If the map maker is a good map maker they would have the ability to look at a map and see if there is any obvious flaws that would greatly damage play.
Even the best map makers become enamored of their own creations. Having that key beta-testing time, and the continual testing and "step backs" on the mapper's part are essential to creating a truly brilliant map.
The map would not be perfect but if the map maker is good it would work and be a good map than it can be revised after he gets some feed back from the beta testers and himself that is all I am saying.
If the map comes out in original form, and it's not good, then it will get a bad reputation and negative reviews. People spread talk of how good a map is from the moment it is released. Even if no one on this thread gives a super fancy review, the map will still get a bad rep if it is obviously unpolished, lacking, unbalanced, etc. Releasing a map before it is fully finished only hurts the map.
P.S This is also coming from someone who has high standards and only plays good maps.
Subjective. This sentence means nothing. I consider Kaizo Caverns (no block variation, bad eroding, etc.) to be one of the best CTM maps ever made. I've played it three times. Someone else might call it an insult to the genre because it doesn't use 15 base blocks, it doesn't use custom mobs, it doesn't have enough loot, etc.
The fact that you consider yourself to have "high standards" adds nothing to your argument, nor does it back you up. It's like saying "Trust my opinion, because I'm a veteran CTM player."
The mapmaker’s job is to make the map. He is the one to make it almost spot-on. He is the one to iron out the things that are wrong. The role of the beta-tester is to play an almost perfect map, spot the minor errors and balance issues, and have the mapmaker make those final changes before he ships it off.
I’ve played my own map plenty of times in my own little alpha stages, being able to complete it. While it is slightly tough, when I can’t beat an area, I go back and change what is needed. Whether it be a bit of food needed here, or some spawners removed there, it all depends. I am now getting in the habit of, say, playing and balancing the first intersection, and saving the base I make at the second intersection as a schematic. Then I can use that schematic to re-establish my progress. But that doesn’t mean I take the lowest gear you could have, and take on the area. I have pretty much all the gear from the previous areas, minus whatever I have used, plus whatever I have farmed.
Taking the lowest gear you could have puts you at a real disadvantage. Even though I could maybe take on an area with the lowest gear there, I still would not make it, and it would not be representing of the map. Playing like that is pretty much the same as “I’ve got no gear, and I’m going on bare minimums. But I’m such a dummy I forgot to loot the loot chests all over the area I have died in 20 times.” A normal player would not have died 20 times, and lost all their gear because they weren’t quick enough. Players would also loot the loot chests I give out, so that they have more things in their arsenal just in case they do die. I have to make sure that the loot I give scales well as the map goes on. I continue to map in 1.5.2, just because I run much better in it than 1.6. But, does that mean I disregard the update? No. I’ve already placed plenty of food to counteract the saturation and health nerf. I’ve been making new armor, tools, and weapons, with ideas for mobs in mind, all of this with attributes in mind to add to them later. I’m ready to embrace, not only 1.6, but 1.7, with open arms to my map. While it will take lots of item revamping, it will be a tool of motivation for me. There’s also a seekret thing me and Skeeto decided to call something seekret, but she’ll sometimes remind me of that, and I will have the motivation to flesh my map out.
Testing is a big thing for maps. Testing is the way to figure out how the map actually plays. If you, the developer, cop out on actually playing the map, then you will get nowhere far. Just ask Skeeto. The first time I asked her about testing my map, I don’t think I even achieved the white wool. Either that or I hadn’t achieved the orange wool, and yet I had built about half the map. I was stupid in asking her then, as it was a pointless cause. I felt real bad, and she opened my eyes to it. Testing is absolutely necessary in making a map. Whether it is alpha, beta, gamma, or whatever Greek character name you want to use. Any and all stages of testing are needed in making a map.
Thank you for reading this essay.
Witty
that's not an essay. I seriously saw someone give like a 20 paragraph post complaining about Lord of the Rings Online.
Very true- I agree Delthyn. I would also add that a member of the forums can get a bad rep if their arguments are unpolished, lacking, aloof, or insulting (whether by ignorance, inability to give others' arguments their proper consideration before replying, or by expressing their personal opinion as fact). I name no names: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1_ 11 12...
Eh. Zero made some good points too, its just that the concept of releasing an unpolished map is a pretty bad one. One paragraph full of wrong assumptions, subjective reasoning and bad facts doesn't make someone ignorant. Heck, if it did, we'd all be ignorant.
Yay i can finally get on these forums again. Was anyone else getting the 'down for maintenance' thing?
I certainly was.
Anyway, I'd just like to say that my hypothetical about a terrible-at-ctm mapmaker was exactly that: hypothetical. I'm not THAT bad of a CTM player. Maybe I should have prefaced my question with this? Too late now, I guess.
Subjective. This sentence means nothing. I consider Kaizo Caverns (no block variation, bad eroding, etc.) to be one of the best CTM maps ever made. I've played it three times. Someone else might call it an insult to the genre because it doesn't use 15 base blocks, it doesn't use custom mobs, it doesn't have enough loot, etc.
The fact that you consider yourself to have "high standards" adds nothing to your argument, nor does it back you up. It's like saying "Trust my opinion, because I'm a veteran CTM player."
I always felt that KC was one of the best Super Hostile maps. I haven't played all of them (I've played 1, 3, 4, part of 7, 9 on the CTM server, 10, and 12), but Kaizo Caverns was at the top of my list (accompanied by Spellbound Caves). Simply put, I think the Super Hostile series is better known/more highly regarded for its gameplay and innovations than its aesthetics.
(also is it bad if I treat all internet arguments the same way: like everyone is a perfectly rational human being? It may not always be correct, but I feel like it's the right thing to do.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mapmaker and LPer of Complete The Monument (CTM) maps.
Creator/owner of the CTM Community Mapping Server - ask about it on the CTM Community thread!
Current projects:
Thanatos - a subterranean semi-open-world urban CTM
Titan's Revolt - a collaborative project run by ProjectCTM; sequel to Pantheon
Pinnacle - a "sketch" mini-CTM intended for newer players (nearing completion!)
(also is it bad if I treat all internet arguments the same way: like everyone is a perfectly rational human being? It may not always be correct, but I feel like it's the right thing to do.)
Nope, not bad at all. Better than treating them like brain-dead, bumbling idiots who should be sarcasm'd into the ground rather than talked to.
Even the best map makers become enamored of their own creations. Having that key beta-testing time, and the continual testing and "step backs" on the mapper's part are essential to creating a truly brilliant map.
If the map comes out in original form, and it's not good, then it will get a bad reputation and negative reviews. People spread talk of how good a map is from the moment it is released. Even if no one on this thread gives a super fancy review, the map will still get a bad rep if it is obviously unpolished, lacking, unbalanced, etc. Releasing a map before it is fully finished only hurts the map.
Subjective. This sentence means nothing. I consider Kaizo Caverns (no block variation, bad eroding, etc.) to be one of the best CTM maps ever made. I've played it three times. Someone else might call it an insult to the genre because it doesn't use 15 base blocks, it doesn't use custom mobs, it doesn't have enough loot, etc.
The fact that you consider yourself to have "high standards" adds nothing to your argument, nor does it back you up. It's like saying "Trust my opinion, because I'm a veteran CTM player."
1) did I ever say they did not and I just don't understand that I am a person who always sees only the flaws in things. yes while this is negative I look at the flaws and see how to fix them this is why I can not make a map because I can clearly see that my buildings are terrible. But lets say I am a good builder if I made a map I would look through every little thing kinda like testing while making it. I mean you would go in this area you are fighting A B and C at this point you should have at least This this and that gear do I think in any situation I could beat A B and C with this this and that but still not have it be easy. Can the player easily find there way from point
A -> B. By just doing things like that you should ensure that the map is at least in a good well balanced state and than tweak it from there based on beta testers (and yes that includes the map maker)
2) If you follow the steps above + a few things I probably over looked because of not wanting to type it it should be good enough to have beta testers play it and if it is not.....(I do not want to say this seeing as it might be seen as an insult and I do not want anyone here feeling insulted by me)
3) and all I meant by that was I do not play bad maps meaning if it is bad (in the obvious gameplay way I mean why are you talking about how a map looks when all that really matters is that the gameplay is solid and it does not look like sh** ) and No. gameplay and creativity is not subjective it is good or bad or in between (I guess)
4) Random Quote = "Admiration is the state furthest away from understanding." - actually found a quote that was kinda on topic because of the enamored thing... Also I might of rambled a bit I tend to do that.
T_T. This is America son. We vote for president in 2016. Mid-term is 2014.
Treat it like you would a 4chan argument.
Eh. Zero made some good points too, its just that the concept of releasing an unpolished map is a pretty bad one. One paragraph full of wrong assumptions, subjective reasoning and bad facts doesn't make someone ignorant. Heck, if it did, we'd all be ignorant.
I never said to release an unpolished map (while I have no idea how I started this) I just say that if you are capable of testing a map while making it (and of course no one can fully test a map as good as a full actual play through with just this but you should be able to make it good enough to release to beta testers) you might be able to have your map released in the version it was maid in and not have to deal with random hunger updates. Of course if someone is not good at this they should just deal with it and play through it completely before letting anyone see it. - errr you can tell I am not good at writing here...... errrrr
did anyone catch that spelling error? Well if you did, did it annoy you?? well if it did I l want you to know I caught it too.
P.S I know for sure that by now I am refereed to by "The guy that posts in bulk".... err but unlike the Super Hostile thread people actually say cool things here. oh and I think I got triple misunderstood I really need to learn to word things better.
Simply put, I think the Super Hostile series is better known/more highly regarded for its gameplay and innovations than its aesthetics.
(also is it bad if I treat all internet arguments the same way: like everyone is a perfectly rational human being? It may not always be correct, but I feel like it's the right thing to do.)
On the Super Hostile series thing, bingo. The earlier maps were done before all these fancy new blocks were added for starters, and on top of that, while some of the areas are aesthetically really cool, the main part of any CTM map is the gameplay. If the gameplay sucks, you might as well look at screenshots and move on. The majority of the SH maps, especially the older ones, have solid, fun gameplay.
In text, most people come off as being 100% rational. Without inflection, tone, emotion, etc., all that is left is logic. The only possible way to read them in anything other than a rational context is if they purposefully type in all caps, use bad grammar, or can't spell. Or if they use Comic Sans. Never trust someone who uses Comic Sans.
3) and all I meant by that was I do not play bad maps meaning if it is bad (in the obvious gameplay way I mean why are you talking about how a map looks when all that really matters is that the gameplay is solid and it does not look like sh** ) and No. gameplay and creativity is not subjective it is good or bad or in between (I guess)
P.S I know for sure that by now I am refereed to by "The guy that posts in bulk".... err but unlike the Super Hostile thread people actually say cool things here. oh and I think I got triple misunderstood I really need to learn to word things better.
(1): I agree. As an alpha tester, the mapmaker should ensure that the map is playable and in a fairly good state before releasing it to beta testers. As to only seeing the flaws in things, by fixing them, you're seeing the good that can come from them. So it's not entirely a negative philosophy. It is a philosophy of bringing good out of the bad.
(3): To an extent, gameplay is objective. But after a certain point it becomes subjective. Aesthetics is always subjective. Some people actually like caverns made out of 6 different blocks. I like caverns made out of 1 or 2 blocks. Neither is correct, its just opinion. Its a mixture of subjective and objective.
P.S.: For what it's worth, I understood you. You should snip people's posts though, or use spoilers for long paragraphs. People can scroll up to read what you snipped to get the context of the discussion.
On the Super Hostile series thing, bingo. The earlier maps were done before all these fancy new blocks were added for starters, and on top of that, while some of the areas are aesthetically really cool, the main part of any CTM map is the gameplay. If the gameplay sucks, you might as well look at screenshots and move on. The majority of the SH maps, especially the older ones, have solid, fun gameplay.
In text, most people come off as being 100% rational. Without inflection, tone, emotion, etc., all that is left is logic. The only possible way to read them in anything other than a rational context is if they purposefully type in all caps, use bad grammar, or can't spell. Or if they use Comic Sans. Never trust someone who uses Comic Sans.
(1): I agree. As an alpha tester, the mapmaker should ensure that the map is playable and in a fairly good state before releasing it to beta testers. As to only seeing the flaws in things, by fixing them, you're seeing the good that can come from them. So it's not entirely a negative philosophy. It is a philosophy of bringing good out of the bad.
3): To an extent, gameplay is objective. But after a certain point it becomes subjective. Aesthetics is always subjective. Some people actually like caverns made out of 6 different blocks. I like caverns made out of 1 or 2 blocks. Neither is correct, its just opinion. Its a mixture of subjective and objective.
P.S.: For what it's worth, I understood you. You should snip people's posts though, or use spoilers for long paragraphs. People can scroll up to read what you snipped to get the context of the discussion.
1) got nothing to say about that I agree...
3) well difficulty is subjective and that kinda spreads into gameplay but over all "Gameplay" Isolated from difficulty is for the most part not objective. Other than that yeah what you said. I don't give a >>>> about block variety. If it is made out of just stone it might be a little to little but if it is made out of stone and stone brick and a few other things at times than it is good IMO.
P.S I often do... I guess I should do it a lot more.
Edit&&%$! I put the biggest one in spoilers and than cut out extra spaces and it still goes from the top of the screen to the bottom at 67% zoomed out. lol
Edit&&%$! VERSION 2! I almost said "well difficulty is subjective and that kinda spreads into gameplay but over all "Gameplay" Isolated from difficulty is for the most part not subjective." good thing I double check my posts.
Also I might be writing my review of UT3 in comic sans. Just maybe.......
The hills are gravel. Should I change it to something else? It looks good when you are far away from it, but just "meh" when closer. Grass doesn't look very good on the hills, so i don't want them to be grass btw.
_snip_
The roof looks a bit boring,
maybe some block variation?
Also I might be writing my review of UT3 in comic sans. Just maybe.......
Block variation. The answer to everything. Because if it doesn't use 8 types of blocks, it isn't aesthetically pleasing.
I agree with you again (well if you are being sarcastic) I believe a map can look good while using only 5 different blocks the entire way. That one might be a bit hard but I think it is possible. But I feel your ceiling is fine.
So thought i'd show off the makings an orange wool area.
EDIT: not looking for suggestions btw, because THIS IS NOT FINISHED! there will be houses when its done, as it is a village
This is what I would call a great representation of good block variation those walls. Marvelous. As far as aesthetics go I have high hoped for your maps.
P.S I hope no one saw that I had some lag on this website and some how managed to post the same msg twice in the same post
Block variation. The answer to everything. Because if it doesn't use 8 types of blocks, it isn't aesthetically pleasing.
There's a balance to be found. Bland color schemes look bad, too many colors that don't blend well looks even worse. A balance between them looks amazing.
Block variation is a pretty decent idea there (although a few ideas on how would have been nice). Some glowstone/cyan clay/ore veins would make the ceiling less bland.
One thing that really annoys me is randomblocks filters. In some situations it looks good, but typically veins/rock formations/structures out of whatever material looks a lot better and gives more contrast than randomblocks filters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There ain't much left of the world these days. The gods have forsaken us, there's no denying that. But still you press on. For what? A chance to sift through the ashes one last time? The hope to one day be called a hero? Whatever your reason, you've got a lot of work to do. The corruption won't leave without a fight, so you better get started.
There's a balance to be found. Bland color schemes look bad, too many colors that don't blend well looks even worse. A balance between them looks amazing.
Block variation is a pretty decent idea there (although a few ideas on how would have been nice). Some glowstone/cyan clay/ore veins would make the ceiling less bland.
One thing that really annoys me is randomblocks filters. In some situations it looks good, but typically veins/rock formations/structures out of whatever material looks a lot better and gives more contrast than randomblocks filters.
I'll admit that block variation is okay sometimes. But please tell people not to use bedrock, obsidian, mossy cobble, netherrack, lava, and red mushroom blocks all in the same area.
Or to use an example of lack of variation that looks fine: Tenuous Crystals from Spellbound Caves. It's just stone walls, but the redstone/coal veins provide enough variety to make it look decent without overloading it with 2-4 different block types. The glowstone and the lake provide cool features, while the stone brick denotes the dungeon areas. It's a beautiful area imo, without being over or under varied.
In my map a good portion of the areas don't have any block variation, and I still think it looks just fine. Only one area has a noticeable amount and I think it doesn't look as good (although maybe I did it wrong).
Also you can download the map and see for yourself, just click on the banner in my sig...
I'll play it tomorrow after I wrap up the void area of IG
Even the best map makers become enamored of their own creations. Having that key beta-testing time, and the continual testing and "step backs" on the mapper's part are essential to creating a truly brilliant map.
If the map comes out in original form, and it's not good, then it will get a bad reputation and negative reviews. People spread talk of how good a map is from the moment it is released. Even if no one on this thread gives a super fancy review, the map will still get a bad rep if it is obviously unpolished, lacking, unbalanced, etc. Releasing a map before it is fully finished only hurts the map.
Subjective. This sentence means nothing. I consider Kaizo Caverns (no block variation, bad eroding, etc.) to be one of the best CTM maps ever made. I've played it three times. Someone else might call it an insult to the genre because it doesn't use 15 base blocks, it doesn't use custom mobs, it doesn't have enough loot, etc.
The fact that you consider yourself to have "high standards" adds nothing to your argument, nor does it back you up. It's like saying "Trust my opinion, because I'm a veteran CTM player."
that's not an essay. I seriously saw someone give like a 20 paragraph post complaining about Lord of the Rings Online.
WHAT?! REASON!? WHAT IS THIS MADNESS???!?!?!?!?!?!?! #capslockbroken #epikkoolletterz
In other news related to this post, Eries for forum president 2014! dis persons has senses!
T_T. This is America son. We vote for president in 2016. Mid-term is 2014.
Treat it like you would a 4chan argument.
Eh. Zero made some good points too, its just that the concept of releasing an unpolished map is a pretty bad one. One paragraph full of wrong assumptions, subjective reasoning and bad facts doesn't make someone ignorant. Heck, if it did, we'd all be ignorant.
Yeah, i thought they would have given us a notice beforehand,.
I certainly was.
Anyway, I'd just like to say that my hypothetical about a terrible-at-ctm mapmaker was exactly that: hypothetical. I'm not THAT bad of a CTM player. Maybe I should have prefaced my question with this? Too late now, I guess.
I always felt that KC was one of the best Super Hostile maps. I haven't played all of them (I've played 1, 3, 4, part of 7, 9 on the CTM server, 10, and 12), but Kaizo Caverns was at the top of my list (accompanied by Spellbound Caves). Simply put, I think the Super Hostile series is better known/more highly regarded for its gameplay and innovations than its aesthetics.
(also is it bad if I treat all internet arguments the same way: like everyone is a perfectly rational human being? It may not always be correct, but I feel like it's the right thing to do.)
*coughcough*totallynotreferringtoanyone*coughcough*
1) did I ever say they did not and I just don't understand that I am a person who always sees only the flaws in things. yes while this is negative I look at the flaws and see how to fix them this is why I can not make a map because I can clearly see that my buildings are terrible. But lets say I am a good builder if I made a map I would look through every little thing kinda like testing while making it. I mean you would go in this area you are fighting A B and C at this point you should have at least This this and that gear do I think in any situation I could beat A B and C with this this and that but still not have it be easy. Can the player easily find there way from point
A -> B. By just doing things like that you should ensure that the map is at least in a good well balanced state and than tweak it from there based on beta testers (and yes that includes the map maker)
2) If you follow the steps above + a few things I probably over looked because of not wanting to type it it should be good enough to have beta testers play it and if it is not.....(I do not want to say this seeing as it might be seen as an insult and I do not want anyone here feeling insulted by me)
3) and all I meant by that was I do not play bad maps meaning if it is bad (in the obvious gameplay way I mean why are you talking about how a map looks when all that really matters is that the gameplay is solid and it does not look like sh** ) and No. gameplay and creativity is not subjective it is good or bad or in between (I guess)
4) Random Quote = "Admiration is the state furthest away from understanding." - actually found a quote that was kinda on topic because of the enamored thing... Also I might of rambled a bit I tend to do that.
I loled twice.
I never said to release an unpolished map (while I have no idea how I started this) I just say that if you are capable of testing a map while making it (and of course no one can fully test a map as good as a full actual play through with just this but you should be able to make it good enough to release to beta testers) you might be able to have your map released in the version it was maid in and not have to deal with random hunger updates. Of course if someone is not good at this they should just deal with it and play through it completely before letting anyone see it. - errr you can tell I am not good at writing here...... errrrr
did anyone catch that spelling error? Well if you did, did it annoy you?? well if it did I l want you to know I caught it too.
P.S I know for sure that by now I am refereed to by "The guy that posts in bulk".... err but unlike the Super Hostile thread people actually say cool things here. oh and I think I got triple misunderstood I really need to learn to word things better.
On the Super Hostile series thing, bingo. The earlier maps were done before all these fancy new blocks were added for starters, and on top of that, while some of the areas are aesthetically really cool, the main part of any CTM map is the gameplay. If the gameplay sucks, you might as well look at screenshots and move on. The majority of the SH maps, especially the older ones, have solid, fun gameplay.
In text, most people come off as being 100% rational. Without inflection, tone, emotion, etc., all that is left is logic. The only possible way to read them in anything other than a rational context is if they purposefully type in all caps, use bad grammar, or can't spell. Or if they use Comic Sans. Never trust someone who uses Comic Sans.
(1): I agree. As an alpha tester, the mapmaker should ensure that the map is playable and in a fairly good state before releasing it to beta testers. As to only seeing the flaws in things, by fixing them, you're seeing the good that can come from them. So it's not entirely a negative philosophy. It is a philosophy of bringing good out of the bad.
(3): To an extent, gameplay is objective. But after a certain point it becomes subjective. Aesthetics is always subjective. Some people actually like caverns made out of 6 different blocks. I like caverns made out of 1 or 2 blocks. Neither is correct, its just opinion. Its a mixture of subjective and objective.
P.S.: For what it's worth, I understood you. You should snip people's posts though, or use spoilers for long paragraphs. People can scroll up to read what you snipped to get the context of the discussion.
Thanks man, I'll take the tip.
1) got nothing to say about that I agree...
3) well difficulty is subjective and that kinda spreads into gameplay but over all "Gameplay" Isolated from difficulty is for the most part not objective. Other than that yeah what you said. I don't give a >>>> about block variety. If it is made out of just stone it might be a little to little but if it is made out of stone and stone brick and a few other things at times than it is good IMO.
P.S I often do... I guess I should do it a lot more.
Edit&&%$! I put the biggest one in spoilers and than cut out extra spaces and it still goes from the top of the screen to the bottom at 67% zoomed out. lol
Edit&&%$! VERSION 2! I almost said "well difficulty is subjective and that kinda spreads into gameplay but over all "Gameplay" Isolated from difficulty is for the most part not subjective." good thing I double check my posts.
Also I might be writing my review of UT3 in comic sans. Just maybe.......
The roof looks a bit boring,
maybe some block variation?
Please don´t
Block variation. The answer to everything. Because if it doesn't use 8 types of blocks, it isn't aesthetically pleasing.
EDIT: not looking for suggestions btw, because THIS IS NOT FINISHED! there will be houses when its done, as it is a village
meeeh
This is what I would call a great representation of good block variation those walls. Marvelous. As far as aesthetics go I have high hoped for your maps.
P.S I hope no one saw that I had some lag on this website and some how managed to post the same msg twice in the same post
There's a balance to be found. Bland color schemes look bad, too many colors that don't blend well looks even worse. A balance between them looks amazing.
Block variation is a pretty decent idea there (although a few ideas on how would have been nice). Some glowstone/cyan clay/ore veins would make the ceiling less bland.
One thing that really annoys me is randomblocks filters. In some situations it looks good, but typically veins/rock formations/structures out of whatever material looks a lot better and gives more contrast than randomblocks filters.
I'll admit that block variation is okay sometimes. But please tell people not to use bedrock, obsidian, mossy cobble, netherrack, lava, and red mushroom blocks all in the same area.
Or to use an example of lack of variation that looks fine: Tenuous Crystals from Spellbound Caves. It's just stone walls, but the redstone/coal veins provide enough variety to make it look decent without overloading it with 2-4 different block types. The glowstone and the lake provide cool features, while the stone brick denotes the dungeon areas. It's a beautiful area imo, without being over or under varied.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/76647015@N08/9846198344/
I'll play it tomorrow after I wrap up the void area of IG
My Thread: http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1881805-ctm-wip-lands-of-mystery-by-bnm-new-map-started/#entry23248316