PlanetPhillip Forum

mel

What makes ‘The Citizen’ HL2 mod that good that it has generated 337 posted comments on the main site?

I have played it 3 times now with a view to write a review, however, I can only rate it good, say 6 & 7 out of 10, what do you think? What make it better then just good for you? Come to that, what make any mod better then just good?

Fluffy The Hamster

The amount of comments a mod gets usually depends on how famous the mod is (whether by PlanetPhillip or other means). Leon's Coastline To Atmosphere is a great example of this.

It's not a particularly excellent mod (atleast, I think so), but Leon's name takes it to great heights.

As for making a mod 'better then good', the best way seems to be doing something extremely well. I get into the habit of calling SMOD Tactical absolutely amazing, even though it lacks nearly everything a mod should have (storyline, atmosphere). Despite the fact that good all-around mod is more preferred, we don't seem to fit it into our category as 'excellent'.

Then again, I'm slightly biased in this opinion: I play Operation Flashpoint for a living (making SMOD Tactical a clear candidate for my tastes).

Obviously, the high number of comments in The Citizen is due to Chris Fox and me answering to most of the comments, doubts, suggestions, problems etc. And if a mod has a high number of comments and above-average ratings, it usually means more downloads, and more comments.
As for quality and rating, that's something that belongs to each individual, and the proof shows up when someone gives a reasonable explanation to why they have liked/disliked a certain mod. You could say that games and mods are made of different elements. Some are present in some mods, others are not. That means someone will like a mod for the unique elements it has, and others will dislike it for the ones it doesn't have. The same is applied to how those elements are implemented.
For me, a good mod would have a good balance of story, puzzles, combat, voice-acting, innovation etc. And it's true there aren't any mods out there that do everything well at the same time.
To speak of another mod, we could talk about Minerva. To those who like awesome Combine architecture and the way of telling a story with text messages, the mod will probably be flawless. If someone expects a different kind of story with more character interaction, voice acting or even different or completely new architectural themes or materials, it's very obvious they might be in for a disappointment.
So "how good" a mod is goes beyond the technicalities of brushwork and entity placement, and has to do more with the relationship between "what I wish from the mod" and "what I get from the mod".

mel

A good and interesting response all of which I for one fully agree with. I think you have managed to outline all the elements involved by presenting a clear picture of what we get or wish from a mod.

However, there are times when you experience that buzz from a game or a sequence, that point when you feel so immerse that reality is what? I guess such moments may not be by design, just moments when ones experience is so intent that you feel part of the game and not just a player. But as you say we are all different seeing and experiencing in a different way.

That's very true, yet it's the level designer's responsibility to create those moments of potential buzz for players. In other words, those mods that don't even try, never get there. Those that at least have the intention of creating such situations have more chances of provoking the intended feelings on at least some players. The ability to be surprised is also related to the overall game experience of the player. For example, I will probably not be impressed by a jungle in a Source map after playing through Crysis. Most Combine facilities will look undetailed to me compared to Minerva and most short mods will feel unpolished compared to Union...etc.
As level designers we can only expect players to enjoy our work and hope to provoke those extra feelings of uniqueness, awe, fear or whatever it is we are trying to do. There is no pure mathematical formula of success in game design. If there was, every single retail game would have ratings over 9/10 and would be a best-seller.
Mappers have the advantage of faster feedback though, and it's something we don't overlook.

Kasperg

Kasperg Wrote:That's very true, yet it's the level designer's responsibility to create those moments of potential buzz for players. In other words, those mods that don't even try, never get there. Those that at least have the intention of creating such situations have more chances of provoking the intended feelings on at least some players. The ability to be surprised is also related to the overall game experience of the player. For example, I will probably not be impressed by a jungle in a Source map after playing through Crysis. Most Combine facilities will look undetailed to me compared to Minerva and most short mods will feel unpolished compared to Union...etc.
As level designers we can only expect players to enjoy our work and hope to provoke those extra feelings of uniqueness, awe, fear or whatever it is we are trying to do. There is no pure mathematical formula of success in game design. If there was, every single retail game would have ratings over 9/10 and would be a best-seller.
Mappers have the advantage of faster feedback though, and it's something we don't overlook.

Kasperg

That is the best truth of all time! -MrTwoVideoCards

its' very hard to make a sp-map/mappack or sp-mod that is liked by everyone. better said, it is even impossible to do so. many times i did get mails or comments that some people liked something very much in one of my maps/mods, and at the same time i got mails/comments about the same subject or event and those people hated it. so, what is liked much by some people is hated by others. all what a mapper/modder can do is try to make something from what can be expected is liked by most people.
and then there is the thing of how old is a game where is mapped/modded with. the older a game gets, the more people have played maps/mods of it, the more they have seen it all.
so, a mappack or mod can be very good when it is released a short time after the game is released, should the same mappack or mod be released years after the game release then it can be that it is not liked so much anymore by the people.
and last but not least is there the thing of how hard/difficult is the mappack/mod. some people do like to fight like if there life is in the ballance, and other like to play a more easy game, so again, you never can do well actualy. you can only make as much maps as you can, and hope that the community will like your work.

Leon (SPY-maps)

mel

Interesting points by Leon and just to take up one: 'hard/difficult'. To my way of thinking this is always best when the hardness factor increases with the depth of play. I hate mods, large or small that open up with a near impossible difficult start, can be a big turn-off for me. On the other hand I am not a great lover of the 'Big Boss' near impossible end scene and would sooner see an ending that is more keeping with a storyline.

There are plenty of good examples around were the mappers have built the level and intensity of combat up to that point where you are stretched to the limit, but still managing to surviving on the learning curve and what went before, that's how I like it.