review points

[456820]

right i was just wondering whats needed in a mission to get a high score and how they are marked and what they are marked for

[Planck]

<old link removed>


Planck

[456820]

thanks for that but i mean what about the breifing would get marks and what is needed in the mission to make it good

[Artak]

This is a small part from OFPEC reviewer's guide.




The score:

Currently OFPEC gives scores on five categories. These are:

• Overview
• Briefing
• Scripting
• Camera
• Overall

Overview:
A good overview has a good picture with frames. When I say good picture I mean that it somehow reflects the mission, it's not too big and not too small. BIS used white frames on their pictures so we also value the pic having frames.
The text in overview should be a short, few sentences, description of what the mission is about.

Overview should always fit into one page. Adding contact or addon information ect. to the second page shows bad taste from the author, because these are things that should be found in the readme file. Listing 3rd party addons or contact information ect. on the second page however should not lower the score. But if there's crap like advertising the next mission or anything such you can punish the author for it. Though only in the overview scrore.

Briefing:
Briefing is an important part of the overall score and it has many things to check. An experienced editor knows that you can do all sorts of fancy stuff to the briefing like have pictures, sounds and different language versions.
Check for the following.

• Is the briefing easy to understand
• Does it have objectives and do the objectives tick when completed
• Is the notes section used
• Are there links to markers
• Does it have pictures
• Does it have sounds
• Does it have different language versions
• Does it have a weapon selection
• Are there a lot of spelling errors

Not everything in the above check list raise the score. For example if the briefing tells you that a SF squad has been in the bush for three weeks, the briefing propably shouldn't have 50 LAW lauchers and 100 MG's in the weapon selection if you get my drift.
In general look at the briefings appearence and how well it suits for the mission at hand. I trust your jundgement.

Scripting:

Because OFPEC is a site focused on editing, mission scripting will be reviewed with a hard hand. How the missions scripting is has the most effect on the overall score. Bugs and bad editing drop the score immediately no questions asked. On the other hand if a mission has good, outstanding or even exceptionally good scripting the mission will score more. Take Toadlife's Operation LoJack for instance which was on the verge of getting 10/10.

You can get a butt feeling wether the mission has editor driven scripting or external sqs files doing the job. These should be treated as equal. There's no glory in making an sqs script do something a trigger could do if the mission isn't fighting with lag issues or such.
Also, scripting should be in the mission to enforce the athmosphere and plot. Scripting should never be used because of "This is cool and I can do it".

So, scripting score includes everything there is to scripting. It's kind of hard to explain but I'll try. If a mission has a tittletext trigger, that's scripting. If it has an sqs file doing the titletext, that's scripting. If the titletext trigger prints the text in the middle of the screen doing a firefight, that's bad scripting. If the sqs file prints the text to the bottom of the screen with custom a font, that's good scripting. Get my drift?
You can do things in the editor or in sqs files, it doesn't matter, there are many ways to do the same things in OFP. What matters is how well and classy it's done.
Again an example from Toadilfe's Operation LoJack. The intro featured credits text with custom fonts in the lower left corner of the screen. Now that's better than in the middle of the screen with that big white titletext font don't you think? Yes - good scripting.

Camera:

Consider how the intro, cutscenes and outros suit the mission at hand. Are they well scripted? Are they too short or too long? How about the artistic side of the camera work?

Overall:

The overall score consists of the above categories but not straight. For example a mission scored 3-5-7-5 doesn't have to have the mathematical average of 5. Even still, the overall score must reflect the four categories. Say a mission has average everything but yet is hard enough with great athmosphere and good playability it can score better because of that.

Something that doesn't fit in to the four categories are for example
- sounds (custom sounds usually boost up the mission)
- playability (did you enjoy playing it)
- general athmosphere (ambience, surprices, twists in plot, ...)
- replay value (are the events random to keep you interested to play again)
- plot (is there a plot, does it have twists, can you follow it)
- originality (not another "kill all russians at Morton" -mission)
- realism (consider this only if the mission is trying to be realistic. A zombie slaghter mission
  doesn't have to be that realistic)
- difficulty (is it hard enough or too easy or too hard)

Take all these and more into consideration when you think about the overall score.
State clearly in your review text what was it that affected to the overall score.

Score descriptions:

This is what each score should stand for. There are exceptions to this as in everything. For example if a mission doesn't end it should not be reviewed, however if the mission is good otherwise you should review it and give a score of 0/10 and then explain this in your review.

0  Non functional. For example the mission is good and playable, but it won't end.

1  Makes you wonder why the author even submitted this

2  Sure you can play it, but you won't enjoy it.

3  Missing a lot of key elements to make it an average mission.

4  This is your basic mission with nothing fancy and maybe some bugs.

5  Now this is already something you can recommend for downloading. Still very basic.

6  A good playable mission. Everything works but a little rough around the edges.

7  Very good. You can enjoy this and you'd like to see more of these submitted.

8  An excellent mission with good scripting and plot. You want to play it again.

9  Outstanding. The author is a genious. It's something different and exciting.

10  Perfect. There has never been a 10/10 mission reviewed at OFPEC and frankly I don't think there ever will be. To score 10/10 the mission must go through a vote among the reviewers.

[macguba]

It's quite hard to define what makes something good.   For example, you can't say that having a good Gear selection makes a good Briefing because in some missions Gear selection is not appropriate.

Always get the basics right:  no spelling mistakes, links to map makers that work and Objectives that tick off.    The Objectives must be easy to understand and the Notes section must be used for something interesting.   Gear selection and the ranks and skills of the loons in your group should be appropriate to the mission.

You also get credit for fancy features:  sounds, pictures, translations and so on.

But perhaps the most important thing (for a good mark) is, does the Briefing create a good atmosphere?   Does it suspend your disbelief?    Mission making is storytelling:  is it a good story, well told?

The best advice is to play some high scoring missions, then you'll see what is good.   Then play some low scoring ones and you'll see what is bad.    The differences are obvious.    

Read Creating good missions.

Edit:  Ah, beaten by Artak again.