PDA

View Full Version : "The Two-Week Plan" - A supplement to a better search engine



WeeB
10-28-2008, 02:04 PM
So I have had lbp for a couple days and noticed that there doesn't seem to be any good way to sort the online levels published by other people. All you can really do is search.

Is there no way to view the most hearted levels or the most played levels??
How do they expect the good stuff to "float to the top" with out this kind of functionality?

gimpyjosh
10-28-2008, 04:26 PM
I'm not sure, but I agree. I want a way to sort by "most hearted" and another by "most played without hearts" to know which to avoid. Is the only way to rate a level besides giving it a word is a heart? That a positive mark, but what about demerits? I want a way to say "This level sucked," so others will avoid it.

What factor decides which ones show up on the first page? I see some popular ones on the first page, but I also see some un-played one.

They really need to have a better sorting system. I also want to be able to choose to view them on a list instead of stamped all over the world. It's too random for my likes. Let me see them like I would a list of servers on an online shooter.

-Josh :idea:

DrunkMiffy
10-28-2008, 04:36 PM
I'm not sure, but I agree. I want a way to sort by "most hearted" and another by "most played without hearts" to know which to avoid. Is the only way to rate a level besides giving it a word is a heart? That a positive mark, but what about demerits? I want a way to say "This level sucked," so others will avoid it.

What factor decides which ones show up on the first page? I see some popular ones on the first page, but I also see some un-played one.

They really need to have a better sorting system. I also want to be able to choose to view them on a list instead of stamped all over the world. It's too random for my likes. Let me see them like I would a list of servers on an online shooter.

-Josh :idea:

QFT.

Agree completely, espeically about the list.

WeeB
10-28-2008, 05:03 PM
I'm not sure, but I agree. I want a way to sort by "most hearted" and another by "most played without hearts" to know which to avoid. Is the only way to rate a level besides giving it a word is a heart? That a positive mark, but what about demerits? I want a way to say "This level sucked," so others will avoid it.

What factor decides which ones show up on the first page? I see some popular ones on the first page, but I also see some un-played one.

They really need to have a better sorting system. I also want to be able to choose to view them on a list instead of stamped all over the world. It's too random for my likes. Let me see them like I would a list of servers on an online shooter.

-Josh :idea:

A list would be great.
You could then sort by most hearted, most played, newest and so on.

I really hope this functionality is patched in because as it stands right now, when we start getting thousands and thousands of levels up on the servers its going to be a mess without some better sorting functions.

WeeB
10-28-2008, 05:10 PM
well they obviously thought of it. if you look at the video below at about 0:55 they had a totally different screen from what is in the release version. and they had selections like highest rated, made today, only friend levels. This was obviously taken from a early build in the game. I just don't get why you would pull out such a useful tool.

5Ds10MzDijo

hypothetical
10-28-2008, 05:11 PM
Well, they did add the star function. You can rate a level 1-5 stars. Hopefully this means that they are going to add more ways to organize the levels soon. We can only hope!

BloodFlameX
11-03-2008, 09:21 PM
The search system is fine, but there is a top list, about 4 new ones just got on top today, so i don't think we need to worry :P

kepsux
11-11-2008, 05:25 PM
I also wish that after playing a level I could mark it as a recommendation for my friends / specific friend so next time they log in they get some sort of notification that indicates "Hey, KePSuX found this level and thinks you'd like it too" and allows them to play it in such a manner.

Snrm
11-11-2008, 06:14 PM
Well, they did add the star function. You can rate a level 1-5 stars. Hopefully this means that they are going to add more ways to organize the levels soon. We can only hope!

yes but i dont think the star function is working atm well it is but other players cant see the levels star rating. i think they want to make it so other players can see it

dshockey
11-11-2008, 06:19 PM
Yeah, I can't view anything about star ratings or sort in that way. I think the following categories should be searchable

- newest levels
- most played
- most played today/week/month
- most hearted
- most hearted today/week/month
- best heart to play ratio (minimum 10 plays)
- best star rating

Also, on the level I created, I can't view what adjectives people describe my level as.

BTW, Check out my level CATastrophe! it's fun and maybe will make you think a little.

Bridget
11-12-2008, 01:55 AM
I have to wonder if they did it that way in order to give new levels a better chance of being tried, rather than everyone just automatically only going to the "best" levels. Which would indeed probably happen, cause that's often how people are.


Because if people did that, a new level someone just put out could be like the best thing ever, but how would it ever get anywhere if everyone just keeps bringing up the same older levels that already had like a zillion hearts?


That's about the best explanation I can think up.

lionhart180
11-12-2008, 02:24 AM
What exactly /is/ the current sorting method, cause I'm seeing the levels witha zillion plays/hearts all on the front consistently, but there are always random less awesome levels, and more awesome ones with more plays and such on other pages...

I'm very confused as to why my level with 40 plays and 5 hearts, is on page 6-7, whe levels with 0 hearts and 3 plays are 4-5 pages ahead of mine...

Bokchoykn
11-14-2008, 03:26 AM
A lot of people dislike the current search engine and suggested a "Highest Rated", "Most Played" and "Most Hearted" list, which I agree with. However, I think there is a problem with that is older levels will obviously be played/hearted more times than newer levels.

My proposal:

Have a section that features levels made within a two-week span. Then, every two weeks, refresh a list of the highest-rated levels that were made in the preceding two-week span, and commence the next two-week period.

This would accomplish two things:

1) Every player would have a quick and easy access to new quality levels that they've never played before.

2) It would motivate creators to continue pumping out levels and give their best effort towards getting their level on this list. It's a great honor, and it guarantees that every great creation gets the recognition it deserves, rather than be discouraged because their level is buried under the list of great but older levels.

On top of that, creators can prepare and polish their work for the beginning of the next two-week period, and players who've just finished playing the "Top 20 of the past two weeks" can look forward to the next "Top 20 list"

Whalio Cappuccino
11-14-2008, 03:29 AM
Sounds good like a good plan, you should suggest it to MM.

Pinkcars
11-14-2008, 03:48 AM
A lot of people dislike the current search engine and suggested a "Highest Rated", "Most Played" and "Most Hearted" list, which I agree with. However, I think there is a problem with that is older levels will obviously be played/hearted more times than newer levels.

My proposal:

Have a section that features levels made within a two-week span. Then, every two weeks, refresh a list of the highest-rated levels that were made in the preceding two-week span, and commence the next two-week period.

This would accomplish two things:

1) Every player would have a quick and easy access to new quality levels that they've never played before.

2) It would motivate creators to continue pumping out levels and give their best effort towards getting their level on this list. It's a great honor, and it guarantees that every great creation gets the recognition it deserves, rather than be discouraged because their level is buried under the list of great but older levels.

On top of that, creators can prepare and polish their work for the beginning of the next two-week period, and players who've just finished playing the "Top 20 of the past two weeks" can look forward to the next "Top 20 list"

I elect this man new head of media molecule!

Snrm
11-15-2008, 11:02 PM
it sounds amazing!! how did you think of this =o

UmJammerSully
11-16-2008, 12:58 AM
I have to wonder if they did it that way in order to give new levels a better chance of being tried, rather than everyone just automatically only going to the "best" levels. Which would indeed probably happen, cause that's often how people are.


Because if people did that, a new level someone just put out could be like the best thing ever, but how would it ever get anywhere if everyone just keeps bringing up the same older levels that already had like a zillion hearts?


That's about the best explanation I can think up.

That's a very valid reason as to why we can't see the stars, and I think it should be that way as people these days pay way too much attention to ratings.

Let's also look at the metacritic incident with LBP. If people who vote like that vote on levels then we may get some gems with low ratings for stupid reasons.

I still believe the sorting system needs some serious work though. The fact that a lot of the decent levels from users here like "Pirate's Voyage" and "Temple of Sun and Moon" (to name but a few) can have less than 50 hearts and a level like "Ramp" can have thousands is the greatest injustice of all time.

Snrm
11-16-2008, 04:47 AM
http://www.lbpcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4713

look here ;)

Elbee23
11-16-2008, 07:55 AM
The above link... links to this thread that I am reading now... the one it's posted in. :confused:

You can search for levels with a specific name if you like. If you go to cool levels, search and then hit square you can enter text. This works for level names as well as authors, so if you know a cool level and can't find it on the first few pages, or can't be bothered browsing, use that feature. For authors I think you need their full name or else it won't work very well.

This is one way to get around the front page if you already know the name, but if you don't then it may be hard to find "that one with the big boss that exploded".

I think the current system is to stop having only the top top levels domminate at the exclusion of new content. Most people are not beta users - I know I am not. I'm still designing my first decent level, and only do one segment a day, which takes several hours as I am still learning the engine and have to spend a lot of time working out "Why is this so?" or "Why is this not working how I want it?"

The first few days, trophy levels were really popular - because people wanted to get the trophies easily. A reasonable sled ride is new and fun for people just new to playing - they don't know any better and they have not seen 5000 boring varients.

I suspect as soon as a level is published, it appears on page one. As it gets rated and played (or not) then it perculates through the list. I suspect each of the pages has a bit of "most hearts", "high rated", "brand new" and "random level". It might also match it a bit to key words you choose as you play or what your friends are playing.

I kind of like how it is at the moment. It does not seem too broken to me. If you want something specific, then use a word search. It's kind of cool how the current search engine is when you can just bumble around and find something brilliant.

It would be nice to have a "friend recommends this level" function, but you could propably just send the level name to a friend or find it on the web and put it in the text based search.

Let me just put my main point in a different way again. The game is still new to the majority of the players. Those designers who got to play with the beta, know the engine backwards and can create (or recreate, or copy, or whatever you do from the beta) quickly have got tonnes of hits and hearts - because there were not many fully fleshed out levels at the start. But you don't want just the beta people to dominate the front page - you want new and interesting (and sometimes terrible stuff) out there as well.

Just give it a bit of time and us new breed people will post interesting stuff - and hopefully the search engine behind the scenes will continue to sort out the good from the bad, the new from the old, the classics from the crappy. :cool:

QuozL
11-16-2008, 12:55 PM
The above link... links to this thread that I am reading now... the one it's posted in.

That is because I merged the previous thread with this one as they covered the same topic.

Cheers QuozL

tribesofwar
11-16-2008, 02:02 PM
If anyone has ever played "Buzz" online the search feature is great. Each quiz when submitted is described as a movie or music, books, people, place, random, etc. and when you search for a particular quiz say a movie quiz you can further search by most played, most rated etc. I think the format would work great in LBP. You know level description as adventure, puzzle, action, race, Proof of concept. And in each section have most heart, most played, newest, etc.

panzer3000
11-16-2008, 04:33 PM
why dont u have newest level list,

Snrm
11-16-2008, 08:37 PM
That is because I merged the previous thread with this one as they covered the same topic.

Cheers QuozL

oh i thought i was crazy and accidently posted in wrong thred:p

Night Angel
11-16-2008, 11:22 PM
well they obviously thought of it. if you look at the video below at about 0:55 they had a totally different screen from what is in the release version. and they had selections like highest rated, made today, only friend levels. This was obviously taken from a early build in the game. I just don't get why you would pull out such a useful tool.

5Ds10MzDijo

I've watched this video a lot of times but never noticed it:

http://i38.tinypic.com/xeidn5.png

Why would they take this out?...

Ineedhelp9
11-25-2008, 04:29 PM
Im sick of some of the really dumb lvls in the search, we definitely should be able to find the best lvls

chillum007
11-25-2008, 11:17 PM
Well, instead of the two week thing why not just take the average number of stars awarded to a level? That way a new level with 10 plays - 9 of which gave it 5 stars and one gave it a 4, will have a 4.8 rating (I think if my maths is right - feel free to correct if not) which would be the same as an old level with 1000 plays and the same rating ratio.....

...and a new level which has just one play with 5 stars would go straight to the top of the ratings list, so loads more people would play it, even though it's new.

chillum007
11-25-2008, 11:40 PM
I've watched this video a lot of times but never noticed it:

http://i38.tinypic.com/xeidn5.png

Why would they take this out?...

Microsoft paid them to... /puts on tin foil hat

Elbee23
11-26-2008, 01:51 AM
Well, instead of the two week thing why not just take the average number of stars awarded to a level? That way a new level with 10 plays - 9 of which gave it 5 stars and one gave it a 4, will have a 4.8 rating (I think if my maths is right - feel free to correct if not) which would be the same as an old level with 1000 plays and the same rating ratio.....

...and a new level which has just one play with 5 stars would go straight to the top of the ratings list, so loads more people would play it, even though it's new.

By the same logic, if a level was played once and was given a 1 star, it would never ever be seen from again. :(

There could be a number of reasons people don't give 5 stars. It could be because they can't finish it, and that could be because it's too hard or too buggy. Sometimes it's hard as in challenging, sometimes it's hard just through bad design.

It might be a lower ranking because they did not like the idea, or it might be a good idea but too buggy for it be given a full 5 stars.

Maybe they just did not give 5 stars because they are jealous, or because they think they can do better. :(

Almost all the stuff I see when I play, even from great designers, has a few niggly bugs. That does not mean it's terrible, it's just within a 10 minute level there are bound to be some small points that you miss, even if you play test extensively before releasing.

Maybe it might be wise to show ratings after a game has had... I don't know, 50 players go through it. This will give a broad cross section of people's opinions and allow the creator to go back over and smooth out any bugs that are pointed out. Maybe 100 is a better number, but 50 is smallish and I think there is an trophy tied to this number anyway.

But to do it from the start... well, I am sure great levels would disappear, or might have such a poor start that it's a very difficult for them to get them to ever appear back on the ratings radar. :cry:

chillum007
11-26-2008, 02:39 AM
True points there mate. I just don't like the idea of losing all the old classics, if we are only shown the last two weeks of creations. What if someone buys the game in 6 months, and doesn't already have all the great levels hearted? How are they gonna find the likes of Azure palace, world of colour etc....?

Elbee23
11-26-2008, 03:47 AM
Perhaps that's why they are not publicly showing the ratings out. If everyone sees that people have given the level a "3", then that puts pressure on you to do the same. Same with any other number.

Or, to put it in a different light. Say you play a level and thought it was really good, but you see the average of the 3 people who have rated it and they give it a 2. Mind you, that could be some fool and his friend giving it a 1, while someone else gave it a truer value of 4.

But you see the average of 2 and think... maybe it was not as good as I thought. So you give it a 3 instead of a 4, and so the rating gets dragged down.

I know it's an extreme example, but hopefully you see what I mean.

Hiding the values from the general public allows for a more internally honest system. It's like surveying. Consider these two questions...

"What is your opinion on this subject?" compared to

"Most people thought this thing was awful. What is your opinion on the subject?"

See what I mean? :rolleyes:

Risen
11-26-2008, 01:09 PM
Yeah, but if you wait until 50 or 100 plays have gone by before you expose the rating, you probably will have a decent representation, and by that point the opinion of one person won't really skew the score anymore.

whatisnarwhal
11-27-2008, 06:49 AM
I'm not sure, but I agree. I want a way to sort by "most hearted" and another by "most played without hearts" to know which to avoid. Is the only way to rate a level besides giving it a word is a heart? That a positive mark, but what about demerits? I want a way to say "This level sucked," so others will avoid it.

What factor decides which ones show up on the first page? I see some popular ones on the first page, but I also see some un-played one.

They really need to have a better sorting system. I also want to be able to choose to view them on a list instead of stamped all over the world. It's too random for my likes. Let me see them like I would a list of servers on an online shooter.

-Josh :idea:

An option for that would be better, since some people will be nay sayers.
However, we do need a better search system.
I'd like to see a "random" search option because a lot of good levels are in different languages.
And I don't speak French, Chinese, German, Japanese, Spanish, or braille.