Problem: How to find the truly good scripts.

[David]

Problem: How to find the truly good scripts.

Part 1:
I have been pondering how to identify the truly good scripts written for RunUO. There are a ton of scripts released over the years--many still in the archives. How does one go about deciding which ones stand out? I mean other than looking to see if I wrote it.

RunUO.com has tried a few things, feedback, votes, download counts. None of those really has panned out. Very few people actually voted over the long haul, or votes (good or bad) were given on a first impression rather than a final working script. Download counts only show the most recent revision of any script.

How can we fix this? I will champion a good solution if it can be identified.

Part 2:
In the meantime, I am thinking about having some sort of Academy Award of Scripting... Identify several categories; quests, npc's, mobs, spawners, tools, best newb script, etc. Then have a nomination phase followed by a voting phase. I will even try to solicite something meaningful for prizes.

This will only work if there is widespread support, and some who may be willing to contribute in some way.

What do you guys think?

 

[Seanchen.net]

I think your idea is good.

Will require the support of other moderators, to help keep any thread, clean and updated. The suggestion there is have a "support thread", "a request to be added thread" to keep the thread that contains the list clean.

Could even lock the thread, and just post new replies ( new additions ) plus edit the original response. Reason being would be, to keep the "date" of the last modification "active" otherwise threads 2 years old exist ( check it out its really funny, and they are never updated ).

I do think you should lock it, so people don't reply to it, in 4 months ( if you stop updating it ) and ask "a question".

Because then somebody will have a discussion about it, then wait another month, and they will respond to that discussion..

 

[Maynza]

Sounds cool.

Scripts could be judged on what they do, and also on their complexity.

 

[CEO]

David,

Here's what we do on EasyUO. First we standardized script headers, a set of comments that must always appear at the top of the script.

;==================================
; Script Name: (30 Chars MAX)
; Author:
; Version: n.nn
; Client Tested with:
; EUO version tested with:
; Shard OSI / FS:
; Revision Date:
; Public Release:
; Global Variables Used:
; Purpose: One or two line explanation of script
;==================================

This is for consistency, but our PHPWiz guy (Scriptfellow) wrote alot of support type functions that uses that header to automatically put the script into our PSL (Public Script Library), which is broken up into categories to help find stuff. When a script is in the PSL, a ratings button is available to anyone that has posted at least once in our forums.

Script Rating is broken down like this:

0=worst, 10=best
Ease of use:
Usefulness:
Stability:
Support:
Rating: 10.0
Votes: 2

As more and more people vote the ratings tend to average out, but when we get 12 votes we start throwing out the top and bottom ratings as well. During the rating process, a person can also leave a personalize comment, which we specifically say to NOT use it to report bugs/etc. When people look at the script's thread, random comments for that script also get included. Like:

What the users say:
"Neat where is my cookie?"
"Will change ease of use to 10 if you remove the drag"


Anyways, it's worked out "ok". It's just the nature of forums like this that give stuff away for free that the majority of users by far don't bother to say "thanks", post, or anything except to leech. Some people get miffed about that, I have in the past, but finally came to terms that that's Just The Way It Is. People complain with stuff quits working, they very rarely tell you when things work great. We have over 90k register users.

Statistics
Our public script library has 1433 scripts and 196 of them are approved.
Our forums have 90964 registered users, 19297 topics and 204473 posts.

Out of that list only 185 users have 100 posts or more. Beginning around user 2000 everyone else has under 10 posts, with over 75k with 0 posts!

Anyways, I'm sure you could register (if you haven't already), and check out how our scripts are maintained and the ratings system. It's worked out pretty well.

 

[Seanchen.net]

The problem is, we should avoid having to ask Ryan/Zippy/Company for modifications to the forum. I can tell you from both experience with this forum, and experience with my own forum, modifications can be bad. They make you unable to upgrade your forum, to fix a security hole, which means you have to find time to make the modifications again.

If you switch from lets say phpbb.com to vbulletin *cough* you lose all your modifications and basicly all your submissions. Although Ryan would never switch ( lifetime license for runuo.com ), we still have to worry about security updates, and that sort of thing.

A seperate project, perhaps maintained by the moderation staff, might be an alternative. It would be a closed submission ( they add the scripts themselfs ) based on the submissions here ( perhaps change it to a verification process ).

Alot of options to add more feedback by users, to the authors that are writting these scripts.

 

[stormwolff]

The problem is, we should avoid having to ask Ryan/Zippy/Company for modifications to the forum. I can tell you from both experience with this forum, and experience with my own forum, modifications can be bad. They make you unable to upgrade your forum, to fix a security hole, which means you have to find time to make the modifications again.

That is how it used to be, but with vb 3.5 most mods can be created using a plugin/product/hook system that never touch the core files. Its a simple matter of uninstalling the product/plugin if it errors during a vb core update.

It would be hard to get guys who are so busy doing other things to create the required mods.

 

[Seanchen.net]

That is how it used to be, but with vb 3.5 most mods can be created using a plugin/product/hook system that never touch the core files. Its a simple matter of uninstalling the product/plugin if it errors during a vb core update.

It would be hard to get guys who are so busy doing other things to create the required mods.

Some modifications could still alter the database, a solution should be done via forum posts, or a alternative suggestion.Even with the new system, I am sure there are expections to the more advanced systems.

I know Invision Power Board, has a similar system, but you still have to modification the files to display your new additions. Which of course mean you have to update them.

The only way to avoid that is:

A) A seperate script
b) Forum Posts
C) Combination of A and B
D) Live with the system
E) Install a module anyways
F) new website
G) Superman sucks...
H) I am going to run out of ideas soon
J) I just did...

 

[Joeku]

I'd like the "Best Newb Script" (only if I qualify, of course!)

 

[Courageous]

I'd like to be able to tell, in a nutshell, whether or not a script was both complete (doing what it said it would) and stable. "Like it," or "cool" or other such is less relevant, in so far as it is otherwise documented as to what it is for. There's also the issue of non-triviality. Trivial code isn't interesting.

I suppose one might borrow a concept from Orbsydia, and go with an "Advanced Scripts" section.

C//

 

[CEO]

The problem is, we should avoid having to ask Ryan/Zippy/Company for modifications to the forum. I can tell you from both experience with this forum, and experience with my own forum, modifications can be bad.

He asked for ideas and I gave him one, it's their choice whether or not they'll want to modify their files. And updating the core files should not be an issue. Our forums are heavily modded and have additional packages installed, phpBB's updates come in the form of diff files and we've very rarely had the update fail due to our mods. I don't know whether or not that holds true for this forum's update methods, but still like I said, I'm giving David ideas/suggestions like he wanted.

 

[Seanchen.net]

He asked for ideas and I gave him one, it's their choice whether or not they'll want to modify their files. And updating the core files should not be an issue. Our forums are heavily modded and have additional packages installed, phpBB's updates come in the form of diff files and we've very rarely had the update fail due to our mods. I don't know whether or not that holds true for this forum's update methods, but still like I said, I'm giving David ideas/suggestions like he wanted.

I know, I was just being realistic :0

 

[ASayre]

The problem is defining good scripts. popularity? well coded? complexity? Stability? neat Idea/concepts? Customizibility?

For 80% of the scripts, pick upto and no more than 3.

Some of the most popular and such scripts on this forum are some of the worst coded. And no admin with more than a handful of players would put them on their shard. But there are still hundreds of others that will, because the idea itself is novel.

If you have users determine it, it becomes a popularity contest.

A different option is to have either the mods and/or people selected from within the community that can look at a bit of code and determine if it is well coded and stable and such and look at each script on thier own merits insetad of how many people like it or how many see the post because it keeps getting bumped up with people having problems with it.

But most of the people that would do it all write scripts and code of their own. could be alleviated by not allowing them to mark their own code, or having the above system where individual users give their opinions but with only the mods and/or selected people able to doso...

The only problem is havign enough people that are 'trusted' to know enough about coding to accurately judge them, whle still being able to give each one the time it deserves for a fair and accurate review.


Just my thoughs sitting here waiting for class. (Did I mention I hate Java? )

 

[A_Li_N]

This sounds like it would be a great addition to the community. I'm running on no sleep right now, but I will try to throw some comprehensable suggestions out for you David (along with the others that have been). These suggestions are in no way well thought out, I'm just throwing things that come to mind as I type.

• Seperate/sub forum for the chosen scripts. This way they can be set apart from the everyday releases.
• Perhaps, for the higher end scripts like AG's XML package, make the creator have a mod status over their thread (or sub forum if singluar threads is not possible) This way they can police their own system and keep things on target as much as they like. If they get a sub forumish situation, have one thread strictly for updates and one for all support. That would help keep the release thread clean and clear.
• Voting system based on things that were mentioned before. Ease of use, code quality, functionality, etc. Should also include options of 'UnEducated' and 'Educated', meaning that if the user is educated in the ways of how things should work and be coded or not.
• Keep the 'acceptance' slow, so as to find the truely good ones. Maybe 1 per week/month. (I would highly recommend AG's XML first and foremost, but that's just me )

My eyes are dry and I have to go pick up a friend, so that's all I got for now. Good luck and thanks for the great idea David!

 

[TMSTKSBK]

I like the idea David and ASayre had (and commiserate with the hating Java)...I was thinking about this myself.

Here's a sort of odd idea...

Why not have a meritocracy of sorts -- users are not allowed to "vote" on a script until they have done certain things (a certain post count [500?], submitted a script, etc.). After they meet those requirements, they would be allowed to voice opinions on other scripts.

Also, who says we have to use *this* site for the project -- why not make a new forum just for the administrative matters, or a sub-forum here? David could be the supreme mod of the forum, and all's peachy, and doesn't take up the rest of the forum.

Thirdly, people could not nominate until they have reached the voting point.

I wrote up a how-to on this...almost *exactly* this...except for anime...**edit: curses, I lost my write-up of how it worked.

Oh...oh I <3 the mod-of-thread idea...(d*** you A_Li_N, you beat me )

 

[Arvoreen]

Scripts should get rated for a variety of things, such as ease of install, original idea, usefulness, etc. (unfortunately, I don't have a lot of details on that).

Restricting voting to people that meet certain criteria isn't a bad idea, but post count is a bad ruler, as it's easy to post thousands of times. Perhaps restrict voting to those that have submitted a certain number of scripts, or had their scripts rated at a certain level.

Hmm. I dunno.

 

[Maynza]

meh I think that ease of install is a crappy criterion.

 

[TMSTKSBK]

or an induction of voting members by the members who are already voting members...(starting with the mods and admins)

I probably won't get inducted //goes off and cries...

Ease of Install isn't a bad criterion. If something has a TON of core mods, it's not as "easy" for a newb to use. And...well...Joe User is our target here.


(On a totally different note, can we pleeeaaaase make the size limit for .zips 50kb? Please?)

 

[Arvoreen]

or an induction of voting members by the members who are already voting members...

I like that idea! Although thinking about it, there's probably a way to cheat just about ANY system eh?

meh I think that ease of install is a crappy criterion.

How come? I myself know how to follow instructions, apply >1 mod to say PlayerMobile or BaseCreature or something, but a script with ill-documented mods to distro scripts, or worse no docs at all, just already hacked copies of distro scripts, is bad form IMHO. A script package, esp. one that modifies existing stuff, at least one that the author wants to be widely used, should be easy to install/setup. Easier to install == more people will use it. At least I guess as much.

And I didn't mean the script would be COMPLETELY rated on ease of install, but it'd be cool for the non-scripters to be able to search for scripts with "ease of install 5" or something, and have a list of scripts that are pretty much plug-and-play, or perhaps with some step-by-step how-to mod instructions. Obviously an easy-to-install piece of crap script would still not rank high.

 

[Seanchen.net]

A different option is to have either the mods and/or people selected from within the community that can look at a bit of code and determine if it is well coded and stable and such and look at each script on thier own merits insetad of how many people like it or how many see the post because it keeps getting bumped up with people having problems with it.

But most of the people that would do it all write scripts and code of their own. could be alleviated by not allowing them to mark their own code, or having the above system where individual users give their opinions but with only the mods and/or selected people able to doso...

The only problem is havign enough people that are 'trusted' to know enough about coding to accurately judge them, whle still being able to give each one the time it deserves for a fair and accurate review.

I love the idea, there is a good number of people who can do this

 

[daat99]

I like that idea! Although thinking about it, there's probably a way to cheat just about ANY system eh?



How come? I myself know how to follow instructions, apply >1 mod to say PlayerMobile or BaseCreature or something, but a script with ill-documented mods to distro scripts, or worse no docs at all, just already hacked copies of distro scripts, is bad form IMHO. A script package, esp. one that modifies existing stuff, at least one that the author wants to be widely used, should be easy to install/setup. Easier to install == more people will use it. At least I guess as much.

And I didn't mean the script would be COMPLETELY rated on ease of install, but it'd be cool for the non-scripters to be able to search for scripts with "ease of install 5" or something, and have a list of scripts that are pretty much plug-and-play, or perhaps with some step-by-step how-to mod instructions. Obviously an easy-to-install piece of crap script would still not rank high.

There's 1 problem with "ease of install".
Simple scripts that doesn't require any distro mods will automatically get 10 for "ease of install" while other scripts which let's face it can't be easily installed just because they are too extensive (aka my OWLTR) will automatically get 0-1 (well the OWLTR will get 0-1 just because of poor coding but that's something else).

I think that "ease of install" shouldn't be a factor.
Easy to install scripts can't do half the stuff that "hard to install" scripts does which in return will result in 1 of 2 thigns:
1. The scriptors won't make it do distro mods which will damage functionality.
2. The scriptors will do it anyway which will damage their chances to get to the "good scripts" list which in return will make them disapear somewhere in the script submission with nobody knowing anything about them.