Some creators are not happy with how Discover treats all islands equally (does it?). They believe that easy-to-build islands get the same impressions as high-effort islands which is not fair in their opinion and negatively affects the ecosystem.
They propose to do something about it. I think applying a multiplier to the impressions an island receives based on creativity and effort will be a step in the right direction.
The multiplier is 1.0 by default, and it increases up to 3.0 if the map has a lot of creativity (complex device setups and/or custom Verse devices) and was worked on for at least one month.
The original Discord discussion starts here for reference.
There is another way to look at this. A creator making low-effort islands can publish more islands than a creator making high-effort islands. If the former publishes three islands while the latter publishes one in the same time period (assuming the same amount of work hours), the former gets three times the impressions the second gets. In other words, both developers put the same amount of effort, but the former is rewarded more impressions.
In the proposed system, weâll be equating the impressions the creators receive instead of the current system of equating the impressions the islands receive. Note that the proposed and current systems do not differentiate between the same type of creators (low-effort islands creators, for example). It is mainly trying to improve the situation for high-effort islands creators which aligns with the platform goals of making more complex experiences.
There needs to be way more manual intervention into the algorthim becuase there is so many low effort red vs blue maps that all look and play exactly the same that are taking up space on the front page.
effort be one thing, quality is another. like why should something be ranked higher if having more details or 100+ more hours?
but to get recognized I agree by their efforts, like
map design or theme
story
gameplay experience (like a single player experience or first completion)
gameplay loop (progression, to balancing, etc)
game mechanics
Audio/vfx/animation
more that one could set tags to show what the community thinks, and if there is some disagreement for some maps.
as for lower engagement on maps that are not made/focused for it, but are still good quality and fun, that it should be extra valued compared high engagement copy and paste with their own degree of efforts.
I agree that quality is very important. However, I believe that quality will determine the islandâs success once it is actually shown to potential players. The quality of the thumbnail, name, and description is going to convert impressions into clicks. Once players join, the quality of the experience (design, art style, story, gameplay systems, mechanics, BGM, SFX, VFX, animations, etc.) will determine how long they stay and whether they come back or not. All of this will create a snowball effect, and the island should succeed based on quality.
Basically, quality will take care of itself in my opinion. Of course, one doesnât have to excel in everything to engage players. Sometimes, game systems may be the only thing that players stay for. Thatâs why I donât think we should impose strong rules here.
This is not intended to replace the marketing push creators should do. Marketing is especially important for experiences that donât naturally appeal to the current Fortnite audience. Weâre just trying to even the playing field in Discover a bit.
In a way I believe that creators who put more work into their product deserve a little more recognition than those who make the most minimalist maps possible. However I have noticed that the simpler the design of the map the more it seems to be embraced. Having a large, detailed, complex map doesnât necessarily mean it is a better concept or funner to play. There is something to be said for how effective and playable minimal maps can be.
I will say that the most popular maps I can see are generally Very basic And also regurgitated over and over and over, most times with nothing but a slightly different title. Such as âRed vs Blueâ / âEpic Red vs Blueâ / âRed vs Blue â
Piece control, 1v1 with every gun, red vs blue, pillars, murder mystery, bot royale; these are all very simplistic maps. They are also rather popular. Itâs crazy how much money some of the original versions of these maps earn at all considering every single day there are groups of creators basically copying the map and changing only one thing in it. Ppl constantly trying to ride the bandwagon or piggy back on prior creators coat tails. Itâs hard to not want to join because those maps Do make money.
How simple or complex a map is shouldnât determine how much exposure it gets. How ORIGINAL a map idea/execution is what should determine how much promotion it gets.
I agree that the current Fortnite audience seems to prefer simpler ideas/islands. However, Fortnite is becoming a platform, and the push to include all kinds of genres is clear. There are two potentials:
Some of the current audience will find the fun in more complex islands.
The audience will expand to include all kinds of players.
My proposal is just trying to help creators of complex experiences survive long enough till one or both of the above potentials happens.
I definitely agree with pushing original ideas. I think my proposal aligns with this. In a sense, new ideas typically require custom devices which reflects on the effort. In addition to being inspired by the original idea, more effort needs to be invested to implement the innovative feature(s).
It turned out that effort is already considered in what Epic calls the Sophistication Score. Itâs definition is included below.
The sophistication score uses the same statistical approach as the Discover Score, but focuses on the content within an island and the development effort spent building and updating the island. It includes metrics that focus on the use of devices, animation, sequencers, Verse code, textures, and many other features. As new features are added to UEFN, they may be integrated into future calculations.
For reference, I also include the definition of Discover Score below.
Attraction, engagement, and satisfaction metrics are combined to create a holistic Discover Score that influences For You and Recommendations in Discover. This score aggregates the following metrics over a 96-hour period: unique players per impression, minutes per player, and fun survey scores.
I think Sophistication Score captures what I wanted to express by effort very well. I guess my proposal is to Increase Impressions Based on Sophistication Score. Maybe this is already the intention, but it hasnât gone live, or it went live, but due to a bug, is not having the desired effect.
Discover Score just expresses what happens after an impression is awarded (how the player interacts with the ad, how long they play, whether they come back, rating, etc.).
I donât think the sophistication score is really a good measurement for creativity becuase if you go into the pvp maps that are normally classified as âlow effortâ they have a hundred+ devices for when you pick a gun from a wall of weapon choices.
Thatâs a good point. I was mostly referring to the fact that Sophistication Score includes much more than what I listed. For example, it includes animations, Verse code, etc. We donât know the exact equation, but if it gives more weight to Verse code and custom assets, one may argue that it is a step in the right direction. Weights can always be tweaked to get the intended results.
Creativity is just hard to quantify. I think that assessing creativity may be better left to players (by rating, coming back to the Island, etc.).
â