Quaddicted Suggestions

Quaddicted.com Quaddicted.com Discussion
21

[quote=Qmaster]I figure I’ll get this forum started with a suggestion thread. Anyone have any features they want to suggest for Quaddicted? Any forum topics, changes to layout, improvements, etc. ? I can’t really think of any suggestion other than to have this…a suggestion thread. :wink:

Cheers to Spirit for adding this forum, a really really really cool new feature. This forum is really the biggest thing I would have suggested for the site a few days ago. I’m looking forward to see this forum grow. Happy posting everyone! :)[/quote]

Well, I’m going to get virtually tarred and feathered for suggesting this as a Quaddicted project, but I have to suggest this under the “etc.” category.

I think that, for me, Quake’s gameplay is good, yet boxy, clean, and stale at the same time due to age (that’s inevitable). So, I think that it needs updated and freshened up. And, to do this, I think that, just like classic Doom has Brutal Doom by Sergeant_Mark_IV, I think that Quake needs Brutal Quake. In fact, I’d be interested in playing more Quake maps because of this alone.

I believe that Brutal Doom is responsible for helping reinvigorate the classic Doom modding community. Likewise, something like Brutal Quake could help reinvigorate the Quake modding community.

Let’s be realistic here. In the end, as with playing any other game, playing Quake is just about having fun and the flexibility of taste which comes with it. Even with me, sometimes I feel like a hardcore purist, and other times I feel like just having some happyfunkills. I’m not serious all of the time, that’s for darn sure. So, I think that my suggestion is not disrespectful to the legacy of Quake, just an example of tempering idealism with realism.

Anyways, thanks for reading. :slight_smile:

22

CasualQuakeGuy, 2 things:

  1. I don’t think this belongs in the Quaddicted Suggestions thread. This thread is for suggesting changes/improvements/additions to the website, and not for suggesting new mods/maps.

Let me be the first with the tar and feathers: I don’t think the Quake SP1 scene is any need of „reinvigoration”. As anyone who frequents this site can plainly see, there is no shortage of new releases of extraordinarily high quality.

Of course people play Quake for different reasons and have different preferences when it comes to custom maps, but your forum posts so far have expressed dissatisfaction with pretty much every facet of Quake SP: you cannot find custom maps that live up to your ideal vision, and you find the gameplay “stale”.

I say this half-jokingly, but: are you sure Quake is the game for you?

I’m sorry if this comes across as harsh.

23

Again, sorry if my response above came across as self-righteous and rude. CasualQuakeguy, you are of course entitled to your opinion. Perhaps you want to start a different thread, though, under “General Discussion about Quake”. There have been a few attempts to “modernise” Quake (or aspects of Quake) via various mods/engine extras etc., so maybe others could suggest something and help you find/compile an approximation of the “Brutal Quake” you are looking for.

24

I disagree about some of the reasons, especially I think that quake’s gameplay is great, but a Brutal Quake could be great fun if developed by some good guys.

Engoo’s pixel gore blood fest mode would be a perfect base.

Give the DMSP2 mod a try!

25

General purpose forum sections would be nice, to talk about non-quake stuff like music, tech, life etc

26

The four screenshots/images on the front page have been messed up (at least in Firefox) for a while now, what’s up with that?
Also, think about what I said on the Articles section. I’m really busy right now (and trying to finish more levels), but I’d be willing to contribute content.

27

Infinite float pushing the pictures off the screen :smiley:

28

How about a link on the frontpage, visible to registered users, to this user activity log: https://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/log.php? As fas as I can tell, it is not linked anywhere (I personally have it bookmarked on my primary computer, but can never remember how to find it when I’m away from home) and I’m not sure how many registered users are even aware of it.

29

Also, if the idea has not been dropped forever, I’d like to renew my request for the feature suggested here: https://www.quaddicted.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=84

30

[quote=negke][list=*]
]Fix or workaround for the author links on map pages. Currently, names with multiple words make the filter either only search for the first word or replace spaces and special characters so that it returns zero results./]
[/list][/quote]

Somewhat related: it would also be great if authors names were clickable on the main map page (https://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/), as opposed to just on individual map pages.

It is of course not hard just to go to an individual map’s page and then click on the author, or to type the author’s name in the search box (just like it is not hard to retype names manually in the case of the issue mentioned by negke) – but having clickable author names on the main map page would make the search process smoother, I think (just like having the problem negke mentions fixed would improve the experience).

Provided it’s not a pain to implement, of course.

31

Yeah, I’ve also been searching for a link to that a lot, until I realized I should memorize it

32

Tags are really useful in aiding search results, and it is on balance a good thing that users are able to add tags – as long as they are accurate and descriptive.

One of the main problems with the current open, unfiltered and unmoderated tag system arises when people start adding evaluative tags, as has happened over the past couple of days when two users started adding the tag “mustplay” to several of their favourite maps. While I am sure this was done with good intentions and while I appreciate their enthusiasm, there are at least two reasons why this is a problem in my view:

a) It serves no purpose. The quality of a given map is already expressed by the users’ ratings and comments, and the editor’s rating (and sometimes description).

b) It is not fair to other users. As I said, I am sure this was not done with malicious intent, but by adding evaluative tags, these two users are effectively forcing their opinion on everyone else. If they wish to express their passion for their favourite maps, they can rate and comment just like everybody else, where others are free to agree or disagree and express their own views.

Therefore, I would suggest

  1. Introducing a policy of no evaluative tags (i.e. no tags such as “stupid”, “brilliant”, “crap”, “mustplay”, etc.).

  2. Enforcing the above policy by making it possible for the administrator and moderator to edit and remove tags. The tags can then be reviewed periodically and evaluative tags as well as obvious typos and misspelled words can be removed or corrected.

Perhaps in addition to “Add comma-separated tags:”, map pages could say “Please do not add evaluative tags” or “Please keep tags descriptive”, possibly with a link to a page that explains the tag policy and gives examples of evaluative vs. descriptive tags.

33

I’d also like to bump my earlier suggestions re: the Articles page, and volunteer some services to help on that later this month, when I get time, if needed.

Also could you add Necros’ review here:
https://shoresofnis.wordpress.com/2010/05/19/review-arwop-–-a-roman-wilderness-of-pain/
And my history of the maps here:
https://www.quaddicted.com/articles/a_history_of_a_roman_wilderness_of_pain_1999-2009_by_tronyn_2009
To “Additional Links” on the Roman Wilderness of Pain map page?

34

i’d like to be able to re-rate a map. i’ve replayed a few & wondered why i rated it one way or another. perhaps i’m better now, or drank too much then.

i’d like access to the speedmap events in the quake injector. only a few show up. yeah, i can do it the ‘old-fashioned’ way, but i love the quake injector!

Spirit, thanks for everything.

35

Amazingly, one user is STILL doing this and steadfastly using tags instead of ratings/comments: this person’s user profile shows 1 rating, 3 comments and 175 (!) tags, many of which are subjective/evaluative.

I would have put this down to a simple misunderstanding, but this is continuing AFTER onetruepurple, Ijed, MikeTaylor and I asked the user in question to stop and after Ijed provided a very clear explanation why. It is really starting to become annoying.

Should you decide to go this route, I have prepared a potential tag policy explanation. It’s all common sense, really, but evidently one cannot depend on common sense. Obviously feel free to use this, modify it or ignore it, as you see fit:

Tag policy

The purpose of tags is to help users search for maps that share certain features. Please keep tags descriptive and accurate.

DO NOT add evaluative or subjective tags. If you want to express your opinion about a map, you can rate the map (from 1 to 5) and/or leave a comment.

Examples of acceptable tags:

Texture set or theme: “wizard”, “castle”, “base”, “realism”, “daikatana”, “hexen”, etc.
Size: “small”, “medium”, “large”, etc.
Dependencies: “quoth”, “drake”, “soa”, etc.
Map type: “speedmap”, “turtlemap”, “remix”, “remake”, “dm”, etc.
Technical features: “limits”, “source”, “monsters”, etc.
Homages or references to earlier maps or games: “Doom”, “e1m1”, etc.

Examples of unacceptable tags:

“crap”, “poor”, “avoid”, “rubbish”, “masterpiece”, “recommended”, “perfect”, etc.

36

That’s a great template, thanks! https://www.quaddicted.com/help/tagging_policy

I also enabled uppercase characters now as well as _ and -

37

Thank you, Spirit. Here’s hoping that does the trick.

38

Good yob Spirit, now I get this error every time I try to add a tag:

Also, a suggestion: Have the link to the policy pop up only after the user clicks the text field.

39

Oops… Should work again, I did not test tags with _ or - yet though.

40

And I reverted to lowercase only. Mixing in uppercase would just create duplicates.