50 réponses à ce sujet

[simuseb]

This topic was originally titled: Are there any competition's going on? 

Original Post:

I always find my self dabbling with the tool set, and so I return again. I remember there was a monthly competition going on for builders to create a module based around a theme. I don't remember what it's called, but I was wondering if such a thing was still happening? 

New Post:

 

Since this has become a thread used to discussed our plans for the ABC, I decided to rename it more appropriately. As per the topic title, would you be interested in the revival of the Adventure Building Challenge? Feel free to participate in the discussion surrounding it. Don't know what the ABC is? 

Please check this link for more information

[CaveGnome]

The ABC (Adventure Building Challenge) is currently stopped, but the Custom Content Challenge is still going strong. You could probably create prefabs or mini-modules for showcasing new content others create within the CCC (look in the Custom Content and Community Expansion Pack section for more info).

[henesua]

Yes, unfortunately there was not enough interest in the Adventure Building Challenge to sustain it. If a group of people want to get together to do it, we should figure out how to get such a thing to happen without leadership. So the thing can take on a life of its own.

[simuseb]

Really? Damn that sucks. I lost my chance to participate in it last year when I experienced computer issues. I felt it was exactly what I needed to get me to actually finish a module When did it stop? Honestly though, I think this small community *needs* something like that. Even if very few people participate, I feel the building community needs a presence leaning over them, poking them and going: "Hey, build something!" You know, encouragement. Hmm...

[henesua]

Thats why I started it, but between low turnout and other interests at the time, I let it go fallow. If you want to do this in April I could set up some posts for you. BUT I would really like it if interested people would figure out how to get this rolling without a leader.

 

Perhaps a shared account at the new vault so that we can all edit the vault entry of the challenge. Or maybe we need to work on the new vault so that some entries can be open to uploads from approved accounts rather than the only the owner.

 

Anyone else have any ideas as to how to cut out the leadership and just allow people to make this thing happen when they want?

[rogueknight333]

I do not understand how "cutting out the leadership" would work. How would that be different from just letting anyone who wants to make modules as they please, which of course they are free to do anyway? The whole point of something like the ABC, it would seem, would be providing a certain amount of structure and leadership, however loose. As the OP notes, some builders might well benefit from a bit more of a formal process than they are prepared to provide themselves.

 

I think the problem with the ABC was that there simply are not enough builders around these days (particularly considering that many of us who are about are so because we have other ongoing projects of our own) for a challenge scheduled to take place every month to be sustainable. I think something of the sort might go better if reconceived as a bimonthly or perhaps quarterly exercise (or perhaps even simply something announced sporadically at convenient times if something with a lot less structure and formality is desired) rather than a monthly one.

 

Note, for anyone wondering what we are talking about, that you can check out the original Adventure Building Challenge thread, or those concerning the February 2013 or March 2013 challenges specifically, for more information about the ABC as originally conceived.

[henesua]

You don't need leadership to have structure. We can set up a structure for how a challenge operates without having one person responsible for it. A challenge is pretty much all honor system anyway, so I don't see why that is a problem.

 

In any case, the main point I was making is that it would be better if posting challenge entries to a vault did not hinge on one person. It would be better if we could work out another way to handle this. Perhaps every entry is posted to its own vault page, and all the links to entries are held in a thread on the forum. And perhaps all vault entries would have an agreed upon tag so they could all be found together with one search. Or perhaps we can work out a shared login for the Adventure Building Challenge vault entries, and a select group of people can manage it rather than just one person. Maybe. These are just ideas, but I think we could find an alternate solution to one person being in a kind of "judge" position for the challenge.

 

Likewise one person should not be needed to organize it if you had a simple structure which anyone could fit into. Perhaps by starting a thread with "Hey, I want to hold an Adventure Building Challenge, and am announcing one now. Anyone else that wants to participate with me is welcome. This challenge is about X, uses X custom content, and starts on X date."

 

I think that could work well as long as we establish a template and norms for starting and holding a challenge, then anyone could start one whenever they felt like it.

 

I thought the best part of the ABC was the deadline, and then following that a period of review by other participants. Its really the restricted time frame and shared experience building modules in parallel that makes the challenge special. i don't think it has much to do with their being someone in charge of it. The trick is creating a very simple but strong structure that anyone can follow.

[MagicalMaster]

I think the problem with the ABC was that there simply are not enough builders around these days (particularly considering that many of us who are about are so because we have other ongoing projects of our own) for a challenge scheduled to take place every month to be sustainable.

 

Exactly.  I was able to spare a month for Siege but it got me very behind on other RL stuff and other projects (which is why the second half of Siege has been so slow).  I think another part of the problem is that the people interested in participating all participated in the first month or two -- and there weren't more builders waiting in the wings for months 3 and 4.

 

Oddly enough, if you had "limited" the entry to like 3 people per month or something it would have burned through interested builders less quickly.  Instead we had a flood of people which then petered out.

 

I think something of the sort might go better if reconceived as a bimonthly or perhaps quarterly exercise (or perhaps even simply something announced sporadically at convenient times if something with a lot less structure and formality is desired) rather than a monthly one.

 

Absolutely.  I'd think every 3 or 6 months would be a good goal to hold the ABC.  Every month simply isn't sustainable.

[simuseb]

I thought the best part of the ABC was the deadline, and then following that a period of review by other participants. Its really the restricted time frame and shared experience building modules in parallel that makes the challenge special. i don't think it has much to do with their being someone in charge of it. The trick is creating a very simple but strong structure that anyone can follow.

 

^ Agreed

Hmm, I would propose this:
 

• Every 3 months (give or take) someone posts an announcement for the next ABC. In the first instance this could be you- or someone else. This announcement contains a poll that will decide the next challenge.
• Over the next month it is decided who will host the next ABC. Perhaps this is decided as a group, or maybe the previous host pasts on the totem to another.
• The cycle repeats. 

So this way there would still be a host for each individual competition, but there would be no one leader of the entire thing. This is very much like a democracy when you think about it

[henesua]

Sounds great. Should we start this up? I have no problem with running less frequently either. It would be nice to see this happening again.

 

My proposal for the next ABC is a HAKless challenge. Make an adventure without HAKs.

[MagicalMaster]

No offense Henesua, but I would suggest something more focused than that (even if it's multiple options).  I'm fine with the idea of using no haks -- but all that does is limit people to default tilesets/models/2da rules.  Doesn't suggest a story or theme or whatever except "You have to be able to portray it by default."  And you can portray a LOT by default.

[henesua]

No offense taken. I like to leave theme open because I don't have a problem coming up with ideas, and prefer creative license, but if people want a tightly defined challenge suggest it.

[MagicalMaster]

No offense taken. I like to leave theme open because I don't have a problem coming up with ideas, and prefer creative license, but if people want a tightly defined challenge suggest it.

 

Here's my take on it:

 

I'm currently happy without the ABC.  I'm working on finishing Siege, I've been doing some work on a PW, I'm helping some other people on a project in NWN (teaching them how to use the toolset and code), I'm running a top end guild in WoW, I play still other games at times with friends, and I still have a relatively busy real life.

 

If I happened to just suddenly think of something I wanted to do in NWN really badly...I'd simply do it.  I wouldn't wait for the ABC.  And I seriously doubt I will think of something new I absolutely feel I want to work on.

 

What I find interesting about the idea of the ABC is precisely the limitations which are imposed.  The time limit means you have to keep it reasonable in scope and you have to figure out what you can feasibly get done.  And a theme actually IMPROVES creativity.  Which is easier to think of something to actually write?

 

1. I want you to write an essay on politics, you have a month.

2. I want you to write an essay on feudal politics in Medieval Europe, you have a month.

 

For most people, #2 is far more likely to give them an idea because the scope is more narrowly defined.  It means you can focus your thoughts and figure out a topic you want to write on.

 

Because of this, I think such a topic would draw more people in because of thinking "Huh, what would I even want to build?" they would think "Huh, a challenge to build something about <X>?  That gives me an idea..."

 

And that doesn't stop you from leaving a wild card option in for people who want the freedom -- but providing some prompts will help a lot of people.  Nor does the prompt even have to be a theme -- here's a bunch of example prompts:

 

- Build a module meant for level 40 characters

- Build a module meant for level 20 characters

- Build a module meant for level 1 characters

- Build a module meant to take you from level 1 to 10

- Build a module meant to take you from 20 to 40

- Build a module meant to go after the first NWN campaign

- Build a module meant to go after HotU

- Build a module where you character LOSES experience as you go through it for some reason

- Build a module where your character has anmesia

- Build a module based on stealth

- Build a module based on divine spellcasting

- Build a module based on arcane spellcasting

- Build a module based on physical prowess

- Build a module based on pirates

- Build a module based on undead

- Build a module based on Drow

- Build a module based on dragons

- Build a module based on political manuevering

- Build a module based on two countries at war

- Build a module based on a city under siege

- Build a module based on a town ABOUT to come under attack by something

- Build a module about exploring the planes

- Build a module based on a book/movie you like

- Build a module based on events that happen in a book/movie that are only mentioned in passing

- Build a module that has to be completed within one hour

- Build a module based on a murder mystery

- Build a module based around an adventuring party that you lead

- Build a module based on discovering secrets about some artifact

 

Etc.  Those are some I came up with off the top of my head.  And, personally, that's the main thing that would draw me back into the ABC -- because, as I said, I don't feel a need to do anything new due to my current projects but seeing what I could come up with within a month for a topic would be interesting.

 

Can even choose prompts based on what people think the Vault is lacking.  Do we need more Shifter specific modules?  Let's make that a prompt.  Do we want more Ninjas?  Sounds like a prompt.  Do we want more modules that play after a current community module (for example, what might the Bounty Hunter from rogueknight333's Snow Hunt do after completing his mission)?  Might be a good prompt.

 

Plenty of possibilities and I think that kind of stuff will draw people in more than just leaving it purely open ended (and again, can always include a "Just do whatever you want" option if people have something specific in mind already).

[henesua]

Thats all fine, MM, but you are greatly overstating your case if you aren't going to be participating anyway.

 

I think we should do two things:

1. Define the common parameters which all Adventure Building Challenges will follow, and publish this.
2. Get a show of hands for a group that want to participate in the next ABC, and let them decide on the particulars of this next particular challenge: theme, custom content, start and stop dates.

I am quite busy as well, but I am willing to enable others to get this rolling again. Who is game?

[MagicalMaster]

Thats all fine, MM, but you are greatly overstating your case if you aren't going to be participating anyway.

 

I'm pretty sure I said the exact opposite -- that I doubt I'd participate in a "Just do whatever you want" deal but would be quite interested in a themed event to make me go out of my comfort zone and compare it to what other builders come up with.

[henesua]

Fine, then are you interested in taking the next step and making a challenge happen that you would want to participate in?

[MagicalMaster]

Possibly.  My main concern is that the whole appeal to me is NOT picking the topic -- to be forced into something I'm not choosing and seeing how I can do.  I don't mind coordinating it or collecting submissions, but trying to think of ways to avoid picking the topics.  Kind of want to avoid a voting system, worried that people will just pick what they want to do (which they can already do anyway, idea is to get people out of their comfort zones).

I'll think on it.

[simuseb]

I personally would love a limiting theme for two main reasons.

1) It forces me to try something that could possibly outside of my comfort zone, or something i probably never would have attempted otherwise.

2) It's interesting to see how different people's take on the theme differ. 

Anyway, I do have some ideas for the theme, but I'm a little busy right now so I'll post em up later. 

[CaveGnome]

I second the idea of finding something less of a burden on the organiser shoulders. I think a more distributed system and a 2-3 month module making / 1 month module reviewing rythm, ofcourse paired with an ad hoc theme poll would be better suited.

 

Perhaps we could relaunch / reboot the ill-fated ABC April 2013 theme, but relaxing requirements to a "no hack module"...

 

http://forum.bioware...ding-challenge/

 

I got this "Whak-a-Hole" thing 95% done on my HDD. I could be persuaded to finish it, even if my Nwn tinkering time is currently very limited.

 

An eventual (weird?) idea would be to use the same CCC polls themes for the ABC period (ie, if the new ABC has a total time spawn of 3 months, use the last 3 voted CCC themes as a basis for ABC). I am not good at organization, but i imagine some bridges between ABC - CCC could help both.

 

<Beating is own drum>

future SpellJammer theme anyone ? :-)

<Druming off>

[rogueknight333]

... I think we should do two things:

1. Define the common parameters which all Adventure Building Challenges will follow, and publish this.
2. Get a show of hands for a group that want to participate in the next ABC, and let them decide on the particulars of this next particular challenge: theme, custom content, start and stop dates.

I am quite busy as well, but I am willing to enable others to get this rolling again. Who is game?

 

I expect I could organize things if necessary (for this cycle anyway - I think your suggestion of having different people superintend the challenge on different occasions is promising). Any other volunteers?

 

Also, if anyone is interested in participating by making modules it would be good to speak up, since that is all important: no point in doing this if hardly anyone cares. If you are somewhat interested but do not want to commit to anything yet it is acceptable to say that. So far simuseb and CaveGnome (tentatively) have indicated a willingness to contribute modules. Anyone else?

 

As for the parameters I suggest a modified version of those for the original challenge. Participants would be expected to complete a module in a limited period of time, using a limited selection of sponsored Custom Content (though for particular challenges we could always add a twist by having all submissions be hak-free, or all using a specific hak, etc.), and all based on some predetermined theme or adventure seed. The main alteration I would propose would be increasing the time limit (one month is very tight). I suggest we set up the ABC as a 3 month sequence: 2 months to build a module, with the 3rd month devoted to review/discussion of the submissions, and generally letting participants "recharge their batteries." After that a new cycle could be started. (e.g. for this cycle, the building would be done over April and May, with modules released at the beginning of June. A new cycle could be started in July).

 

In the interests of increasing the polish and general quality of submissions, participants would be encouraged to devote the first month to the actual building of a module, leaving most of the second for them to playtest and revise it (though obviously this would not really be enforceable). They could also be encouraged to post a progress report at the end of the first month, which might give an opportunity to rethink the time frame, if more or less time seemed called for at that point.

 

Another random idea I will throw out there: in the original challenge you had "Completion prizes" for those who actually completed something on time, and "Honorable mentions" for those who submitted something a bit late. Perhaps we could expand on that and award people points on the basis of how well they observed the challenge parameters? Anyone who submitted a module would be awarded a certain amount of points. There would be penalties reducing these points for things like submitting late, not respecting the theme, submitting something with game-breaking bugs, etc., and bonuses for things like submitting early and finding a way to combine multiple themes in a single module. One advantage of this is that it would leave anyone who wants to be a "wild card" and submit something that has nothing to do with the theme free to do so: such a person could still be part of the challenge if willing to sacrifice some points. Points would be kept track of somewhere and could accumulate over multiple challenges for frequent participants. Obviously these points would in actuality be somewhat arbitrary and meaningless, but since this is all being done for fun anyway (hopefully) we could all pretend to care about them to make the challenge more interesting.

 

...Or perhaps we can work out a shared login for the Adventure Building Challenge vault entries, and a select group of people can manage it rather than just one person.

 

That could be helpful. Perhaps an admin for the new vault could advise us on the feasability of setting up such a thing? How does the CCC handle this (their entries attribute a generic "CC Makers" as author)?

 

...My main concern is that the whole appeal to me is NOT picking the topic -- to be forced into something I'm not choosing and seeing how I can do... Kind of want to avoid a voting system, worried that people will just pick what they want to do (which they can already do anyway, idea is to get people out of their comfort zones)...

 

If we wanted to do things very D&Dishly, I suppose we could generate a list of topics and then pick something on it by means of a D20 roll. 

[henesua]

I'm fine with all of that, RogueKnight. Run with it.

[MagicalMaster]

So far simuseb and CaveGnome (tentatively) have indicated a willingness to contribute modules. Anyone else?

 

I've mentioned (twice) that I'd be interested dependent on the "rules," mainly regarding topic choice.

 

I'm not sold on the two month period, though, instead of one -- I agree that one month is very short but I kind of thought that was the whole idea?  That someone would literally have to make and test a module within one month and thus encourage people to get into module building precisely because the time limit is so small and requires a module to be limited in scope?  Seemed to be a focus on agile programming rather than having people build "big."

 

On the flip side, while hearing two months makes me think "Wow, that sounds like more time than I want to commit" I do also recognize that some people, especially people who haven't built before, might not be able to do anything worthwhile in a month and two months would make them feel far more comfortable because they feel they could submit something that's more than just one or two areas.

 

I don't know.

 

Maybe the ABC would be better on a three month cycle but at times we could hold a "Build-a-thon" where a theme is posted Friday and submissions are due on Sunday or something -- to see what people can do in a 24 or 48 hour period or something.

[henesua]

i really like the idea of the weekend buildathon.

[rogueknight333]

I'm fine with all of that, RogueKnight. Run with it.

 

Then if my nomination is uncontested, I will plan to make a new thread formally announcing this ABC cycle, and laying out the rules for it, in several days. That will give people time to make suggestions about how to organize this thing. Or me time to figure out an organizational scheme if nothing practical is suggested: speak now or forever (well, for this cycle anyway) be subject to my arbitrary dictates. Some things to consider before then (again, just tossing out some random ideas to see what people think of them):

 

1) What theme(s) to use?

 

As CaveGnome suggests, we could just carry over the unused adventure seeds from the April 2013 challenge: here. At a minimum that could save a lot of time and trouble generating a new list. My preference would be to allow using one of those adventure seeds as one option (for the benefit of anyone who was thinking of something for those at the time, did not follow through, and wants to try again), while also picking out a single new theme as a fourth option for people who want to try something new and exciting. Going forward, I think it might be interesting to have a similar arrangement for the ABC generally: each cycle one new theme would be introduced, while one old theme from the last cycle is carried forward to give people another shot at it (for the benefit of those who were in the position of thinking, "I have a great idea for that theme, but unfortunately no time this month to build anything based on it.").

 

As for lists of possible themes to pick from, the original adventure seeds can be looked up here. MagicalMaster's suggested list can be found earlier in this thread. I suppose we could combine them, along with any other suggestions people have, and pick something off them either randomly or by voting.

 

One idea might be to generate two lists, one based on "story" ideas like "Save the Princess," "Dragon Attack," etc., and another based on more "technical" ideas like "module for characters of level X or class X," and then combine the two to get something like "Level 20 PC saves Princess" or "Shifter vs. Dragon" (hmn, that sparks a new adventure idea: Shifter infiltrates Dragons, or Drow, etc, by becoming one - but that aside one gets the general idea, I hope).

 

2) How to handle Custom Content sponsorship?

 

I liked the arrangement in the orignial ABC where haks were limited to a selected list of sponsored content, and would like to do something similar. I thought it a good way to keep the focus of the challenge limited, while still allowing participants a reasonable set of CC options, and also giving some of the community's currently active CC makers a chance to advertise their work a bit. Again, if we want to save some time and trouble, we could, for now at least, simply use the list of sponsored content generated for the original challenge, but at some point at least it would be good to produce a more up-to-date list. One alternative way of arranging this might be, instead of having a general list of sponsors over multiple challenges, to have a particular CC maker sponsor a particular challenge cycle, which however would introduce a complication in that ideally the cycle's theme(s) would be coordinated with appropriate CC. I am open to suggestions about the best way to handle integrating CC with the ABC.

 

...I'm not sold on the two month period, though, instead of one -- I agree that one month is very short but I kind of thought that was the whole idea?  That someone would literally have to make and test a module within one month and thus encourage people to get into module building precisely because the time limit is so small and requires a module to be limited in scope?...On the flip side, while hearing two months makes me think "Wow, that sounds like more time than I want to commit" I do also recognize that some people, especially people who haven't built before, might not be able to do anything worthwhile in a month and two months would make them feel far more comfortable...

 

Ideally, as well as being fun for the builders, the challenge should also produce something players will actually be interested in, which will not happen if the submissions are routinely incomplete or seriously buggy. In the original ABC, too many submissions were, culminating in the April 2013 ABC where nothing got done at all, so it seems something needs to be done to make that less likely. The simplest and most obvious thing to do is give people more time. To be sure, that may not work: instead of using the additional time for quality assurance, it might just inspire more ambitious projects which will end up in an equally incomplete state. I think it worth a shot, however. Builders would be encouraged to plan something they think can be completed in only a single month, aiming for at least a working "rough draft" of the module at that point that can be tested and revised in the second month.

 

Also, if we introduce my earlier suggestion of doing something like awarding bonus points for early submissions, anyone who can turn out a submission in a single month will be free to do so, and be given credit for it, provided it is complete and reasonably free of bugs, while those who are "behind schedule and over-budget" will have a margin of error to work with.

 

We can always experiment with different time limits in different cycles.

[rogueknight333]

Not detecting a lot of interest here. If people do not care only about how this is organized that is one thing, but it would be nice to know that there is a sufficient number of likely participants for this to be worth it before moving forward.

 

Anyway, one other subject on which I thought it might be useful to solicit opinions before making a formal announcement of rules, themes, etc. would be: how should the submissions be released? Should each participant make an individual entry or should the cycle organizer put up a single combined entry, with links for such revised and expanded versions as authors may later put up included? I think there are advantages both ways. The first gives participants full control over entries and makes it simple to upload bug-fixed or otherwise revised versions as soon as these are done. As for the advantages of the latter, I will simply re-post what I said in the original ABC thread:

 

...Also, though there are some problems with it, I think there are a few advantages to having a consolidated entry:

1) It would be more convenient for players (for whom the builders are ultimately working) to be able to download all the modules in the challenge from a single page, rather than having to click through a bunch of links to do so.

2) It would avoid cluttering the vault with hordes of new entries. To give one example of why this might be worth doing, I know from my own submissions that modules typically get far more downloads while on the "New Modules" list than they do in any given period of time subsequent to getting bumped off it. It is very helpful to new authors to spend a reasonable period of time on that list, and if a bunch of new module entries are being added every month as part of the challenge, normal submissions might end up getting buried in this avalanche, rapidly bumped off the list, and being overlooked as a result.

3) It might actually be an advantage to noobish authors to have their work submitted in a context where judgment is likely to be more forgiving (since people will know that the modules in question were made in a month, and presumably adjust their expectations about the level of polish to be found accordingly) and more likely to be downloaded if it is found side by side with better known builders. By contrast, I think individual entries would have the effect of raising expectations and encouraging more selectivity about what challenge entries are downloaded.

This is not to say that there are not disadvantages to a consolidated entry as well, or necessarily that they do not outweigh these advantages, simply that, to be fair, there are arguments on both sides.

 

 

 

Also, are the submissions best released on the new vault? Old vault? Both?

 

I would appreciate knowing more about people's preferences on these matters (and on those raised in my previous post), but if no one cares to express any than I can proceed to announce my own arbitrary arrangements in a day or two.