[interface] New Filtrer to find Add ons (New idea!)

[IPS]

New Filtrer to find Add ons (original idea)

I see at the momments this filtrers: Name, Version, Download, Author, Type, and size.

But Must be interesting to add another filtrer like "popularity" or something like that. How it must work? simply, the add ons with most downloads per day must be first or last depending how you use that filtrer.

As an example, a New Add on can be in a high rate of popularity, and ohter what was one of the first published add ons can be much after than that new add on. With that form you must know what add ons growns faster and what add ons growns less without checking seriusly the numbers of each add on. Also you must can see this with or without the filtrer (like the image) of the rank of popularity of that add ons (it must not be the same than the number of downloads). But you must be able to clasificate this filtrer for types too (to check what is the most downloaded map pack and or scenario without checking the download count and checking for the 1st map pack )


I know this detail must be useless, but it must be interesting too. Just see the immage.


http://i.imgur.com/Zw44k.png

Also, A Newer add on can be in a higher position than the Campaign "A New Order" in this example.




New Filtrer to find Add ons (New idea!)

Also I know now another form how the people can rate the things: by the simple count of positive and negative votes; incluiding a stuff like adding "favorite" option.

There is a new idea now, an example for this is if were a form to the people could vote for those add ons what really do like or dislike to them. Also there can be an special botton like "following" or "favorite". If you dont know the add on or you dont like or dislike an add on, a simple stuff what the player can do is ignoring the votation for the add on.

With this idea, the followers of the add on can find themselves by the only add on server and then enjoy they alone for their favorite add on and not rejecting the game because its so very impopular (liked to me with Breaking Ground add on, I like it a lot, but nobody want to play it )

[Iris]

Game Development
Discuss development of or ideas for other Free games here, as well as other games in general.

Wrong forum. Moving to Ideas.

[IPS]

Thanks for the job shadowmaster

I had too an idea for other filtrer, named "activity", where you can see when the add on had been update the last time. Also there are to many add ons what are published but never updated (a problem when the add on needs some updates) This may be useful for players what does want to play only secure eras what will have update soon and maps with balancing changes very often

[galeanthrope]

One that should really be added is the date of creation, because for now you can't see new addons and because their number of downloads are very low people will think that they are just unpopular addons and don't download them. Something with a new interface showing the most popular addons, the recent ones and some randoms ones could be a very good way to fix that.

Also if you could, if people could rate the addons and write reviews like "Lots of bugs" or "Work fine, fun to play" ... that could help a lot.

[Captain_Wrathbow]

Also if you could, if people could rate the addons and write reviews like "Lots of bugs" or "Work fine, fun to play" ... that could help a lot.

FPI #32.

32. The add-on server should have a ranking system.
Background: Some players feel that this would enable them to quickly identify which add-ons are the best so that they do not have to waste time with add-ons they consider sub-par.
Result: The developers feel that this would be unfair as the system would be entirely subjective because people have different tastes and so the idea will not be implemented.

[galeanthrope]

Ok I understand why they don't want that, still people need more criterias to choose addons, like date of creation, date of last update, last two weeks download ... With just what we have now people download the few most downloaded addons (which are most likely also the oldest ones) and a few random ones by trying to imagine what's behind very short and obscure descriptions hided behind a button, and I think good addons can't become popular because of that.

[IPS]

Also if you could, if people could rate the addons and write reviews like "Lots of bugs" or "Work fine, fun to play" ... that could help a lot.

Sounds nice this suggerence. Rates and comments of 2-3 lines for the critic for some persons about the add on. This must help a lot to see the unknown add ons what the people says are the better and some critics about this.

A design like or different from this.
http://imgur.com/o8QgV


But it must be better if it would run automatically in the wesnoth and not in an external window. Like in the example page if you click in the rating of each track (add ons in wesnoth) it must show you who and how did rate the add on.

[Gambit]

The developers are against number rating systems.

[pauxlo]

So, maybe giving a link to the forum thread (which you can copy in your browser)?

This would need a new field in the pbl file, and would not be really useful for filtering (except for "has forum thread or not"), but it at least facilitates giving feedback (and reading opinions of others).

[bvanevery]

So, maybe giving a link to the forum thread (which you can copy in your browser)?

I don't see any point in that unless the link actually works and takes you to the forums by clicking on it. Convenience features make sense. Inconvenient features are just clutter. Anyone can just go to the forums and look up a campaign manually if it's going to be awkward.

[PeterPorty]

Personally, the only problem I have with the Add-on server is the inconsistency in the version numbers. That is, when I see something with a version 1.0.0, I assume it is something finished, if it's a campaign, I at least expect that it has all the scenarios, and that they are all playable. If it's an era, that the factions have all the units they should have. I don't eve expect custom art or even balance, but at least that it's "ready" and playable. On the other hand, there are some people who consider 1.0.0 as the first release, as 0.0.1 is for me, and it really gets on my nerve. See, this would give a "Quality number" to the campaign, if it's 1.0.0+, it'd be supposedly bugless, and if it's 4.x.x, it is probably very polished, and new content has been added. That way, it'd be easier to choose add-ons that are actually good, and not try out every single thing there is to try and find a decent one.

[bigkahuna]

if it's 1.0.0+, it'd be supposedly bugless

Bugless as in you can play the campaign without it crashing on you. I would suppose 2.0.0+ as being completely bugfree, and everything after that as being completely polished with more content.

Personally, the only problem I have with the Add-on server is the inconsistency in the version numbers.

I agree with that.

[bvanevery]

That way, it'd be easier to choose add-ons that are actually good, and not try out every single thing there is to try and find a decent one.

This is an open source community, so I see mechanisms for avoiding other people's work as rather mean spirited. The Right Thing To Do if someone's campaign is in a lousy state of incompleteness, is to give them feedback on their lousiness, or file a bug report, or help them complete it. I can't abide a Wesnoth community where people just say "gimme my content" like they had forked over money for an expected level of commercial polish. If it ain't done right, either help fix it or go make something better.

[PeterPorty]

It's not really something against developers, I mean, there are many add-ons that look like they could be really cool. The point has to do with the fact that I have a couple of hours to play Wesnoth in a week at most, and when I use them, I'd rather play good campaign. I hate wasting several hours playing something to find out I get to scenario 14 and it's not finished, and then go back to the add-on server and find out the version is 1.0.8 and it doesn't sat 14/X scenarios done, and it makes me very, very mad. I'm not saying anythhing against uploading content that isn't ready, since it's a great way to get feedback, but I do think something with 1.0.0+ should be playable from start to end without crashing.

[Iris]

Unfortunately, some UMC developers are not amongst the brightest bunch and can’t follow standard software development practices.

For those who can read English and visit the forums, there’s this thread, but then we go back to the “not amongst the brightest bunch” part.

Use the standard version numbering scheme: 0.x or 0.x.y for incomplete versions and 1.x or 1.x.y only for versions which are complete (fully playable from start to finish without major problems). You can still attach other notes or labels of your choice, so versions such as “0.9.1 beta” or “1.1 (updated)” are fine.