Orph's Reviews

As soon as grimlocks map arrives, i will essentially be done with the competition maps, as such, none of them received scores, because i could not convince myself they needed them as such, considering the parameters of the competition..

BUT, my future reviews will include scores, the help i need is deciding "WHAT" actually to score on..

i need 5 categories, here is my list, you can add/edit any or all, i will consider any advice given as long as the results are the same..

• Architecture
• Lighting
• Item Placement
• Connectivity
• Ambience

 

my score for each of the 5 will be so: (these are set)

2 = Excellent

1 = Good

0 = Poor

with the five categories that will be a 10/10 system

thanx in advance..

looks like ya hit this one on the head, i think that would be a good rating, scoring system, however im not sure what exactly you mean by connectivity.

also, this system would have to be revised if your planning on using it for mods other then HLDM, like CS item placement isnt normal, infact very rare as mostly items are bought.

Sinner_D said:
looks like ya hit this one on the head, i think that would be a good rating, scoring system, however im not sure what exactly you mean by connectivity.

also, this system would have to be revised if your planning on using it for mods other then HLDM, like CS item placement isnt normal, infact very rare as mostly items are bought.

thanx, and connectivity? i thought that was self explainitory ..

i wouldn't feel competant enuff to do anything except HLDM.. i have played the mods so few times you could count them on both hands.. ask mazemaster how badly i embarressed myself whle playtesting his map :sad:

thanx again tho for the input..

taps foots

any others

I think those ingredients should be considered as a whole really, which is why I never marked that way :/ But it's up to you, those are good parameters to go by :smile:

its the best compromise i can think of... i don't believe the 10/10 system has enuff merits to make it better than the 100/100 i prefer, BUT also agree, that since its not my website, that it would be rather brazen to insist on my way over the preferred SP method..

since SP has a set 10/10, i think its the best "meet half-way" i can think of..

but, i felt it important enuff, to get some feedback on "what" would be acceptable criteria..

some reviewers feel "atmosphere" is more important than "ambience" but IMO, its almost the same animal.. so its a bit problematic..

anyways, just asking.. i am genuinely curious, i have had a couple dozen or so reviews written of my maps over the years, but many were as dis-similar as they could possibly get..

Is architecture all the technical details of map making and then ambience covering how well it works, along with texturing (not including misalignments)? Because typically I would have considered lighting a subset of ambience... Where does playability fall into this (chugging r_speeds, good/poor traps, cover, spawn locations)? Are you going to be considering the learning curve of the map anywhere?

I'm not trying to beat you down or anything, just help you sort out what's gonna get covered where.

you could probably get a slightly improved reading with that system, if you increased the range of scores for each catagory. i realise that that sounds kind of obvious, but with the way you have it atm, there is no good way of seperating, say,  a large map with really well crafted architecture, and a smaller map as equaly well made. and it would be just as unfair to mark down a map that is better than average to a 1, as it would be to mark it up to a 2.

using a scale of maybe 1-10, could reserve the top scores for maps that really are outstanding, while giving maps that are 'better than average', a fairer score.

i dont mean to go on, but theres one more thing that could be considered. the catagories you listed seem fine, but do they each merit equal points? it would be interesting to see what percentage of the total people would give each of them, in respect of there relevance to the finished article.

Cash Car Star said:
Is architecture all the technical details of map making and then ambience covering how well it works, along with texturing i consider anything it takes to build the map architecture , including gimmicks and texture choices(not including misalignments) [color=red]i am really anal about texture alignments, the occasional missed one? no biggie, brazenly rubbing our noses in doing none, BAD move ?[/color] Because typically I would have considered lighting a subset of ambience if lighting is used to set the mood , then yes, but if its an office building with only a bunch of florescent bulbs , nah... Where does playability fall into this (chugging r_speeds, good/poor traps, cover, spawn locations)? all these fall into architecture, if the map is made poorly, it will play poorly Are you going to be considering the learning curve of the map anywhere? not really, unless there is something obvious, i won't even go into experience level of the mapper vs. his results.. IMO its a biased decision, why score someone higher cause they are a n00b, than i would a pro cause he knows better than to mess up?

I'm not trying to beat you down or anything, just help you sort out what's gonna get covered where.

all are good points, and could only be solved with........ a 100/100 system.

i am never adverse to any suggestion, especially one thats well thought thru, but with only 10 points to work with?? you see my problem i hope..

the point to a 10/10 system is to group the subdirectories you mention a bit tighter.. in order to retain the 10/10 system and make it VIABLE, you have to keep it at no more than 5 subdirectories..

i hope that made some sense cash :smile:

Hmm, maybe I shoulda been more explicit, when I said not including texture misalignments, I was counting that as part of the technical buildings of the map. Anyway, I think currently then you're giving far too little weight to architecture and far too much to lighting/ambience.

When I said learning curve, I meant ability for a player to learn the map and logical interactivity of its entities, not how good the mapper is.

fishy said:
i dont mean to go on, but theres one more thing that could be considered. the catagories you listed seem fine, but do they each merit equal points? it would be interesting to see what percentage of the total people would give each of them, in respect of there relevance to the finished article.

i would have to say yes, only because if you take each great map, and remove just one of the categories, i mean remove WHAT MADE IT that way, and look at the map again, it would suck..

each sub-directory has equal merit IMO, because without it, there would be no success..

your other points were answered in my post to cash

 

Cash Car Star said:
Hmm, maybe I shoulda been more explicit, when I said not including texture misalignments, I was counting that as part of the technical buildings of the map. Anyway, I think currently then you're giving far too little weight to architecture and far too much to lighting/ambience. dang... it seems we both are misunderstanding.. sorry ..

i thought my above post was really focus'd on architecture, since so many things go into its creation..

When I said learning curve, I meant ability for a player to learn the map and logical interactivity of its entities, not how good the mapper is. very good point, and completely opposite of how i took the meaning..

wouldn't your definition of learning curve be a big part of connectivity?

i mean if its a big maze then the connectivity may be faulty, but if its linear, then the cure\ve would be lower, but connected bad too

i don't exactly know how to answer this cash :sad:

Orpheus said:

• Architecture
• Lighting
• Item Placement
• Connectivity
• Ambience
  </LI>

my score for each of the 5 will be so: (these are set)

2 = Excellent

1 = Good

0 = Poor

with the five categories that will be a 10/10 system

UPDATE: my score system will contain 1/2 points as well.

as i was recently reminded, it would add a bit of flexibility to my reviews, cause the whole numbers are a bit rigid..

thanx to all who commented public, and private, your advice was greatly received, and if you notice some is being used already :wink:

i will have time for a review tomorrow, anyone have an HLDM map laying around?

If you're really bored...

http://docrocksmaps.homestead.com/files/Nightmare2.zip

but, I'd bet, it would take a very serious rash of being severely bored to even remotely consider it.

If not, again, I totally understand. :smile: