PDA

View Full Version : [Poll] Do you think Atari and Nivizzio should corroborate with select UGC Creators?



deathtome
06-13-2016, 09:22 AM
Please try to keep on topic of the poll please.
This post doesn't have anything to do with anything other then the fact of should they or should they not.

As of 6/23/2016 - 9:00

46 - Total Votes

29 - Yay

Airboss,
AtiTech,
Beaker86, ---------------------Commented
coolman916,
DanPlayer01,
deathtome, ---------------------Commented
dwwilkin, ---------------------Commented
edtbh,
f794251,
Gandalf,
glychd1001,
Hersheypark2011, ---------------------Commented
Horsti12,
jerseygrrll, ---------------------Commented
magicart87,
maxfreak,
Missin_STL,
osudenny,
Remco, ---------------------Commented
shirty,
sofresh5,
Sylvester,
TheMagicianThing, ---------------------Commented
The Stig, ---------------------Commented
Tobi4,
Wabigbear, ---------------------Commented
widlan,
WoodenCode,
yourowner,

17 - Nay

Asgaurd,
B3DDO3,
Bitter Jeweler, ---------------------Commented
Bram313,
Disneyaniac, ---------------------Commented
Future RCT,
Iratewalnut,
Kombiice, ---------------------Commented
mattytude,
Millennium_Force, ---------------------Commented
mixer114,
MrBob101,
nlwouter,
Paul_Boland,
Scott97, ---------------------Commented
Volg.,
Wes_Man77,


People that left a comment, and have voted.
14 different people have left a comment, that either voted or didn't vote.

Beaker86, ----------------------------------------Yay
Bitter Jeweler, ----------------Nay
deathtome, ----------------------------------------Yay
Disneyaniac, ----------------Nay
dwwilkin, ----------------------------------------Yay
Hersheypark2011, ----------------------------------------Yay
jerseygrrll, ----------------------------------------Yay
Kombiice, ----------------Nay
Millennium_Force, ----------------Nay
Remco, ----------------------------------------Yay
Scott97, ----------------Nay
TheMagicianThing, ----------------------------------------Yay
The Stig, ----------------------------------------Yay
Wabigbear, ----------------------------------------Yay


People that have not left a comment but have voted.
32 different people have voted and not left a comment.


Airboss, ----------------------------------------Yay
Asgaurd, ----------------Nay
AtiTech, ----------------------------------------Yay
B3DDO3, ----------------Nay
Bram313, ----------------Nay
coolman916, ----------------------------------------Yay
DanPlayer01, ----------------------------------------Yay
edtbh, ----------------------------------------Yay
f794251, ----------------------------------------Yay
Future RCT, ----------------Nay
Gandalf, ----------------------------------------Yay
glychd1001, ----------------------------------------Yay
Horsti12, ----------------------------------------Yay
Iratewalnut, ----------------Nay
magicart87, ----------------------------------------Yay
mattytude, ----------------Nay
maxfreak, ----------------------------------------Yay
Missin_STL, ----------------------------------------Yay
mixer114, ----------------Nay
MrBob101, ----------------Nay
nlwouter, ----------------Nay
osudenny, ----------------------------------------Yay
Paul_Boland, ----------------Nay
shirty, ----------------------------------------Yay
sofresh5, ----------------------------------------Yay
Sylvester, ----------------------------------------Yay
Tobi4, ----------------------------------------Yay
Volg., ----------------Nay
Wes_Man77,----------------Nay
widlan, ----------------------------------------Yay
WoodenCode, ----------------------------------------Yay
yourowner, ----------------------------------------Yay



People that left a comment, and haven't voted.
1 different people have left a comment and not voted.

hupulups, Leaning towards Yay with comment



Everyone that has some kinda input so far either through voting or leaving a comment.


Airboss,
Asgaurd,
AtiTech,
B3DDO3,
Beaker86,
Bitter Jeweler,
Bram313,
coolman916,
DanPlayer01,
deathtome,
Disneyaniac,
dwwilkin,
edtbh,
f794251,
Future RCT,
Gandalf,
glychd1001,
Hersheypark2011,
Horsti12,
hupulups,
Iratewalnut,
jerseygrrll,
Kombiice,
magicart87,
mattytude,
maxfreak,
Millennium_Force,
Missin_STL,
mixer114,
MrBob101,
nlwouter,
osudenny,
Paul_Boland,
Remco,
shirty,
sofresh5,
Scott97,
Sylvester,
The Stig,
TheMagicianThing,
Tobi4,
Volg.,
Wabigbear,
Wes_Man77,
widlan,
WoodenCode,
yourowner,


I would like to personally say thanks to everyone that has had some kind of input on this poll.

These names and how these people voted is all displayed here.
https://forum.rollercoastertycoon.com/poll.php?pollid=191&do=showresults


P.S ~ I will try to keep this updated and accurate as possible. I plan to keep this updated till Atari and Nvizzio make a official statement about this matter.

Millennium_Force
06-13-2016, 11:07 AM
No, mainly for the reason they should not have to rely on others to create the content they are being paid to make.

deathtome
06-13-2016, 12:19 PM
No, mainly for the reason they should not have to rely on others to create the content they are being paid to make.


That's really not a good reason.

Beaker86
06-13-2016, 12:30 PM
No, mainly for the reason they should not have to rely on others to create the content they are being paid to make.

But it would make it easier for UGC creators to expand on existung sets particularly when PxP is released so that there can be UGC to complement the vanilla assets. For example we've had a few big centerpieces released, if select UGC creators had access to these early we would then also have a variety of related assets to bulk our park. Particularly when we got the Asteroid Belt i love it but the Sci Fi theme is too lean to really use it to its full potential

deathtome
06-13-2016, 12:35 PM
But it would make it easier for UGC creators to expand on existung sets particularly when PxP is released so that there can be UGC to complement the vanilla assets. For example we've had a few big centerpieces released, if select UGC creators had access to these early we would then also have a variety of related assets to bulk our park. Particularly when we got the Asteroid Belt i love it but the Sci Fi theme is too lean to really use it to its full potential

Great point. I also feel like that if they selected the creators and worked with them that we could have more official in game content and the game would not be so heavily dependent on the ugc, as not everyone wants to use ugc. Some might not want to use ugc as there really is no QA with the ugc. Something that was made for ugc could be 50,000+ polygons when it only needs to be 10,000.

Disneyaniac
06-13-2016, 12:53 PM
No, mainly for the reason they should not have to rely on others to create the content they are being paid to make.

Well Said! Scenery and piece by piece building should have been in the game from the beginning. I am glad they decided to implement UGC into the game, but that should be an added bonus as to why I would choose to buy this game over the "other game". The fact that they are relying on the community to do the work is sad. What is even more sad is that they think this game is currently worth $49.99.

deathtome
06-13-2016, 01:33 PM
Well Said! Scenery and piece by piece building should have been in the game from the beginning. I am glad they decided to implement UGC into the game, but that should be an added bonus as to why I would choose to buy this game over the "other game". The fact that they are relying on the community to do the work is sad. What is even more sad is that they think this game is currently worth $49.99.

They are not relying on the community to do anything, it is simply a extra feature that allows players to more customize there parks with object they or someone else made. Ummm, UGC is a bonus. As far as scenery and piece by piece building, you do know the game is still in Early access and still being developed right????

The Stig
06-13-2016, 02:06 PM
As for OP's question: I don't see why not.

That being said, even if the community's top UGC creators don't get brought on board directly, we would still have the option of using their content anyways.

deathtome
06-13-2016, 02:30 PM
As for OP's question: I don't see why not.

That being said, even if the community's top UGC creators don't get brought on board directly, we would still have the option of using their content anyways.

Unless they don't release that content on the workshop.

The Stig
06-13-2016, 03:16 PM
Unless they don't release that content on the workshop.

In which case, I can see where you're coming from. Not a bad idea. It would benefit us players in the long run and provide incentive to the content creators.

Wabigbear
06-13-2016, 03:35 PM
What I would like to see is Nvizzio to come up with a 'Best Practices' manual that outlines what they suggest would work best in the game, a small selection of 'template' structures that match the in-game service buildings and shops that you could use as a guide for creating more, and a selection of textures that match what they used so that we can expand upon their work. I've noticed a couple sets that look fantastic, but they are scaled too large. Templates or some guidelines would help address that. I don't think we've had anything official from then as of yet.

While I get the misgivings about the amount of in-game content, custom stuff in RCT3 ended up being hundred of times more in quantity, so UGC in this game is still going to end up providing most of the content as well. I'd rather it was done right with Nvizzio's help, and the game work flawlessly with custom content.

I don't have a problem if they work with select UGC creators, especially in the beginning, they'd help get UGC off on the right foot, and also help create some community knowledge that others in turn can use.

Kombiice
06-14-2016, 01:19 AM
Problem is optimization and stuff

jerseygrrll
06-14-2016, 04:21 AM
Cities: Skylines works with mod creators and some UGC creators. Stuff that is really popular has even made it into the game.

deathtome
06-14-2016, 07:32 AM
Problem is optimization and stuff

Well if they worked with the UGC creators that could possibly help fix that.

Millennium_Force
06-15-2016, 11:41 PM
The way I see it is that Atari/Nivizzio relying on UGC creators to help create material for a game is pure laziness. It is their job to create content for this game. It is one thing for the UGC creators to create extra content that enhances the game (see RCT3, cities skylines, and I am sure plenty others) but there is no reason UGC creators should be creating content that should have been put into the game originally (I am talking about you PBP construction and a handful of other features).

deathtome
06-16-2016, 01:56 PM
The way I see it is that Atari/Nivizzio relying on UGC creators to help create material for a game is pure laziness. It is their job to create content for this game. It is one thing for the UGC creators to create extra content that enhances the game (see RCT3, cities skylines, and I am sure plenty others) but there is no reason UGC creators should be creating content that should have been put into the game originally (I am talking about you PBP construction and a handful of other features).

Your excuse is lazy.

Millennium_Force
06-16-2016, 03:11 PM
Do you want to be any more immature? If you don't want to be more immature,then do give me solid reasons like I gave you of why I am wrong. Unless of course you recognize I am right and have no idea or reasonable response.

The Stig
06-16-2016, 03:14 PM
The way I see it is that Atari/Nivizzio relying on UGC creators to help create material for a game is pure laziness. It is their job to create content for this game. It is one thing for the UGC creators to create extra content that enhances the game (see RCT3, cities skylines, and I am sure plenty others) but there is no reason UGC creators should be creating content that should have been put into the game originally (I am talking about you PBP construction and a handful of other features).

Translation: it's fine for other games, but not RCTW.

deathtome
06-16-2016, 03:18 PM
Translation: it's fine for other games, but not RCTW.

lol I could have not said it better myself.


Do you want to be any more immature? If you don't want to be more immature,then do give me solid reasons like I gave you of why I am wrong. Unless of course you recognize I am right and have no idea or reasonable response.

Calling someone immature now that right there is real mature...... I don't have to give a reason :P

Millennium_Force
06-16-2016, 04:54 PM
Stig, if you actually read what I had to say, you would see that what I am saying is that the UGC in other games does not provide features and other stuff that the game should already have.

As far as what you are saying DeathToMe... I understand the reason you don't have to give a reason is because you don't have a reason and that is alright. I forgive you.

deathtome
06-16-2016, 05:15 PM
Stig, if you actually read what I had to say, you would see that what I am saying is that the UGC in other games does not provide features and other stuff that the game should already have.

As far as what you are saying DeathToMe... I understand the reason you don't have to give a reason is because you don't have a reason and that is alright. I forgive you.

You have been reported for trolling.....

Disneyaniac
06-16-2016, 06:03 PM
Ok don't post a thread asking for peoples opinion about this topic if you are going to bash everyone who doesn't agree with what your saying. Its called freedom of speech, it is an amendment of the constitution. So if you want to talk about immature, let people voice there opinion without you attacking there point of view, you asked.. I tend to agree with Millennium_Force who is not "trolling".. not sure where you even came up with that, nor is he attacking you or doing anything wrong. He simply stated how he felt about the very topic you asked people to speak of.

jerseygrrll
06-17-2016, 09:43 AM
Stig, if you actually read what I had to say, you would see that what I am saying is that the UGC in other games does not provide features and other stuff that the game should already have.

As far as what you are saying DeathToMe... I understand the reason you don't have to give a reason is because you don't have a reason and that is alright. I forgive you.

Look at the workshop in Cities: Skylines. Creators there have mods and assets that DO provide features the vanilla game does not/did not have. Colossal Order had incorporated some of the most popular ones in the game, such as Fine Road Heights, canals and many other mods/assets. They work with the creators of the most popular mods to make sure they update their creations when a new Update is going to be released.

The Stig
06-17-2016, 10:34 AM
Look at Nolimits Coaster. User created programs like Wood Magic and Force Vector Design was integrated into the game's main editor, adding new features that the game didn't have previously.

Scott97
06-19-2016, 03:46 AM
Translation: it's fine for other games, but not RCTW.

Must be a language barrier, that's certainly not the translation I picked up.

dwwilkin
06-19-2016, 12:53 PM
Clearly some content creators are better at this than others. Some make sets that once PbP is truly effective, would be UGC everyone would want to make the game more robust. Can you imagine the RCTW Main Street and Alpine sets?

Scott97
06-19-2016, 02:30 PM
Clearly some content creators are better at this than others. Some make sets that once PbP is truly effective, would be UGC everyone would want to make the game more robust. Can you imagine the RCTW Main Street and Alpine sets?

The trouble is, a lot of the people who made UGC for RCT3 just lost interest and have moved elsewhere. I don't want to turn this into RCT v PC obviously, but PC offers more creativity and so that's where the creative players have gone, which is why UGC hasn't really taken off over here as much as I think Atari were hoping.
If there were a set of rules etc. released then maybe it would help a bit, but I can't really see UCG taking off no matter what happens, at least for the foreseeable future anyway

Hersheypark2011
06-19-2016, 10:49 PM
I voted yes under the idea that collaborating would mean they would get paid. If some fans want to add their work to the game for free, and Atari/Nvizzio will accept it, then cool. But typically I think most would want to get a little something in return. If this would happen it probably wouldn't be for bulk sets of content, more likely just to flesh out scenery themes and such.
As long as continuity with visuals that Nvizzio has made is kept (which would be on their part to approve what fan-made items are added), I don't see any major downsides.

deathtome
06-19-2016, 11:03 PM
I voted yes under the idea that collaborating would mean they would get paid. If some fans want to add their work to the game for free, and Atari/Nvizzio will accept it, then cool. But typically I think most would want to get a little something in return. If this would happen it probably wouldn't be for bulk sets of content, more likely just to flesh out scenery themes and such.
As long as continuity with visuals that Nvizzio has made is kept (which would be on their part to approve what fan-made items are added), I don't see any major downsides.

I think it would be awesome if Atari/Nvizzio would work with UGC creators either for paid work or none paid work. I personally would just love to see them add something I created into the official game.

I honestly wish more companies would work with their fans / UGC creators / modders more then they currently do. But at the end of the day Atari/Nvizzio would be the ones that makes the calls on if something is good enough or not good enough to be added and if any changes needed to be made to the piece of art for it to be added. If done right this could speed up the amount of time it takes to see more added content to the official game, which in the long run all the players would benefit from this.

hupulups
06-20-2016, 11:18 AM
yes it would be great to participate. Peraphs contest is the solution??:) after all for me it's just lobby of corse it will be not perfect .... just fun!!

Remco
06-21-2016, 01:13 PM
I hope they'll do. I personally do not like to manage so much UGC items. I'd rather have them as an official object in-game. And I don't know if it's true, but (lots of) UGC in your park will increase the loading times. If they work with UGC creator it will be much more organized in-game and there is plenty of new official stuff that is already installed and that you don't have to download first.

deathtome
06-21-2016, 06:05 PM
I hope they'll do. I personally do not like to manage so much UGC items. I'd rather have them as an official object in-game. And I don't know if it's true, but (lots of) UGC in your park will increase the loading times. If they work with UGC creator it will be much more organized in-game and there is plenty of new official stuff that is already installed and that you don't have to download first.

The problem I'm seeing with ugc is that some people are using other peoples models and have no respect for the polygon count of said models. If its not copy righted protected and allowed to be used freely and the artist is credited that's fine. The problem is that the polygon count needs to be kept low as possible as this can cause the game to lag or slow down. People will download a bunch of poorly made ugc and when their game moves slow as a snail they will blame the game.

FuddyWoodie
06-21-2016, 06:31 PM
The problem I'm seeing with ugc is that some people are using other peoples models and have no respect for the polygon count of said models. If its not copy righted protected and allowed to be used freely and the artist is credited that's fine. The problem is that the polygon count needs to be kept low as possible as this can cause the game to lag or slow down. People will download a bunch of poorly made ugc and when their game moves slow as a snail they will blame the game.

They would have every right to blame the game.

If poorly made UGC is allowed into the game because of a lack of quality control on the part of the creators then the feature is poorly implemented, wouldn't you agree?

deathtome
06-21-2016, 07:37 PM
They would have every right to blame the game.

If poorly made UGC is allowed into the game because of a lack of quality control on the part of the creators then the feature is poorly implemented, wouldn't you agree?

No, Nvizzio and Atari have no control on what a person makes and uploads to the steam workshop. That all comes down to the person that is uploading the content to the steam workshop.

Millennium_Force
06-21-2016, 08:27 PM
Shouldn't Atari and Nvizzio be responsible? If the game is unable to support all UGC, even low quality UGC, then it should not have UGC.

Bitter Jeweler
06-21-2016, 09:05 PM
Only the UGC creator is responsible.
Nvizzio/Atari are only responsible for putting out guidelines and warnings in regards to polygons.
It would be nice if uploaded UGC was automatically tagged with poly count.
Then "responsibility" would rest with the downloader.

FuddyWoodie
06-22-2016, 09:58 AM
No, Nvizzio and Atari have no control on what a person makes and uploads to the steam workshop. That all comes down to the person that is uploading the content to the steam workshop.

Having no control and not TAKING control are two different things.

You can't push the blame of a poorly regulated feature onto the players, surely?

The Stig
06-22-2016, 11:07 AM
So what would the solution be? A polygon limit?

Scott97
06-22-2016, 11:10 AM
I think they're suggesting regulation. I must admit I don't think it's their fault if people make UGC with a stupidly high poly count, although I do see the point about the systems being in place to support it

FuddyWoodie
06-22-2016, 11:35 AM
So what would the solution be? A polygon limit?

Well that would be a start, at least until they have managed to optimise the game engine to a satisfactory level.

Considering they kept harping on about baby steps it seems a bit daft they chose to run with UGC before they could even crawl.

deathtome
06-22-2016, 12:01 PM
So what would the solution be? A polygon limit?

No, having a limit on the polygon count would just limit people from making things that they want to make. They just need to make it better known about what should be consider to be good modeling practices.


Well that would be a start, at least until they have managed to optimise the game engine to a satisfactory level.

Considering they kept harping on about baby steps it seems a bit daft they chose to run with UGC before they could even crawl.

No, that would do nothing but limit the people that do know how to model. What do you mean run before walk with UGC they haven't even allowed use to fully make stuff like we want yet. As of right now using the current UGC import tool, we can only make scenery that has, lights, sounds, and animations. We currently can't make UGC that has scripts or videos yet, so that mean no custom rides made by use or no cool effects when peeps walk next to a piece of custom UGC. So No they are not letting us run with the UGC as much as you would like to think.

The problem lays with people importing models that have not been designed for the game but instead have only ripped off of some web site and uploaded to the workshop.

Asgaurd
06-24-2016, 06:16 PM
The way I see it is that Atari/Nivizzio relying on UGC creators to help create material for a game is pure laziness. It is their job to create content for this game. It is one thing for the UGC creators to create extra content that enhances the game (see RCT3, cities skylines, and I am sure plenty others) but there is no reason UGC creators should be creating content that should have been put into the game originally (I am talking about you PBP construction and a handful of other features).


I agree with this to a certain amount, Atari and Nvizzio did not start this poll it was just a normal "I want it now post" so i cant condem atari or nvizzio for this opinion. but for stating that a seperate entity should let there work be used to complete a game is stupid, the only way i can see this as being a viable and fair way is if the UGC creator has said that there work may be used by the atari/nvizzio, to bring in more money when they sell the game. If atari/nvizzio give the selected UGC a royalty or wage then thats a different matter. but in all the UGC i have seen it has been to either enhance a already great game such as skyrim or citys skylines. not to do the work of the studio involved. no matter how worried they are.

deathtome
06-24-2016, 06:27 PM
I agree with this to a certain amount, Atari and Nvizzio did not start this poll it was just a normal "I want it now post" so i cant condem atari or nvizzio for this opinion. but for stating that a seperate entity should let there work be used to complete a game is stupid, the only way i can see this as being a viable and fair way is if the UGC creator has said that there work may be used by the atari/nvizzio, to bring in more money when they sell the game. If atari/nvizzio give the selected UGC a royalty or wage then thats a different matter. but in all the UGC i have seen it has been to either enhance a already great game such as skyrim or citys skylines. not to do the work of the studio involved. no matter how worried they are.


You do know what the meaning of corroborate is right? This is not a "I want this now thread" it's a "should they or should they not do this thread". If you don't think they should that's fine. I you think that Atari/Nvizzio should give some kinda royalty or wage based on work done then that's awesome to. I personally don't care if its paid or not, tho paid would be a lot better. The main reason I feel like this is a good move is that a UGC creator can make something and if people like it a lot then why not work with that UGC creator to get it put into the game as a official item. It can be a great way to save time and money for them, and if we are lucky well get good content that people like and want.

It's a WIN WIN, we get more content that we want and like, as well as have the assurance that its been optimized and approved for the game.

Asgaurd
06-24-2016, 06:53 PM
corroborate or collaborate semantics aside. I understand your concerns that the content and speed of updates is not good shall we say. (im in polite mode lol "fix the paths") but you say IF we are lucky and get good content from the UGC that people want its a win win. why not make a poll for the content creators see how they feel about the whole situation.

deathtome
06-24-2016, 07:30 PM
corroborate or collaborate semantics aside. I understand your concerns that the content and speed of updates is not good shall we say. (im in polite mode lol "fix the paths") but you say IF we are lucky and get good content from the UGC that people want its a win win. why not make a poll for the content creators see how they feel about the whole situation.

"corroborate or collaborate" Which ever is the one that I needed to pick, also sorry if my grammar or wording is not 100% I am dyslexic. But I do try my best to notice any problems with my wording.

I am not concerned with the speed of which content comes out, In fact I am more worried about the quality of work that comes out. Like with the pathing system. But If people do in fact like a piece of UGC and the creator comes to terms for Atari/Nvizzio to use that piece of UGC how would it hurt anything? In fact it would save them time and most likely save them money as time is money. All we are really doing is working with them to set a standard of quality of UGC that is officially added to the game.

Asgaurd
06-24-2016, 07:57 PM
I agree but do you think that for each bit of UGC content that atari/nvizzio (we need to shorten this (A/N) :) it would shorten time in the aspect of accepting external work, but it may cause delays in the legal and contractional obligations of the parties involved unless they were voiding copyright. so while i agree with your premise as a actual functional method i have my doubts about the time and effort involved to make it a viable process, or as i used to say it wont work dude :).

Asgaurd
06-24-2016, 07:58 PM
tell you what i will post new UGC tomorrow for free just for a giggle. I have been playing with low (and i mean low ) poly models. thats if my hangover aint to bad lol

BTW I think your poll was a Intrusion of privacy I saw no statement that you would post the polls results to the community, which smacks of either dishonesty on your part or dam right fraud. bad wicket dude bad wicket. ( in english that means shame on you)

deathtome
06-25-2016, 07:02 AM
tell you what i will post new UGC tomorrow for free just for a giggle. I have been playing with low (and i mean low ) poly models. thats if my hangover aint to bad lol

BTW I think your poll was a Intrusion of privacy I saw no statement that you would post the polls results to the community, which smacks of either dishonesty on your part or dam right fraud. bad wicket dude bad wicket. ( in english that means shame on you)

"Intrusion of privacy" Invalid as far as I can tell, as all the info I posted is already listed on the web for public to see. Please try to keep this thread on topic.

https://forum.rollercoastertycoon.com/poll.php?pollid=191&do=showresults

TheMagicianThing
06-25-2016, 08:40 AM
it would be nice to see certain UGC added to the base of the game without having to roam the workshop :) especially since the people making UGC know how to make them good :D

Beaker86
06-28-2016, 10:29 AM
it would be nice to see certain UGC added to the base of the game without having to roam the workshop :) especially since the people making UGC know how to make them good :D

Id just like to be able to
A) see what is in the workshop as there are now over 700 items but i can only see the same 100 or so i had weeks ago
And
B) have the UGC I enable in the content manager/social hub actually appear to be used in game

deathtome
06-28-2016, 03:45 PM
Id just like to be able to
A) see what is in the workshop as there are now over 700 items but i can only see the same 100 or so I had weeks ago
And
B) have the UGC I enable in the content manager/social hub actually appear to be used in game

I don't ever seem to have a problem with my ugc, other then people just importing other peoples work and them not taking into account the polygon count of the model they are importing. I mean really a small kids playground should not have 192,000 polygons...... My biggest problem with the ugc is that and the god awful UI layout.

Beaker86
06-29-2016, 07:49 AM
I don't ever seem to have a problem with my ugc, other then people just importing other peoples work and them not taking into account the polygon count of the model they are importing. I mean really a small kids playground should not have 192,000 polygons...... My biggest problem with the ugc is that and the god awful UI layout.

I agree with the UI if I try to use the content manager on the main screen i cant actually read any of the names of the items and if i go in game to the social hub my game is already so laggy that it is a nightmare to negotiate.
Ive added numerous UGC items from the social hub and while they show as enabled only a small number of them are availabke in game. I know that they are usable as ive spoken with the author of them and seen them in the UGC tab on other peoples streams

Scott97
06-29-2016, 11:00 AM
I think they should release guidelines and tips for UGC (e.g. Poly count etc.) but none of it should end up in the actual game itself, it's their job to supply sufficient content and hiding away from that by using other people's content (whether paid or unpaid) is just wrong in my opinion

deathtome
06-29-2016, 02:00 PM
I think they should release guidelines and tips for UGC (e.g. Poly count etc.) but none of it should end up in the actual game itself, it's their job to supply sufficient content and hiding away from that by using other people's content (whether paid or unpaid) is just wrong in my opinion

Guidelines would be helpful, something along with polygon references vs size of UGC. Like averages for flat rides, light, ect....

I don't see how or why you would think its not a good move when its handled right.....

1. They can save money buy not having to model the object in house.

2. Free up in house modelers to focus on other content.

3. Adds more Content to Official game.

4. Content has been Approved by Game Devs. and Publisher. (No Need to Worry about what the quality of the objects are.)


Heck, if they did it with a season pass system both the UGC Creators and Game Devs./Publishers could stand to make a little money.


Here is an example of how it could work with a flat ride and some extra scenery objects.


Basically find some select UGC creators have them make like a flat ride, and some extra UGC pieces to go with that ride. Give them some simple guidelines as you would say.

Take that Flat Ride Dev team adds the needed coding and make changes from there so it would be in-game, a long with extra pieces.

Take those items pack them together and release it as a UGC DLC Pack.

Make it so that anyone that has RCTW: Deluxe Edition gets any UGC DLC Packs for free during Early Access. (As a bonus for owning the Deluxe Edition During Early Access)

Anyone that doesn't have a Deluxe Edition can either buy the UGC DLC Packs that they like one at a time or they can upgrade to deluxe.

When game is released to public and fully launch the season pass free ride ends. Deluxe owns would then have to buy them as early access is over or by a season pass.

When a new ride is added thanks to this system everyone would get the added ride, the DLC Packs would include the extra objects and would not be required to enjoy the newly added ride.


CS:GO skins are a great example of how it can be good for the game's Dev./Pub. and the creators. I am sure you can find several more games that have improved in a positive way thanks to content creators.

Scott97
06-29-2016, 04:39 PM
I just feel like for a game which among the gaming community already has a big reputation for being a cheapo cash grab, this will only worsen it. I think UGC should be encouraged, but I think only devs should supply content as the community shouldn't be relied on to do the devs job for them. Improved UI to ensure UGC ease of use, but not actually placing in game

deathtome
06-29-2016, 07:22 PM
I just feel like for a game which among the gaming community already has a big reputation for being a cheapo cash grab, this will only worsen it. I think UGC should be encouraged, but I think only devs should supply content as the community shouldn't be relied on to do the devs job for them. Improved UI to ensure UGC ease of use, but not actually placing in game

Well sorry to tell you but its all about the money at the end of the day, Atari is a company, a companies first goal is to make a profit.

Scott97
06-30-2016, 04:24 AM
Well sorry to tell you but its all about the money at the end of the day, Atari is a company, a companies first goal is to make a profit.

But doesn't a bad reputation reduce sales which reduces profits anyway? I do understand what you're saying, I just think it can't be that hard to spend a bit more time on scenery etc. to give the game a content rich feel in order to satisfy more players and increase sales?

Asgaurd
07-01-2016, 12:53 PM
About 35 years ago when i was a programmer , some of the companies i worked for always expected a product to be done within a certain timeline and if the quality was shall we say less than "really really average" they did not care, they released the game as scheduled and they usually made a small profit, but every time i saw this happen they lost credibility of the gaming community which was minute compared to today, in fact on the last 2 games i worked on i made them take my name of the programmers involved because i was embarrassed by the quality of the pre pre alpha game released. my coding was good but they just refused to give us time to remove basic bugs, those companies are all gone now. so producing a crap game does have a impact on the company as a whole, but some companies just dont learn and go bankrupt, again and again. dam im glad i retired lol.