Murphy covers this weeks foundry news and covers some major changes to the show. Then, Future Murphy takes on the console quickies.
Hope you can find a co-host soon, Murphy, good to keep a presence and promote the foundry. Oh I know, how about auspix?
It is pretty hard going for a story based foundry authors to get plays, but yet again, it doesn’t help when a podcast reviews spotlighted and/ or high profiled author’s missions. Food for thought.
Not necessarily true. Only if you are trying to help people find good missions they may not have heard about. One of the primary goals of FF was indeed that but it also was to find the best mission and discover great missions in each of the categories we reviewed. Many times spotlighted missions can be a great example to show new foundry authors how to create great missions using tricks these type of missions use. That would be one reason I would select a high profile mission to review over another less known mission if I thought one had a lot to teach and show other authors.
So I take it that you will only review it if it only meets a curtain level of excellence or spotlighted? How encouraging.
I said this once before once in a email to PUGC a while back. There is only one Alimac, only one Kirkfat, only one Murphy, only one auspix and last time I looked, there is only one of me. We only bring to the editor in what we are wanting to show the STO community in what we produce, in all shapes and sizes and in all sorts of levels. Does that mean we don’t do our best? To me, it bring our own uniqueness to the foundry. Just have to look at the Purity series to see that.
So since it doesn’t meet your standards of a great mission, worthy of spotlighting, that it should not be commended for the author’s efforts?
I got Central Auditory Processing Disorder (Google it), I struggle everyday with spelling and grammar. I can’t even hang on to a job and be on a government disability pension for the rest of my life.
Should I not make foundry missions and have one of them spotlighted or reviewed on FF?
Should I do not co host Tribbles in Ecstacy Podcast and not promote foundry missions on the show?
Should I not be the co fleet leader of Caspian?
Quite honestly, I have been through a lot of crap with my foundry missions and deeply hurt from it too. I not so into making missions as I use too, but I still try to create something new and different to what I have made before.
So you still want to show the mark to achieve or you want to encourage the under dog that they did a good job?
When the hell did I say I would review just the best of the best or only spotlight? I was responding to your statement about it not helping the foundry when people reviewed spotlighted missions. I disagreed saying they shouldn’t always be ignored by foundry reviewers. There were several reasons I decided for example on the show to cover the Purity series even though it would take six weeks. One was there were so many authors we hadn’t reviewed before and we always made sure to jump around between authors. Two it was the first collaborative project so it was worth reviewing on the show as it was a huge event for the foundry. Three was with all of the work being put into the series it was bound to have things worth discussing on the show to show other authors how they might want to go about creating their missions. Just because something gets spotlighted doesn’t mean a reviewer or podcaster should just out right ignore it like you seemed to imply. On the show I tended to stay away from spotlighted mission unless that was all we had since the foundry search got screwed back in December.
The primary goal since the show started out though was always to bring a mission to the table that we both thought the majority of our audience would enjoy since STOked. Does that mean every other reviewer out there has to have the same mission statement. Everyone has their own way of reviewing and how they pick their missions.
In the end we weren’t paid to do what we do, and we did it because we loved the foundry. Unless someone is getting paid by someone to do their own show, they are free to do whatever they want with it. I don’t see that you have any ground to be making statements like should I do a podcast or be co fleet leader just because others choose to review spotlighted missions because people say I make bad missions, which when did I call your missions bad? I’ve played them before and while I did have a few issues with stuff like grammar and story, I felt otherwise they were well built. In the end, Cryptic has screwed up the foundry. Its their fault the foundry search is so screwed up. Foundry podcasters like myself even have a difficult time finding missions unless they were sent in. Hell if anyone is taking the time to review missions in the foundry and putting more work into it than the review box whether its a podcast or written text gets huge props, no matter what people should be grateful of them putting the effort into doing more than that given the state of things for the foundry since Season 4.
Well I suppose the actions and decisions we take can lead to open interpretations.
“In the end we weren’t paid to do what we do, and we did it because we loved the foundry” – Why you thing I’m making these comments?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This site provides resources, information, and tutorials for Star Trek Online user-generated-content. If you're an author, player, or STO enthusiast, then you've come to the right place.
We encourage all of our members to contribute to the blog and add their missions to the foundry section of STOwiki.