To answer the general point of how far to go, as a rule it is not sufficient simply to play a mission once. Apart from anything else you don't know what you've missed.
Crappy missions like these are a real problem for the community. They waste a lot of good people's time. and create disappointment, frustration and bad feelings all over the place. As you probably know we're trying to encourage more people to put their missions on the beta testing board and then beta test other people's missions. Most people who make crappy missions do so because they don't know any better: if they are nudged into a journey of discovery it a) keeps them off our back and b) means that the next mission/version will be much better.
If it's complex-good that is merely a pleasure. If it's complex-crap it can be really hard work ... but that is the cross the mission reviewer has to bear, and is partly why so few people have what it takes to be a mission reviewer.
Now if I were to explain all these in the readme file it would seriously impact on the experience I am trying to create for the player - but clearly if the mission is to get a balanced review the reviewer should be made aware of these features.
Any suggestions - this is not urgent by the way - my mission is months from completion.
Hey, you started to bugging me here, not all around! But let us drop this once and for all, shall we?
Here is not the problem my mission (man, would you ever see this?), but you being unable to take any constructive criticism, or even advices, as a reviewer. If you have the the power to criticise others work, then you should be able to take the constructive criticism yourself. You can consider this as my humble advice to you, though I'm not a reviewer.
It's good for you that you seek some advices about the mission reviewing; maybe it isn't too late for you as a reviewer after all.
The readme is for communicating with the player, not the reviewer. You shouldn't need to communicate specially with the reviewer, but in this particular case all that needs to be done is make the reviewer aware that there is more to this mission than meets the eye.
Now if I were to explain all these in the readme file it would seriously impact on the experience I am trying to create for the player - but clearly if the mission is to get a balanced review the reviewer should be made aware of these features.
Now if I were to explain all these in the readme file it would seriously impact on the experience I am trying to create for the player - but clearly if the mission is to get a balanced review the reviewer should be made aware of these features.I beg to differ. I am talking about a mission that will require anything from 8 to 20 hours of mission time (not playing time) to complete and which because of its design would need to be played several times before all the logical possibilites could have been exhausted and that is assuming the reviewer knows what all these possibilities all are. I currently have a 12 page word document (and it will grow with the next beta version) of 'spoilers' - things that I do not expect even the best review to notice more than a fraction of. I would be very happy to share this with you privately to see if you still think I am wrong.
Any good reviewer will notice these without being told.
of all the missions we get only 50% are worthy of being reviewed rest are just too crap and out of the remaining 50% only a few manage good scores and are enjoyable. For me as a reviewer its very tiresome and disheartening to write the same stuff again and again advising the author about his mistakes often too common and basic and to learn to rectify them and give some thought next time more on the mission design etc etc.... its a thorughly rehearsed rhetoric by me i have to launch in to 70% of the time
70% of the time its complex-crap and that can really burn you down as a reviewer especially if your the only SP reviewer around and got to review every mission sent in
Major cock-ups result in an IM to the author describing the problem and giving him two weeks to fix it. If he does, well and good. If not, the mission is deleted. (We're not harsh though, if he replies and says can I have a bit longer that's fine.)