quickly get cluttered with unusable content. Then if enough people mark something as "broken" in their version, an appropriate warning could be generated.
Inexperienced content creators could flag their content as "unstable" or "experimental" to warn newcomers of potential problems, and in order to request feedback from the community. I think a lot more people could learn and improve their design skills this way!
Try some Multiplayer Scenarios / Campaigns
-
freim
- Retired Terrain Art Director
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: November 29th, 2003, 11:40 pm
- Location: Norway
Great idea 
I would like to see a way to flag stuff as "tested and approved". Fx if 10 or 20 users has rated it as such it would be flagged. Since anyone can upload anything which could be broken, unapropriate in some way (offensive, etc) or just not any good, I think it would be nice to be able to filter out this and only see what the community deems to be good quality.
Maybe that should be the default view also, with a clear option to view all the "non-tested" material.
I would like to see a way to flag stuff as "tested and approved". Fx if 10 or 20 users has rated it as such it would be flagged. Since anyone can upload anything which could be broken, unapropriate in some way (offensive, etc) or just not any good, I think it would be nice to be able to filter out this and only see what the community deems to be good quality.
Maybe that should be the default view also, with a clear option to view all the "non-tested" material.
-
Elvish_Pillager
- Posts: 8137
- Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
- Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
- Contact:
I truly agree here.
I've started again working in the barbarian units and their campaign, and when I though what would be cool for them was having an era, the campaign(s) and the units in separated packs. However, even if it could already be done, could be better generalised with this. Those who want to play the campaign download the unit pack and the campaign, those who want to try them in multiplayer download the era, and those who don't want them just delete the packs (I think an option to delete added content will be increasingly needed).
Another limitation that would be interesting to overcome is the "Image used in the campaign server must be one of the standard", as sometimes there isn't any image that really fits, although I know it would make the whole operation of connecting to the content server more complex.
Just my two cents
I've started again working in the barbarian units and their campaign, and when I though what would be cool for them was having an era, the campaign(s) and the units in separated packs. However, even if it could already be done, could be better generalised with this. Those who want to play the campaign download the unit pack and the campaign, those who want to try them in multiplayer download the era, and those who don't want them just delete the packs (I think an option to delete added content will be increasingly needed).
Another limitation that would be interesting to overcome is the "Image used in the campaign server must be one of the standard", as sometimes there isn't any image that really fits, although I know it would make the whole operation of connecting to the content server more complex.
Just my two cents
-
Woodwizzle
- Posts: 719
- Joined: December 9th, 2003, 9:31 pm
- Contact:
Well, feedback to this idea is much warmer than the original idea for the campaign server 
Some kind of rating mechanism is a good idea too....
David
Sure. Anything already done by the campaign server will definitely be included.Woodwizzle wrote:Awesome idea. How about the server keep track of how many times a file is downloaded too so that we can sort by times downloaded to reveal the more popular content.
Some kind of rating mechanism is a good idea too....
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
i think a way to communicate with the creator of the content would be good. how else do you submit a bug report on something that is not officially supported and might not even have anyone on the forum who works on it?
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
That's why it's advised on the campaign server that authors include their email addresses in the 'author' field.turin wrote:i think a way to communicate with the creator of the content would be good. how else do you submit a bug report on something that is not officially supported and might not even have anyone on the forum who works on it?
However an in-game method of communication might be nice too...
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
-
Darth Fool
- Retired Developer
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: March 22nd, 2004, 11:22 pm
- Location: An Earl's Roadstead
Or at least a hyperlink to the forum topic. That would be simplest for those who don't put e-mail addresses in the .pbl file (which is everybody so far).
You could give writers a pbl field for forum topic number, for example 3906 for this thread. The game could supply the http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=####
Thanks for adding a size field. How about update notification/cues next? Either with an icon or color-coding indicating a mismatch between installed version and server version. Then, sorting by field.
You could give writers a pbl field for forum topic number, for example 3906 for this thread. The game could supply the http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=####
Thanks for adding a size field. How about update notification/cues next? Either with an icon or color-coding indicating a mismatch between installed version and server version. Then, sorting by field.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
The content server is a neat idea.
Whats even more important IMO (or maybe would be done with the content server in one step?)
is the possibility to sync with local installed campaigns (/content) or at least make differences visible
(as has been proposed by different people before).
Right now I end up downloading a campaign I want to play once again,
just to be sure I use the latest version because I don't know
how to check it (and I'm bad at remembering ten to 12 different version numbers,
and too lazy to find a piece of paper to write them down every time...)
Also, a rating and managment system would be a must
or else data-hell is awaiting us
greetings
defsy
P.S.: sorry for not having some great solutions or ideas,
but even an opinion is better than none, right?
Whats even more important IMO (or maybe would be done with the content server in one step?)
is the possibility to sync with local installed campaigns (/content) or at least make differences visible
(as has been proposed by different people before).
Right now I end up downloading a campaign I want to play once again,
just to be sure I use the latest version because I don't know
how to check it (and I'm bad at remembering ten to 12 different version numbers,
and too lazy to find a piece of paper to write them down every time...
)Also, a rating and managment system would be a must
or else data-hell is awaiting us
greetings
defsy
P.S.: sorry for not having some great solutions or ideas,
but even an opinion is better than none, right?
okay, what happens when there is a conflict?
"ILLEGITIMIS NON CARBORUNDUM"
Father of Flight to Freedom
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/FlightToFreedom
Father of Flight to Freedom
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/FlightToFreedom