Map Description: A Must

[eubz]

For almost half a year till now when I look at the submitted maps of SOME users, I am always in dismay that they don't have proper description before clicking the upload button. And so, as a member of the map reviewers' group, I always tell them to fix or try to polish the description they have (some really don't have any descriptions). With this, I thought that, how about if a user who tries to submit his map without a description (and a description of the map should not be less than the prescribed number of words) he will not be able to upload the map instead he will get an error that says, "The map has no description." or "The description you entered is too short." and some window will pop up/show up giving him links to description generators or description templates we have here. With this, I think, all of the maps will have a proper description.

I wrote this because of the reason I stated above and the Map Submission Rule States that:

Submitted Map Resources need to have a good description on the Hive.

 

[Heinvers]

I fully agree with this. Although they are supposed to look at the map submission rules(few do that:/). Great idea eubz.

 

[Ralle]

There is already links to help the user. Are these not enough?

Anyway, I would suggest we increase the minimum description length.

 

[Kino]

A description can be flashy, use tons of BBcodes, images and still tell you nothing useful about the map. Or worse, it could be misinformative.

I once did the latter out of spite, and was praised for it.
Tells you what qualifies as a good description around here.

 

[TriggerHappy]

There's nothing else we can do.

The people that post these kinds of maps aren't going to read any rules.

 

[LordDz]

Add a simple script that detects if the description has .png, jpg, .jpeg, etc atleast one time, if not print an error message "An image is required for uploading a map".

 

[Heinvers]

Fair enough That should make some interest for the new uploader.

There's nothing else we can do.

The people that post these kinds of maps aren't going to read any rules.

I think they should start reading those rules. Imo, by ignoring those rules they disregard the users who actually put some effort into their maps.

 

[TriggerHappy]

Add a simple script that detects if the description has .png, jpg, .jpeg, etc atleast one time, if not print an error message "An image is required for uploading a map".

What would that solve?

 

[Kyrbi0]

The issue appears to be one that is reflected in Real Life all the time (and somewhat parodied in a recent XKCD ); how can we force people to give good information (good feedback, good descriptions, it's all the same)?

The answer is, 'you can't'. It's not possible to force someone to do it, and neither requiring post-lengths nor image uploads nor anything else will truly solve the problem (though they may provide some relief, or at least a minimum of the requirements).

In my opinion, I suppose one of the only solutions is to put the onus on them. If the map uploader has not met the requirements in any way (description, etc), then put it as "pending" or "temporarily rejected" and move on. Don't even waste your time checking it; just point them to the rules. Those who really care about their map, will conform to fit the (incredibly minimal) guidelines for uploading. Those who don't, will eventually have their resource perma-removed. They can always try again.

//EDIT// - 2000th POST (I think)!!!

 

[GhostWolf]

Can we get a helpful and constructive bot instead of the ones spamming about kitchens pretty please?

Not reading the rules is hardly an excuse to being just plain stupid. If someone uploads any kind of resource without a description, pushing the rules in front of his face wont solve the problem.

(I never read the rules and I was only banned 2 times and got 8 infractions)

 

[eubz]

The only way I can think to solve the problem is that, if a user will not be able to upload his map without having any words in the description area. Is this possible?

 

[Binsu]

My opinion about the matter.

I agree with the suggestion seeing that many users would finally make a proper description for their map. It's really just sad to know that they made a really great map but they did not even bothered one bit to create a description for it, I have seen a little of this situations.

If I may request also, it could maybe make the chances higher to link some more description tutorials when uploading map instead of Kobas' only maybe include Vengeance which as far as I know is recommended by now and the newly description generator by eubz here which works perfectly for melee maps. Not only in the Uploading Sections but in the Updating Sections as well. Can increase the chances of users seeing it once uploading maps or updating them most likely in updating so they'll waste no time finding the tutorials or generators itself.

Overall, I agree with the description being a requirement.

 

[Idaero Ace]

I saw the rules but not read it.

eubz has great idea. So there must be minimum text on the map description also it must detects the BB Code too.

 

[Orcnet]

I would suggest we increase the minimum description length.

Uh no chief I suggest we keep it the way it is, I wouldn't read a massive wall of text times 2 plus Rainbow Brite's colorful alphabet feature just to appease the mass.

The idea of making a map description in the first place is just to inform all users what's stored inside the map and how it should result a play value. (I believe it started 2009?). Most users read rules nowadays, only some dismisses it.

 

[PurgeandFire]

Uh no chief I suggest we keep it the way it is, I wouldn't read a massive wall of text times 2 plus Rainbow Brite's colorful alphabet feature just to appease the mass.

I share the same opinion. My fear is that people will just spam mindless text. Even if they have a lengthy description and some pictures, it may be complete gibberish.

There have been a couple of spell submissions where people just copy and paste the same thing over "DotA spell X DotA spell X DotA spell X DotA spell X DotA spell X" for whatever reason. Adding a minimum length won't necessarily fix the description issues.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

Helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment, helpful comment.

Submit.

 

[Rheiko]

i don't think there is anything we can do about it, because it depends on the user.

 

[GreeN!X]

Imo, it's fine the way it is right now. It just depends on what "good description" means to users who view the map. Since there are times that a description that's too informative could spoil the contents of the map and there are also times that a map can never really have a description of more than a few sentences (like templates). So, I suggest keeping it the way it is right now.

BTW, I don't think the requirement of adding bbcodes to the description (as some users have suggested) will help either since there are descriptions that look better without those bbcodes (especially if the uploader doesn't know how to use bbcodes).

 

[Kyrbi0]

I share the same opinion. My fear is that people will just spam mindless text. Even if they have a lengthy description and some pictures, it may be complete gibberish.
...
Adding a minimum length won't necessarily fix the description issues.

Absolutely, and exactly what I was saying. The problem is, we can't "legislate" an informative, thoughtful description ("Legislate" being used loosely here to mean "make rules/guidelines", etc). Or at least, such rules can only go so far.

No, the burden must be put on the mapmaker to do the job right; otherwise the punishment consequence is their map will not be reviewed or accepted. It's a consequence as much as picking up one end of a stick will also pick up the other.

 

[Lambdadelta]

ITT: Ahhh, wc3c.net reminiscent.

 

[Kyrbi0]

ITT: Ahhh, wc3c.net reminiscent.

Huh? Who/how so?

 

[TriggerHappy]

I say change nothing.

 

[eubz]

Well, I have just raised up my suggestion here because of the rule
(to quote again)

Submitted Map Resources need to have a good description on the Hive.

and because of too repetitive telling to the users to have a description, modify your description, use bb codes to fix your description, use some tools for your description, read the rules, etc.

If it's the decision of everybody to change nothing, then let the majority rule. Besides, it's up to the moderator whether to reject or set to needs fix a map not following the rules.

 

[GhostWolf]

You can make an alert box with something that asks the user something along the lines of "Are you sure your description is good enough?", just as a reminder. but you can't in any way force anyone to write a good description, because you can't detect a "good" or "bad" description.

 

[eubz]

I just want to show some maps uploaded having improper/ no description at all:
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/laura-k-teresa-m-250232/?prev=status=p
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/halloween-mania-2-a-250231/?prev=status=p
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/eva-vs-dievite-250230/?prev=status=p
11:28 PM.

 

[LordDz]

What would that solve?

It would be a hint for the user to upload screenshots and add a description.

Another way would be that when pressing the upload button, the user would be taken to another page with "Are you sure your description is complete? Maps without a proper description are rejected.

Here are some good template descriptions for you to use.."
Or something like that.

 

[Idaero Ace]

LordDz : nice signature

Well, I think its the uploader problem, their maps will be not be approved.
It just bothering the mod. I can't say anything for this problem.

 

[eubz]

I could see there is already a link to kobas' tutorial on having a description in a map but when a user is in a hurry uploading his/her map. He/she will ignore clicking the link that is why, some maps which have been uploaded in the Pending Maps section has no description at all.

 

[Rheiko]

imo, every new user almost always has this kind of enthusiasm that makes them uploading his/her map in a hurry

 

[eubz]

imo, every new user almost always has this kind of enthusiasm that makes them uploading his/her map in a hurry

That leads to frustration when their map got rejected or set to awaiting updates because of this simple issue.

 

[Rui]

I would rather have people suggest improvements—in a moderate way, as opposed to a degree of radicalism I've seen a few times—, instead of leveling bureaucracy. Comments are a much more precise feedback than assuming quantitative restrictions will elevate description qualities.

P.S. — If this suggestion is due to growing tired of repeating yourself, it is okay to shorten your feedback or just stop commenting at all; the job can get tiresome, but the bright thing is that no one forces you to do it.

Agreed to changing nothing.

 

[Ralle]

One could also install a tool similar TextExpander (for Mac OS). It gives you expandable snippets. I use this for things like []sol which gets turned into [Solved] and []ign which is converted to [Ignored]. Just to make things I write a lot a bit easier. I have the same for username changes, but those are longer.

 

[Daffa]

Just a little note, according to my 1 year experience, this problem happens to majority of new maps, I recall 40% - 65% of maps are uploaded without proper description.

In my opinion, there's nothing to change as other said. I would do in Punishment way, however, it really discourages users if we instantly sends punishment right after they do the mistake (similar to schools).

 

[Rheiko]

agree, we must at least warn them first and give them a bit tolerancy

Just a little note, according to my 1 year experience, this problem happens to majority of new maps, I recall 40% - 65% of maps are uploaded without proper description.

as i've stated before almost every new user always has this kind of enthusiasm that makes them uploading his/her map in a hurry and in a result, they don't make a proper description for it or they don't know how to describe it and they ignore kobas' tutorial

 

[Daffa]

agree, we must at least warn them first and give them a bit tolerancy


as i've stated before almost every new user always has this kind of enthusiasm that makes them uploading his/her map in a hurry and in a result, they don't make a proper description for it or they don't know how to describe it and ignore the linked kobas' tutorial

The only way is to enforce them. THW is like school, where students are forced to follow the rules, wether they like it or not. School has MINOR tolerance on mistakes however.
There's no efficient way to force them, unlike in reality. I guess it's not more of in a hurry, it's because they want to feel all the fame like successful maps such as DotA, EotA, Harrier's Command and so on without knowing what's they're doing can be their worst mistake in their career.

 

[Rheiko]

simply right.

 

[Rui]

Guys, I think the majority of the Hive is much more mature than what you're picturing and, even if most newcomers are in their early teens, it is unfair to judge the whole from the part—that is, a few of those newcomers will also be people in their twenties.

I don't quite like the school analogy either. School has an entirely different mission. The Hive, on the other hand, is a database of user-made maps for a leisure video game. It is blown out of proportion to take it with the degree of seriousness school should be taken with.

From experience, I know there are users who will react immensely intemperate to just one or more points of reputation penalty. Inclusively, they will think you've got a grudge against them, hate them, among other variants. On the other extreme, there will be well intentioned people who happen to commit newbie mistakes. Is it really appropriate to just bash them and possibly convey to them a hostile view of the site?

Punishment as a way to enforce “good”—whatever that means, as already has been criticized—map descriptions sounds terrible to me. Things are okay as they are. Some map's description could be improved? Just say it to its author!

 

[sonofjay]

Yup, totally agreed with Rui. That school analogy is really fuck up.

Hive never really forced anyone to follow the rules because if that is the case then most of the users are already banned.

About the map description discussion I think this thread is just an extreme exaggeration. Most of the new and functional maps here have really decent description because their creator knows what they're doing and giving effort to every aspect of the map including the map's description while most of the map that doesn't have or have poor description will be rejected anyway because they're most of the time doesn't meet the requirements of a decent map and is mostly created by people who will probably leave modding after a week or two.

Oh and hey, I've seen maps with decent description and yet description fags still criticize it.

 

[eubz]

P.S. — If this suggestion is due to growing tired of repeating yourself, it is okay to shorten your feedback or just stop commenting at all; the job can get tiresome, but the bright thing is that no one forces you to do it.

It is not of becoming tiresome or whatsoever. It is for the good of the user who is submitting a map. If at his haste he quickly clicked the upload button without reading anything, the pop-up window will tell him he has forgotten something he has to do.

About the map description discussion I think this thread is just an extreme exaggeration. Most of the new and functional maps here have really decent description because their creator knows what they're doing and giving effort to every aspect of the map including the map's description while most of the map that doesn't have or have poor description will be rejected

As for me, a map having flashy, nice and better description is not a must for it to be approved. Just having the title, having the map maker tell what the map is all about including its functionality, telling who are the people who helped him in the creation process of his map, and that the map follows the map submission rules is what matter most.
Even Just a simple title and a paragraph telling everyone what a map is all about can be called a description.

 

[Metalbear]

... You people are supposed to try out the map and enjoy it, NOT being bored reading thru buncha walls of text. -.-

WC3 got so old, that people actually have nothing better to do, then trolling the newly born gamers/map creators about their compact description.

Also to the spoileis - I used to have a pc with specs:
Processor Sempron 2400+ (ancient tech!)
Vcard: Nvidia 5200 FX Gigabyte (ancient tech!)
RAM: 512 MB DDR400 Kingmax (AGAIN ANCIENT TECH!)
Internet: 3G 64bit ...

Currently I have:
Processor: Intel Core I3-3220 3.3gz
Vcard: Nvidia GT 640 2GB GDDR3 version Gygabyte
RAM: Dual Technology 2x4GB DDR3 1600 Kingston
Internet: Atleast 10Mbit Broadband

I was annoyed by the buncha "image-o-spam" culture in this site, for both the big issue of ancient pc I had, and the ULTRA slow internet! Even tho my current pc is amazing in today's standards, and my internet could support a hosting by itself now, I still find annoying the buncha "readmycrap", and the popular hiveworkshop-like "Image-o-spam".

When I come back from the 9.5(MINIMUM!) hours trip from the factory, I dont wana read your crap of what balances you have made, or your "amazing grafikz" filling my screen like adds. I just wana know, if the maps suits my needs of entertainment! I for example like SIMULATION GAMES. I tend to download the map, and try it on for ATLEAST 15 min, to see if only the beginning sux. Also, I dont enjoy playing around the multiplayer, since players in there tend to have the same trolling behavior as in here. With which I mean that I strictly want the map to be singleplayer AI!

Just let the people have fun already, and stop acting as if you are about to give your 20 dollarz for der new best releaze of some commercial game!
More simple I cant write it for you to understand it ...

 

[MasterTrainer]

How about send the to-be uploaded maps to some kind of purgatory where they await final judgment, before they get uploaded?

 

[Vengeancekael]

Yup, totally agreed with Rui. That school analogy is really fuck up.

Hive never really forced anyone to follow the rules because if that is the case then most of the users are already banned.

*DEAD*

Also can ya'll stop discussing this, there's more important stuff to decide on. 'Ya know, like how to support SCII modding on this website.

 

[Daffa]

Guys, I think the majority of the Hive is much more mature than what you're picturing and, even if most newcomers are in their early teens, it is unfair to judge the whole from the part—that is, a few of those newcomers will also be people in their twenties.

I don't quite like the school analogy either. School has an entirely different mission. The Hive, on the other hand, is a database of user-made maps for a leisure video game. It is blown out of proportion to take it with the degree of seriousness school should be taken with.

From experience, I know there are users who will react immensely intemperate to just one or more points of reputation penalty. Inclusively, they will think you've got a grudge against them, hate them, among other variants. On the other extreme, there will be well intentioned people who happen to commit newbie mistakes. Is it really appropriate to just bash them and possibly convey to them a hostile view of the site?

Punishment as a way to enforce “good”—whatever that means, as already has been criticized—map descriptions sounds terrible to me. Things are okay as they are. Some map's description could be improved? Just say it to its author!

I refer the way we enforce rules, I hope it doesn't really confuses you too much.
Perhaps you're right about the analogy being fucked up.
Anyway,maybe you have a better view than mine, considering your experience as a former staff.

Yup, totally agreed with Rui. That school analogy is really fuck up.

Hive never really forced anyone to follow the rules because if that is the case then most of the users are already banned.

About the map description discussion I think this thread is just an extreme exaggeration. Most of the new and functional maps here have really decent description because their creator knows what they're doing and giving effort to every aspect of the map including the map's description while most of the map that doesn't have or have poor description will be rejected anyway because they're most of the time doesn't meet the requirements of a decent map and is mostly created by people who will probably leave modding after a week or two.

Oh and hey, I've seen maps with decent description and yet description fags still criticize it.

I don't really think ban is part of the analogy(?)

Perhaps you're right about the modding part. I have to agree on that.

Some people are too descriptive askers, and this can't be avoided, however, if Moderators deemed enough, then it's enough, Eubz post should explain it well.

It is not of becoming tiresome or whatsoever. It is for the good of the user who is submitting a map. If at his haste he quickly clicked the upload button without reading anything, the pop-up window will tell him he has forgotten something he has to do.


As for me, a map having flashy, nice and better description is not a must for it to be approved. Just having the title, having the map maker tell what the map is all about including its functionality, telling who are the people who helped him in the creation process of his map, and that the map follows the map submission rules is what matter most.
Even Just a simple title and a paragraph telling everyone what a map is all about can be called a description.

Yet, the simple task is still ignored by many.
Not too flashy but not too classic, else people can make wall of text of craps and call it description.

 

[GhostThruster]

this is a non-issue. i think pop-ups and whatnot would take too much effort to implement to fix a problem thats not really even a problem. i mean, maps with a lack of description dont do any harm or add any workload onto reviewers.

it would help though in the 'map rules' box that appears in the upload maps page to explicitly state:

Maps require descriptions with at least:

• Information on what the map is and how to play
• Evidence of map's playability eg) screenshots, videos, link to development threads/official sites
• Credits list