Official Mission Testers

[Willow Storm]

Mission writers put there heart and soul into Missions. Would it be too much to ask that a Mission have 2 people test it before it is rejected? Missions are a bit subjective. The tester may not like something about the mission but others would love it.
Perhaps a second tester could be sent only if tester 1 does reject the mission.

For example I have been told twice now in rejections that one of my Missions flaws is that I only make people type single words and not full sentences. But when I came into SmallVerse I asked 8n the forums what players look for in a mission and one of the overwhelming answers was little to no typing.

Mission writers are giving you free content and paying dearly for the privilege of doing so. Not that I'm complaining. Missions are what drew me here. But undeserved rejections could drive writers away.

[Tennessee Autumn]

Agreed.

Having my first mission rejected sucked. I made the changes for it to be approved. I took a break from making missions, and finally started working on a new one. Why invest in all that time and energy to get rejected? If it was rejected for a genuine reason I would understand, but it seems there are so many different standards based on who is testing.

Meanwhile, I have been playing missions that have been approved with complete spelling and grammatical errors. I've had to cancel missions because I could not figure out how to type whatever needed to be said despite copying word for word from the task.

[Adriella Spencer]

I personally think Mission Creators should organise an Anti-Approval movement because that kind of oppressive regime should have no place in this NEW WORLD. How does a system that was formed to filter out exploitation and ensure baseline mission functionality (hence the term "testing") pivot to gatekeeping 'creativity?' And why are people who pay to keep the lights on all too happy to subject themselves to this indignity at the hands of an anonymous and power-tripping crew? Wild!

Your suggestion sounds reasonable, Willow, but I don't believe in improving a system that really should not even exist, especially when the same rigid standards don't apply to other content creators (painters, sculptors). I beg, make it make sense!

[Kissy My]

been told twice now in rejections that one of my Missions flaws is that I only make people type single words and not full sentences.

Are you serious??? That has to be a joke!!

Whoever that mission tester is, needs to be removed... they are a mission tester... not mission critique ... and if whoever it is, is someone I know, I am sorry if you take that offensively.
Their job needs to simply be just to test the missions playability and that a mission doesnt violate any terms .. NOT EVER the storyline or how the creator sets up their tasks.. like seriously [redacted]

It's bad enough mission makers have to deal with people constantly complaining about "having to do missions" .. "missions are boring" and all the other blah blah blah ...
Many spend so much time, money into creating these mini game worlds and dont get the recognition they deserve for their ART..

It is very sad these games, yes SV powers that be... you ... dont grasp that player created missions are the ONLY thing that sets games like this apart from the MANY other social worlds.
and many of those other games are way more advanced...

ugh.. I just get so sad and frustrated.. sorry for the whiny fit ..

[Willow Storm]

I was also told I didn't have enough decorations in the yard of a fully decorated home. It really frustrated me! If you want to try the mission before I make any changes it's called The SHOES and is in Family Home. I would love to hear opinions.

[Aribella Lafonte]

I’m not really directing this toward your mission, Willow, this is just my general opinion on this if it were any rejected mission for whatever the reason. So please don’t take this personally.

I sympathize with someone who gets their mission rejected but I don’t agree on having to have two testers run through a mission if it gets rejected. It might sound good, to perhaps weed out the possibility there is any unreasonable prejudice against a mission, but I don’t really find it reasonable. I only say this because what happens if one tester rejects it and the next one would approve it? Who exactly is going to be the tie breaker? This would require a third tester, which is what would make it really unreasonable. For the number of missions that are submitted on a weekly basis or even rejected in that amount of time. To have to test the same mission multiple times takes away a testers time to test new missions that haven’t been tested even the first time. This might cause a delays in getting our missions improved. And to be honest, there’s some people that get rejected, disagree and only make one or nothing for changes before they resubmit. That’s hardly fair for new submissions or those that have been rejected that put in the time for changes.

We get defensive if our missions are rejected but I am sure testers have a clear criteria for what they are looking for (guidelines, even if not openly shown to us) and it’s not really a matter of personal opinion to what they as a tester finds “engaging “. It’s not that hard to meet guidelines. It helps to use a variety of different interactions with gestures, emotes, say lines and interacting with items. If there is less involvement with say lines or anything else, one can always put more into a storyline, decor, or other interactions, even programming with sound effects/lighting to pick up on the part of the mission that is lacking. We also can’t have missions that are so simple (3-4 minutes normal time) that one can rush through and get them done in 1-2 minutes after they have played them a few times. There should be enough involvement to last 3-4 minutes rushed through at the bare minimum. If a creator doesn’t have that, then add more.

As far as say lines, a one word say line or task I agree is not very engaging, and I don’t say this as anything personal, but it doesn’t require the player to put much effort into typing it nor does it support much for storyline dialogue. My missions only require 2-3 words to update a task, (to allow for reasonable error) but I do have them type most if not all the say line as it is bolded on the task card. For the mission that I have that has no say lines, (which was the part of the mission challenge I recreated), I embedded the dialogue on the characters themselves and in a way, those characters added to the story in the same way as a NPC. Instead of one word say lines, try a short sentence or highlight a few that is a reasonable amount for testers but still short enough for players and make it a happy medium if the mission is repeatedly rejected for not enough text in the say lines. You could always make sure that there are just a couple simple say lines as well and not add so many that give the tester the impression that theres nothing but one word say lines for a dialogue.

The guidelines to us are fairly clear. But in general, a mission that is rather rushed through on part of the creator or player, may run a risk of rejection. Ie say lines that are one word or consist mostly of say lines that don’t require interacting with items within the space, items with no proximity limits that don’t encourage movement in a space, missions with little text that have a story or proper flow, or missions that do nothing much more than emotes or gestures. You got to mix it up.

As far as what is already on panel for older missions that seem to be sub par (with typing errors etc) you have to consider many of those were on panel in the beginning of the game when there was a need to add missions and the expectations were a little lower. Now that there is a growing number of missions on panel, and quite a few that are so similar (mainly assimilation missions) it is fair and understandable that they want a little more coming from us.

Ok, I’m done rambling, but hopefully this can help for some ideas on how to fix a rejection for somebody.

[Kissy My]

I was also told I didn't have enough decorations in the yard of a fully decorated home. It really frustrated me! If you want to try the mission before I make any changes it's called The SHOES and is in Family Home. I would love to hear opinions.

Just played your mission .. and it was what I expected... wonderful...
the space is decorated perfectly, excellent story and very smooth playability... was quite enjoyable

I really expected the tasks to have 1 word, not be mixed actions of doing things and saying the 1 word ..
which in my opinion really helped emphasis the story... clearly someone missed how that in itself is creative ...

But it did make me realize something...
seems that missions that dont have razzle dazzle, often too many interactions are the ones getting rejected.
Thats fascinating, since those are often (not always) the types of missions that turn many mission players off.. (have heard that complain 1000s of times)

Whoever the tester is, doesnt see the creativity and important execution in story telling ..
send a note to support and ask them to reconsider and explain.. it is a story mission ..

[Willow Storm]

Thank you to all who commented so far.

And a special thank you to you, Kissy. You're opinion means a lot to me.

I really put a lot into my missions as I know most writers do. I don't just "crank 'em out to earn tokens. When I write a mission I am always careful to meet the official guidelines and anyone who has ever played AND ACTUALLY READ my missions can tell you there is always a story in it!

I hope the powers that be will look into this idea at least and maybe even go play my mission so they can see if they agree with the rejection or not. It will give them an idea as too if there is or isn't a problem with the current system.


BTW, my other mission that was rejected originally and is now approved is Thieves of SmallVerse in case you are curious.
It was rejected for, "The mission lacks a clear storyline." as well as decoration and not enough talking among other things. In fact, the tester pretty much insulted everything about it. I did make some changes before re-submitting but I did not amend the story line and it was approved.

Thank you again everyone.

[Adriella Spencer]

Their job needs to simply be just to test the missions playability and that a mission doesnt violate any terms .. NOT EVER the storyline or how the creator sets up their tasks..

Period.

This ridiculous nitpicking will only get worse. Where would it end? No more bolded text or hints to make the task easier for the player? Space is too small? Not enough gold used for props? Decorative sculpture too ugly and therefore killing the vibes?!

Ya see, that's the thing about surrendering yourself to an approval system; you give up all control and, clearly, all creative authority because only they can legitimise your hard work. And they can move the goalpost when they want....and they will...often. And you can't challenge the system without risking damage to your past work and future efforts. The system, after all, is designed to keep you invested, compliant and desperate for affirmation. So, Willow, sorry but you're not smart enough, you're not creative enough, you're just not good enough for them. So they expect you to do some twists and turns to meet their "standards" because you are at their mercy.

This boat doesn't just need to be rocked, it needs to be tipped over! What you allow will continue...if anyone is starting a guestbook petition in-world, you know where to find me...

[Willow Storm]

I can agree that this may not be the best system. Until there is something better proposed I can't support "tipping over the boat".

Perhaps a simple checklist of the requirements.
*Do all tasks complete?
*Less than 3 (or whatever) spelling errors?
*No profanity
etc.
Take the subjetivity out of the equation.

Anyway I definitely see a need for improvement.

As Kissy said, missions are the most unique factor in SmallVerse and IMO, really need to be treated as valuable.

[Aribella Lafonte]

This ridiculous nitpicking will only get worse. Where would it end? No more bolded text or hints to make the task easier for the player? Space is too small? Not enough gold used for props? Decorative sculpture too ugly and therefore killing the vibes?!

They have somewhat done this. There have been complaints of nitpicking where it seems to go beyond what would be reasonable for a specific criteria that they are looking for or one particular tester that goes to the extreme not fully understanding what is actually required for approval. I have seen where a mission was denied because they added helpful hints to be more clear at the bottom of the task card if the bolded word wasn’t clear enough (too simple). Another person I know had their mission rejected for one typing error, one. Seen where someone was rejected for a few reasons but the size of the space was mentioned, the tester also went as far as suggesting a NPC when really, NPCs aren’t a requirement for approval but can help enhance a storyline. At the time, such suggestions were insulting while not providing a clear explanation of why the mission was rejected. Suggestions could possibly be interpreted as expectations and that shouldn’t be the case. Supposedly rejection reasons are better explained now, but I wouldn’t know. Hopefully, they are. The creators need to understand the reason for rejection and not get so focused or confused on the suggestions given in order to help fix what is wrong. THAT is the subjective part of it.

What they should do is, if there are a lot of complaints about testing and especially if there is suspicion that one tester isn’t being fair or if there is question to consistency, that they should evaluate which tester was testing and rejecting those missions to find out if it was one particular tester and check to see if they were following whatever guidelines/criteria they follow for approval and make sure it is consistent with other testers. If not, that tester needs to be corrected to properly test the missions or be removed from the team.

Perhaps a simple checklist of the requirements.
*Do all tasks complete?
*Less than 3 (or whatever) spelling errors?
*No profanity
etc.
Take the subjetivity out of the equation.

I agree with this and honestly, it should already exist.


@ Willow, I’ll get around to playing your mission later today. 🙂 Try to keep positive.

[Oisin Anderson]

Well, reading this is discouraging.

Whomever tested your mission must not have played the original game. To say that YOUR missions are lacking in any way- one of the most prolific, detail-oriented, and beloved mission makers on the OG game- seems arbitrary and very ill-informed.

It's times like this I wish we could go back to the old way- higher payout for decent play times. Then we could all have a decent payout without needing to take up the staff's time, since we all run the risk of getting a mission tester who either a) hates missions or b) simply wants people to spend more on decorating than they already do. As if mission making isn't expensive enough.

[Kissy My]

very interesting...
your mission Isle of imagination is approved, while the Shoes got rejected....
When the Isle mission is not highly decorated and you used very similar mission task style.. with saying 1 word

[Willow Storm]

You honor me, Oisin. Thank you for the kind words. It is indeed confounding trying to figure out what's passable in the current system.

Yes I wondered about that too, Kissy