Updating levels vs Making it polished from the start

I've noticed recently that a lot of popular threads in the level showcase forum don't necessarily have a lot of posts because they're perfect-best-level-I've-ever-played quality, but because of all the feedback and updates they get. I thought it would make in interesting discussion.


Say somebody spends weeks and weeks making a level and try to make sure that it is perfect in every way. They ask people to test it and give feedback before they publish. They end up with a highly polished level/game that very few people can find anything wrong with. In my opinion this is how levels should be done and it's what I always try to do; I only publish when I'm 100% sure the level is as good as it can be.

And then you have someone who publishes a level when it isn't complete or only finished to a basic level, as a kind of starting point that they'll update over time with feedback and suggestions. I'm seeing this more and more. The problem (in my opinion) is that these level threads always seem to be on top. Obviously if people continue giving feedback for things that could be improved and the level author keeps updating their level the their thread will have more posts and discussion going on (and therefore more noticeable) than the more "finished" levels where all anyone gives is praise. The trouble is that nothing but praise doesn't create any kind of discussion, and therefore these threads are more likely to go unnoticed.

So, the thing I wanted to discuss is... is it right that it works this way? Is it fair that levels which start off, for lack of a better phrase, "less complete", get more attention than those the creator spends more time and care over? Is it better to approach creating levels this way, start off simple, get it out there and improve it over time? Or should they be made good from the start?

In my opinion, level updating can be justified in some cases. Such as standby's LOST series and levels in which updates are to be expected -- racing levels with new tracks, etc. Every thread that has a level that's been updated shouldn't immediately be frowned upon, either. Very few levels are perfectly flawless from the start. A random bug almost always needs fixing, therefore and update is produced.

However, I do see that this is not what you're talking about. In the above cases, the levels are polished, but need updates to fix problems or bring a whole new base element to the already-published level.

I believe that those basic levels -- ones that are obviously meant to be work-in-progress projects -- belong in the forum meant for them: Ideas and Projects.

Well looking on my Tetris, yea look like first hit is impotent, but you need to keep in balanced so you wont polish the level forever :p

Hi there.
I see my level's been mentioned here as an "exception" almost. I do want to say, however, that although updates are to be expected here, the updates are usually due to new chapters being added, as opposed to fixing errors. I mean, I spent quite a long time polishing it, and I'd like to think that it's relatively sound at the moment seeing as I haven't had to update it much at all up to this point.

I understand though, that it muse be frustrating if nobody posts feedback because there's not much to say - through looking in the cool pages section of this website, a lot of the levels are levels that are still being worked on, or even levels that may not have been good originally, and the only reason they got promoted was because people gave loads of feedback. Heck, I've seen some levels get there because people were arguing in the thread!

So is it fair that unfinished levels get more noticed, whereas finished and polished ones do not, because there's nothing to say except it's perfect? Short answer, no.

Perhaps it would be an idea to open up a section in the level showcase for Level Projects/Level Series. I think it's safe to say that many of these are being developed now with the introduction of LBP2, and this may relieve some of the strain of single levels (so to speak) getting hidden under constantly updated level series threads, or through mutiple threads being made for a level series. Because even if this isn't happening right now, it will be soon.

Whatcha reckon?

:)

Ah, you have a good point there.
If a level really is truly good, people will still play it/review it by way of recent activity stream and such. If my friends heart a level, I usually give it a play, and if it is on LBPC, leave some feedback.
Perhaps players should be more critical in their reviews of these "finished" levels. A finished level can still go from good to great with some constructive feedback.
One huge advantage these finished levels have over the rest, they're a lot more likely to be spotlight material. And I know I queue everything from the spotlight now.

As for the "basic level" levels, I notice they mostly come from new members.
Thankfully the seem to be more open to critical feedback (actually asking for it! :o), than regular members, which I find interesting.
They just want to improve their building skills, and without critical feedback, that won't happen as quickly.

I don't think a decent level will be lost in the sea of "first time levels" simply due to thread activity.
Plus if you use the F4F system, the newbies get their feedback, and you get a bump/positive review. Win-win.
And I would more likely play a level filled with glowing reviews. ;)

Can you PM me some examples so I can better understand? ( no need to name and shame anyone)

I know my first thought is that it's impossible to have anything 100% polished. Someone's always going to make the level react in ways you didn't expect and there will be issues and as more and more people play it's only natural to start making improvements.

I know my own levels go through several updates as I hear of issues I didn't see before, and I definitely put a lot of work into all of them.

Fairness in discussion? I don't know, the whole point of a discussion board is to discuss, so more traffic where discussion is would only be natural. I rarely get any posts in my own threads I post for my levels. Feedback for Feedback helps a lot since people will want to post feedback to get a play on their own level. Assuming people have constructive feedback to give...

I don't think there's anything wrong with making levels that are supposed to be updated, such as The Lost or racing games with new tracks etc. I think it's great when people are willing to update their levels due to feedback or the plan they have for the level, and I know that no level can be perfect to begin with anyway, there's always going to be a few things that could be improved. But it's a bit annoying seeing some threads where half the posts are from the author with great long lists with things they've tweaked or fixed. I just can't help thinking "why didn't you make sure all this was done before you published?"

I can see where you're coming from but it really depends on context. In same cases its definitely frustrating, akin to my pet peeve of youtube guitarists who post videos with descriptions like "Sorry for the mistakes, I only practiced this for a day" etc.

Ptherwise, it's very hard to debug your own work because you know the design. People tackling it with 0 knowledge will attack it totally differently than you might expect since they know nothing of the level. You have to do your best to assume 0 knowledge but you can't always be right. It helps to get friends to test it but when dozens, hundreds, thousands, etc. people play it, you're bound to hear of a new issue.

Unfortunately at the end of the day, all the bumps with updates and FIX THIS - FIXED IT volleys give a thread traffic, and people are more likely to click on a thread that has many posts than a thread with no posts. Just like unfortunately most people are more likely to play something that has many plays and hearts versus something that has almost nothing. (not me - I love playing new levels!)

It's unfair but hopefully now if the level is good enough word of mouth across the imagisphere will bring it attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nuclearfish

I just can't help thinking "why didn't you make sure all this was done before you published?"

---

Like I mentioned before, I would wager the majority of these creators are new to level creating, unlike some of us.
They may not necessarily know the ins and outs (and nuances) of LBP in general as well as we do.

It isn't that one level gets attention over the other, Nuclearfish. You see, as a level that needs more polishing, people deem it more worth their time to put in feedback for it, in order to produce a better level. As your level is already "complete" in a sense of the term, there isn't much people can say except for "Wow! Excellent job!" or, "nice level +1". While the level is not so good, people may have more meaningful feedback, so your posts aren't entirely counterprofuctive. Is answer to your question, I think it is 100% right for the lower-quality levels to be higher. This way, they improve. And if the author doesn't want to do anything, well just lock the topic or don't bother posting your shabby level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by standby250

Hi there.
I see my level's been mentioned here as an "exception" almost. I do want to say, however, that although updates are to be expected here, the updates are usually due to new chapters being added, as opposed to fixing errors. I mean, I spent quite a long time polishing it, and I'd like to think that it's relatively sound at the moment seeing as I haven't had to update it much at all up to this point...

---

I would say your levels aren't as much of an exception than they are the, what I would deem, the "correct" way to use level updates and threads to announce them.

@Nuclearfish

I believe your thread title is a little, I don't want to say harsh, but stereotypical. Not every level that is published and updated is necessairly bad.
Updating levels vs Making it polished from the start would seem a little more appropriate. Just a suggestion to avoid misinterpretation.

:)

Agreed. It's best to always take your time, but it's not so serious that you can't be lax. One look at the servers proves that perfection & unfinished/broken/nonsensical has little to no relevance to a vast majority of people. MM even temporarily had popit sackbot as a pick even though it was a 10% complete clunky interface that was arguably the unfinished menial prep work for an actual game.

I feel this only holds true for objective qualities like performance issues, optimization & organization, bugs & breakability since everything else about a level is subjective & a small crew of tester's can't possibly be reflective of thousands of aesthetic & gameplay preferences. There is no perfection even if nobody has imposing suggestions on theme changes, controls etc

1 person's intuitive & beautiful is another person's confusing, inverted & ugly. As an analogous extreme, most of us don't tell someone a fantasy puzzle rpg would be better as a lazer filled twin stick shooter. Always be receptive to reason though.

The only levels that get reveiwed are really good or really bad. Us mediocure creators just have to die in a hole.
(my point being that if it's a basic level, loads of feedback. If it's a fantastic level, loads of feedback. If it's a perfect and average level; nada.)

Also, not everyone has eager fans who double as testers & some projects of far greater complexity require open & mass ongoing feedback to find every possible instance of failure or amass & filter every possible good idea. Think betas & patches in the big leagues. I'll be less impressed that Peggle runs flawlessly than I am that Fallout 3 runs at all.

I must also echo taupe's post. There's only so much 'hey good job' single sentence ego stroking that a great level thread can get or that one person needs. Ongoing volleys of constructive thought & creative cyphering will obviously have a longer shelf life.

Nuclerfish...You being a pretty "famous" person on both the EU forums and on these forums, I'm surprised you don't post on the Littlebigworkshop forums.

IMO the level showcase is about feedback and helping others and yourself to improve. Plenty of people don't spend months and months on their levels, or don't make very simple, easily tested levels and are genuinely looking for advice and ways to improve. Tuning of gameplay flow, difficulty, aesthetic details, hints, etc. are perfectly acceptable subjective changes to be making after release. As is fixing game-breaking issues that weren't uncovered at testing time, which in a complex or long level can easily happen. Of course it's less likely to happen if you're making circles spin with a couple of bits of logic tacked on*. And as ninja says, not everyone has the luxury of picking and choosing amazing testers, and not everyone has 2-3 years experience with the level editor, many people have weaknesses in one area or another, be it visuals, understanding failure safety... whatever.

Those people need the level showcase to get their feedback and hone their craft. And when the showcase actually provides them with this and they take full advantage of the feedback received (by filtering out what they agree with and understanding others' points of view to try and decide if there are improvements they want to make) then the level showcase is a wonderful example of the community coming together - it's an example of a creative community working. And it's commendable of both the creators and the feedback-ers that get involved in these tight feedback loops - especially when it's people that don't know each other and don't normally play together that are involved in these scenarios.

I personally think that level showcase threads where people are posting feedback and the creator simply goes "no, I'm not changing it because it's finished", whilst thanking every sycophantic "oh mah gawd youse the graytest creatorz evarrr", to be a waste of server space (and yes, these exist). What's the point in those threads? To brag about your play count and get your ego stroked? Nice. That's the kind of artist we can all aspire to be :rolleyes:


I'd rather see the showcase filled with levels that were 75% there when published and their creators doing everything they can to improve, than a showcase filled with 95% polished levels and the creators just posting it for the praise....



*I'm not actually mocking you or your levels here - I've not had time to properly play your latest levels extensively, but the truth is, they are mechanics that are very easy to get working 100% correctly, compared to a lot of other level types out there. There is less to tweak visually, there are less mechanical and logic factors to break, there are less gameplay elements to tune up, you don't have to worry about flow, or varying scenarios, multipath issues, puzzle design, the subtleties of visual cues, narrative... Etc. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the level (I loved the first clockworx and the new version does seem to be an improvement on a great concept), but c'mon, you should be able to see the comparative ease with which one can design and test something like that, due to the limited factors?

They should be as good as possible from the start obviously. What makes this more difficult in LBP2 is that you don't have variations of platforming games with very similar control schemes, but a myriad of different kinds of levels with very different control schemes. As a creator you might think that the controls in your levels are smooth and intuitive, but only once a number of people have played it do you really know whether they are as good as you thought. If they aren't you might want to adjust them so that they suit people's expectations more.
Sure you can get your friends to test your levels before you publish them, but most of us I'm sure only have a handful of friends who play LBP and are willingly to test our levels. And even then you won't end up with the same feedback you would get from masses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pigg

I believe your thread title is a little, I don't want to say harsh, but stereotypical. Not every level that is published and updated is necessairly bad.
Updating levels vs Making it polished from the start would seem a little more appropriate. Just a suggestion to avoid misinterpretation.

---

Thanks, I've changed it. That does sound a bit better. :)


Reading back my posts from yesterday I'm not really sure they exactly get across the point I was trying to make. I have no problem with anyone updating their levels. I know it's the reason most people post their levels, to get feedback so that they can improve. I don't expect levels to be perfect to begin with (imo no level is perfect anyway). I also know that not everyone has the benefit of people they can get to test etc.

Sorry if it sounded like I was saying that making levels this way is "bad". It isn't. It's just different to how I would do it. I publish levels when I'm satisfied it's fully finished, with the view that I don't want to update it again unless it's fixing stuff or to change something according to really good feedback. What I wouldn't want to do is, say, publish Clockworx 2 with a basic spinning wheel, then update it later with bonus points, then update it again with a power-ups, then update it again with a tutorial, and so on. I prefer to get all that stuff in there to begin with.

You could compare it to how games are released. They spent a couple of years in development and are realeased when they're finished. The first prototype after a couple of months isn't (usually) made avilable to the public. The alpha build isn't. The beta might be to select testers. And then after it's released DLC comes to add features on top of what was already a finished game. Again, I'm not saying that this is how everybody should make levels. If LBP is now about releasing something early and building on it from there, then so be it. I guess what this thread should be is asking which way of making levels people thing is better/prefer to do. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rtm223

IMO the level showcase is about feedback and helping others and yourself to improve.

Those people need the level showcase to get their feedback and hone their craft. And when the showcase actually provides them with this and they take full advantage of the feedback received (by filtering out what they agree with and understanding others' points of view to try and decide if there are improvements they want to make) then the level showcase is a wonderful example of the community coming together - it's an example of a creative community working. And it's commendable of both the creators and the feedback-ers that get involved in these tight feedback loops - especially when it's people that don't know each other and don't normally play together that are involved in these scenarios.

I personally think that level showcase threads where people are posting feedback and the creator simply goes "no, I'm not changing it because it's finished", whilst thanking every sycophantic "oh mah gawd youse the graytest creatorz evarrr", to be a waste of server space (and yes, these exist). What's the point in those threads? To brag about your play count and get your ego stroked? Nice. That's the kind of artist we can all aspire to be :rolleyes:

I'd rather see the showcase filled with levels that were 75% there when published and their creators doing everything they can to improve, than a showcase filled with 95% polished levels and the creators just posting it for the praise....

---

I know the level showcase is mostly about feedback. But it is called a "Showcase". I don't think there's anything wrong with publishing a level and hoping to get praise. I do publish for feedback, but also because I want to hear that people played and enjoyed it. Surely that's what we all want? One LBPC member saying my level was really good means much more to me than 1,000 plays in the game. That's my goal with a level - I don't want anyone to find anything to critisize. They always do have something to critisize because as I said, nothing can be perfect.

Quote:

---

*I'm not actually mocking you or your levels here - I've not had time to properly play your latest levels extensively, but the truth is, they are mechanics that are very easy to get working 100% correctly, compared to a lot of other level types out there. There is less to tweak visually, there are less mechanical and logic factors to break, there are less gameplay elements to tune up, you don't have to worry about flow, or varying scenarios, multipath issues, puzzle design, the subtleties of visual cues, narrative... Etc. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the level (I loved the first clockworx and the new version does seem to be an improvement on a great concept), but c'mon, you should be able to see the comparative ease with which one can design and test something like that, due to the limited factors?

---

I don't think the type of level has much to do with it. In fact it's mostly mini-games/survivals that seem to be "publish now, improve later". It doesn't take long to get a basic concept working. That's what I'm asking - should you publish as soon as you have the basic concept, benefit from more feedback and more publicity, or spend an extra few days/weeks to make it more a of a "full" game to begin with?

Oh, and I disagree with the "easy to get 100% working" statement. ;)

I also think that the level you make should get debugged before being in F4F because F4F isn't for teaching you how to debug your stuff but more to improve it on any other level. I don't think however that the level needs to be polished like a Comphermc level or something like that. It's just that it still should be in a "done" state. Adding tracks, or chapters to an adventure or whatever is an entirely other thing and it's ok imo. See it as "free DLC".

I think that posting levels that are "too unifinished" are causing the "cool levels" logic we have here to be less efficient. An unfinished level might reach the cool level forum faster than a level that if finished and great for real.

use inout movers & a tractor beam for Herd instead of fleeing, but followers need to lock on grabs without conflicting ex: not picking up cars & sheep at the same time. sheep always get stuck on walls & there's no way to competently herd more than one. cars should scatter when you use your pulse wave. It needs more sound for the attack & the drone of the UFO gets repetitive. put it on modify with either a forwards backwards sequencer or timer. The UFO's need more analog speed. A boost of some sort would make the play more fun when raiding rival pens, & venturing over there would be less costly & more strategic. The arena's too big for the slow ships, but if they were sped up & had turbo, it would need to be larger. With multi sheep grabs & boost you'd need more sheep. Since everything'd be faster & more competitive you'd want more attack & defend ability. then you'd want a control screen & tutorial. A title screen would add polish. arena select & point carry too

nothing's ever really finished.