I was just wondering about this.
I've seen many missions with different types of briefing writeups in my short time playing arma. From barebones one sentence intel to vast stories detailing the context of the mission plot with intricate explanations of each player's roles in step by step form. Some briefings use visual elements like pictures and homing map markers with colours and patterns. Others write the instructions in text directly on the map.
According to the briefing modules, there are 4 different sections that briefings are meant to be divided into: Situation, Mission, Execution and Signal. Oftentimes they are summarized into only two.
Personally i feel that guidelines to the best kind of mission briefings are to be found in the showcase missions where they use every available element to convey information without over or under doing the quantity of information given to the player.
I for one try to follow after the style that BI uses for official content. What about you mission makers out there, is there a certain style you try to achieve in the pre-game briefing screen? do you prefer to use certain map markers over others? do you purposely omit or include details/instruction based on the design of your mission?
I think is a matter of style, taste and type of mission. For instance i want to make missions without tasks.
I'm not an editor i just want to make some missions i'd like to play and experience. I use only briefing, intel and map marks as main source of information.
If you looking for an artistic touch intro movies can be informative and entertaining.
As for quantity and "quality" of information provided i think for a mature/experienced crowd is better to omit, mislead or "lie" a little, this can be a source of surprises and entertainment as long is not done in a frustrating way. Is a fragile balance tho.
Personally, all my briefings are influenced by the faction for which the briefing is done.
If it's for an army (like NATO or CSAT), I'll do it "military strict" style, like "Mission", "Situation", "Enemy forces" etc...
For guerrilla forces, it's usually just a diary type of breifing, and all map markers are of the handwritten type that you usually place during the mission.
It also depends on whether it's for a regular fighting force, or secret service, or special forces.
I think there is no best way to do it, but there's a worst way for sure. A briefing should contain all the information that players need, clear-cut description of the goals and available assets. How you convey that is up to you.
I'm with Varanon here. I adjust to the situation.
I also regard briefings as "in-character". I try to avoid addressing players but rather address soldiers. Whether the information is to be taken verbatim as a briefing, or as what soldiers remember from their briefing isn't really so relevant.
I try to give context as far as possible, but try to keep i small (unless it is part of a campaign). I know that in the Arma 2 days Sander liked to give huge backgrounds, but it usually is a pain in the arse to read all that, so I try to keep it short. But I dislike when the briefing does NOT give context, I would want to know what is going on, or at the least who the enemy is and what the situation is.
I also try to keep marker usage to the bare minimum. I know a lot of people like to put literally dozen of markers on the map, but I try to stick to key points (insertion, target(s), extraction), known enemy positions, and other important aspects. Since the markers stay into the mission, that should be kept as low as possible.
In a sense, the briefing is important to set everyone up and create some sort of expectation for the mission. That is why I usually write it first, before even starting with the mission itself. I also often do the loadscreen first, because seeing an image usually puts myself in the mood I want to achieve for a mission, but then, I'm weird
I used to do two sections, Mission and Story, in my ArmA2 ACR missions but the Story part took too much effort, so I got it down to just Mission. This is my default briefing from the template mission I copy-paste from:
Quote:<br/><br/><marker name='start'>Molnya</marker>SUMMARY EXECUTION ENEMY NOTES
If you read closely, all my briefings are sectioned into those four, summary (what's happened, happening or will happen), execution (how to do the mission), enemy (what to expect) and notes (any additional info related to the mission).
For example, the first briefing I did this way:
Quote:A local criminal has set up a smuggling operation to supply arms to <marker name='opfor'>criminals and collaborators</marker> fighting against the <marker name='blufor'>partisan</marker> cause. Time to put an end to this.
<br/><br/>
<marker name='start'>Bear team</marker> will proceed to assault the <marker name='obj1'>beach house</marker>, where they will eliminate the arms smuggler's security detail, force the smuggler to betray his partners in crime in order to <marker name='obj2'>destroy smuggler's boats</marker> before <marker name='obj3'>extracting</marker> from the area via civilian transport.
<br/><br/>
The arms smuggler pays a group of local militamen to protect him at all times. They number about a dozen or so men, on patrol and guard. The smuggler plays tough, but can be persuaded using small caliber means. Once the arms smuggling boats pull into the bay, destroy them.
<br/><br/>
You will fail this mission if the arms smuggler is killed before he betrays his friends.
I highly recommend Outlawz' briefings. They are always informative and engaging and make you look forward to play the mission, which is for me, the primary objective of the briefing.
However, I will always like the most the OFP style briefings which were always simple and rather short comparing to most of the briefings I usually see now. They had a "Notes" section that were a narrative story which was always fun to read and taught you about the mental state of "your" character. I think that with some adjustments it can also work nicely in coop.
Igor Drukov is following this method and his briefings are just AWESOME. His Notes section is using a handwriting font, as OFP did, which adds to the drama.
See here an example for an OFP briefing (starting at 29m55s):
http://youtu.be/KEzi_E0xmy0?t=29m55s
Oh! I forgot to mention that the best briefings I ever read are Fuiba's! Check his PMC versus campaign.
(08-19-2014, 10:31 AM)Varanon link Wrote: [ -> ]Personally, all my briefings are influenced by the faction for which the briefing is done.
If it's for an army (like NATO or CSAT), I'll do it "military strict" style, like "Mission", "Situation", "Enemy forces" etc...
For guerrilla forces, it's usually just a diary type of breifing, and all map markers are of the handwritten type that you usually place during the mission.
It also depends on whether it's for a regular fighting force, or secret service, or special forces.
I think there is no best way to do it, but there's a worst way for sure. A briefing should contain all the information that players need, clear-cut description of the goals and available assets. How you convey that is up to you.
Intel: Enemy forces at outpost Zulu comprise of 8 infantry foot mobiles
*Friendlies arrive at outpost Zulu
Radio: Enemy gunship reinforcements inbound
Wow its almost like i always see Variable and Alwareen
good job guys
(08-19-2014, 12:41 PM)Alwarren link Wrote: [ -> ]I try to give context as far as possible, but try to keep i small (unless it is part of a campaign). I know that in the Arma 2 days Sander liked to give huge backgrounds, but it usually is a pain in the arse to read all that, so I try to keep it short. But I dislike when the briefing does NOT give context, I would want to know what is going on, or at the least who the enemy is and what the situation is.
I personally really enjoyed Sander's briefings and I consider my own heavily influenced by them. I don't think short and huge descriptions are mutually exclusive. I think one should always (and by "always" I mean that there are of course "always" exceptions ) give a long briefing (e.g. "Situation) for those players who like to read the briefings to set the mood and a short one for (e.g. "Mission") for those who just want the main points. So I think in this case one "can have his cake and eat it too".
(10-03-2014, 06:47 AM)Fuiba link Wrote: [ -> ]I personally really enjoyed Sander's briefings and I consider my own heavily influenced by them. I don't think short and huge descriptions are mutually exclusive. I think one should always (and by "always" I mean that there are of course "always" exceptions ) give a long briefing (e.g. "Situation) for those players who like to read the briefings to set the mood and a short one for (e.g. "Mission") for those who just want the main points. So I think in this case one "can have his cake and eat it too".
Agreed, I do like briefings that are relevant and give background. My main problem with Sander's briefings was that he tended to make them more complicated than needed. For example, he always wrote things like "Rotary Aircraft Insertion" instead of Helicopter. That pretty much annoyed me. I remember than in one briefing he even used some fancy term for Car.
I like to keep it simple and not try to make it overloaded with terms that nobody would use. A chopper is a chopper.