Map Pack- Memoir Of the Ancients

http://nmaps.net/user/Erik-Player · Postby **Erik-Player** » 2009.02.15 (05:28)

yungerkid wrote:i agree with kaos's first statement. i no longer think it should be based on age. instead, it should be based on the quality of the maps submitted to the pack. kaos, you are correct in saying that everyone who submits to this pack will be canonized as ancients depending on how well remembered this pack is. i would like to add that because of that, we should go for as high quality a pack as possible, both so that the pack can be well remembered, and so that we don't indellibly print an unworthy mark on history. to repeat, we should judge the maps, and we should judge them on quality. we should judge them by a high standard. i think that maybe a quarter of the people on that list are probably not going to produce good enough maps for the pack. i don't want to hurt any feelings, but again, we must preserve the best, if that is truly our goal (which it seems to me to be)

on an unrelated note, i can vouch for minion_of_pi and erik_player. both demonstrate that age is almost completely irrelevant to quality.

<3<3<3<3

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (05:29)

Even a bad map by a bad mapper can be made good by extensive playtesting and feedback from a good author.

With a little effort on everyone's part, we can make every map great. We're starting with good authors anyways, so with a little feedback from other good authors, we'll turn something cool into something legendary and amazing.

EDIT: I'd vouch for E_P too. I've played a few of his and never been disappointed.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (05:31)

well, kaos, it depends on the concept behind the map. every map is based around a core concept, and if the concept is rotten, the map might not have the potential to be made good. polish can only go so far.

what do y'all think about my idea of strict quality judging? and i would also suggest that we suspend submitting moa maps to numa. i think we should organize them apart from numa.

http://nmaps.net/user/Erik-Player · Postby **Erik-Player** » 2009.02.15 (05:33)

I have an idea. What if there were prizes for like the best 3 maps or something to get people motivated to make the best they can?

Postby **Martyr** » 2009.02.15 (05:35)

Chaostar, can i make a new thread for the playtesting, and judging of the maps?
I'm afraid this'll get crowded quick.
But feedback guys!
EDIT: Damn, Spent three hours on a concept map and it's gone!!!

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (05:37)

martyr raises a good point. how will we judge quality? i'm thinking his idea of a thread is a good one; we could accomodate all viewpoints, including the experienced mappers'. however, i think we should have a more specific group of ultimate decision-makers.

http://nmaps.net/user/Erik-Player · Postby **Erik-Player** » 2009.02.15 (05:41)

yungerkid wrote:martyr raises a good point. how will we judge quality? i'm thinking his idea of a thread is a good one; we could accomodate all viewpoints, including the experienced mappers'. however, i think we should have a more specific group of ultimate decision-makers.

We can make up our own judging rubric just for this, and martyr can post it in his thread.

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (05:43)

yungerkid wrote:well, kaos, it depends on the concept behind the map. every map is based around a core concept, and if the concept is rotten, the map might not have the potential to be made good. polish can only go so far.

what do y'all think about my idea of strict quality judging? and i would also suggest that we suspend submitting moa maps to numa. i think we should organize them apart from numa.

Your idea? =P

I think playtesting should be done in the following manner.

1) Create the map.
2) Find someone who's willing to partner up with you for the first stage.
3) Exchange maps with them. Playtest their map, and give detailed feedback.
4) Find a partner for the second stage. Repeat step 3.
5) Submit the map to the judging thread Martyr's making and see if it passes quality control by the other mappers in the pack, just by general consensus. This part should be necessarily harsh judging, and if necessary, the maps can go through a third playtest.

Postby **Martyr** » 2009.02.15 (05:44)

Well we gotta wait for the project coordinators go haha=]

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (05:45)

O_o a rubric? you see, in order to formulate a rubric, we would have to know all the formal theory behind what makes excellent maps. you know, we'd have to have all the logic available that goes on in an expert's mind when he/she thinks up a concept and begins to develop it. in other words, we probably won't be able to create an efficient and/or clean enough rubric, i'm thinking.

edit: kaos, if everyone is going to be seeing it anyway, why have an exchange? this goes back to a general consensus, and i still think we would be better off with a more specific unit of people doing the judging. i think we should appoint a unit of experienced mappers to judge and decide which maps are good, and then submit the maps that are approved to the thread. if they aren't totally booed (and depending on the situation), they will then move on. how's that sound?

http://nmaps.net/user/Minion_of_Pi · Postby **Minion_of_Pi** » 2009.02.15 (05:46)

yungerkid wrote:well, kaos, it depends on the concept behind the map. every map is based around a core concept, and if the concept is rotten, the map might not have the potential to be made good. polish can only go so far.

what do y'all think about my idea of strict quality judging? and i would also suggest that we suspend submitting moa maps to numa. i think we should organize them apart from numa.

I'm with yungerkid on this. Only thing is, what about people who have already submitted maps? Can we leave 'em up, or take 'em down? And also, a seperate thread sounds like a grand idea/way for me to get more posts.

Also, agree with KlanKaos for the most part; but, I don't think it should be required to playtest; just sub it to Martyr's thread, and if it doesn't pass, keep working on it, or even get others' aid.

Also, anyone got any advice on the 4 maps I posted earlier, before I put them through Martyr's future thread?

Postby **Martyr** » 2009.02.15 (05:48)

Or a non specific rubric to cover all categories?
with a panel of 5 judges. Their average vote must be at least an av. of X/10 for it to be passed.

http://nmaps.net/user/ska · Postby **ska** » 2009.02.15 (05:48)

Yeah, whatever, I'll give it a crack.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (05:49)

i think that the panel should be more like 15 or so judges. and i think we should leave the current moa maps on numa up, and subject them to the same quality judging standards as the others.

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (05:51)

Well, the thing is, I think a serious, constructive playtesting by more than one person is worth a lot more than a simple 'yes, it's good enough' or a 'no, it's not good enough'. After all, we want this to be an epic pack, right? And so every map should go through some pretty serious testing. I think having two or three others playtest before submission is still a good idea.

I think already-submitted maps should be left up, but any reference to Memoir of the Ancients or moa tags should be edited out. We do want this to be completely new and awesome when it comes out, as well as just legendary.

I also agree with yungerkid on the idea that a concept can only be taken so far. That's what the judging thread will be for - so that even refined maps with a crappy concept that just don't work will be cut from the pack. Everyone signed up is capable of producing ten top-notch maps, I think. We just need to make sure they are all top-notch.

I also think that the panel should be at least ten judges. yungerkid and martyr, your ideas sound good on that front.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (05:55)

i agree with you, kaos, on all fronts except this: essentially, when it all boils down to it, all the judges are doing is giving a yes or a no to the maps up for judging. the reasons are vital to be sure, and that is why i think we must have over 10 experienced judges with demonstratably refined tastes, but the yes and the no are still all that needs to be given for whether the levels make it into the pack or not. i mean, the judges should not need to each give out hundreds of hours giving in-depth criticism of every map. just deciding which ones are good enough.

http://nmaps.net/user/Erik-Player · Postby **Erik-Player** » 2009.02.15 (05:57)

KlanKaos wrote:
yungerkid wrote:well, kaos, it depends on the concept behind the map. every map is based around a core concept, and if the concept is rotten, the map might not have the potential to be made good. polish can only go so far.

what do y'all think about my idea of strict quality judging? and i would also suggest that we suspend submitting moa maps to numa. i think we should organize them apart from numa.
Your idea? =P

I think playtesting should be done in the following manner.

1) Create the map.
2) Find someone who's willing to partner up with you for the first stage.
3) Exchange maps with them. Playtest their map, and give detailed feedback.
4) Find a partner for the second stage. Repeat step 3.
5) Submit the map to the judging thread Martyr's making and see if it passes quality control by the other mappers in the pack, just by general consensus. This part should be necessarily harsh judging, and if necessary, the maps can go through a third playtest.

I agree with you on this.

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (05:59)

@yungerkid: No, that's exactly what I meant. We're saying the same thing through different words here.

I'm saying that mappers should PM the maps to other mappers from the pack (NOT the judges) before they submit it to the judging thread, so it gets a little critique and a little playtesting, and can be tweaked, refined or even majorly overhauled (if that's necessary) LONG before it ever gets to judging. The judging should be the final stage in a long, involved process. After all, if we're only making ten maps each, they should all be great, and playtesting is the way to get to that point.

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (06:04)

I think we should wait until the general... judging procedure, I suppose you could call it... is finalized before we consider any maps part of the pack.

No offense to you, nSPIRED, 'cause I'm sure your map's going to make it. It has a VERY solid 4 average and great comments, so there's probably not too much wrong with it =P Just we should wait for a bit before we rush into anything.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (06:04)

oh, i see what you're saying. you're saying that first there's individual, one-on-one playtesting with a partner. then the judges. and then if all the other mapmakers don't boo it down completely in the thread (wording that very intentionally), it is included. i agree with that system; it think it's the most efficient system we could use.

as for standards of quality to be used by the judges. they are to judge maps based on what they feel history should remember us by? i think we should define the purpose of the pack before we can say what the maps should do. what's the purpose of the pack? for the future eras to remember us by? that's a fairly general standard.

http://nmaps.net/user/Minion_of_Pi · Postby **Minion_of_Pi** » 2009.02.15 (06:09)

Purpose of the pack: basically, provide a prime example of what we were made of to whoever comes next. In fact, there could be like a massive mappack like this every 10 years or something (maybe too long?) but you'd have to be serious about the game to stick with it for long enough to be a part of it. And, should there be another thread were all we do is get our maps reviewed by others? So, like, one thread for each stage (joining, reviewing, judging, and eventually a thread for organizing and final touches.)

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (06:10)

The purpose of the map is to showcase some of the finest mapping we can do, so that new N players and mappers have something to enjoy that is still enjoyable years from now. It's pretty broad, for sure, and it covers action maps, puzzles, and anything else you can think of that's completable, actually. Argue that with me. That's what I believe the purpose of the map to be.

EDIT: Sorry, Minion, missed that post.

I agree with your definition completely.

I think that for the purposes of the playtesting/reviewing stage, we should just pick a partner, trade maps with them, get them back, refine them, and repeat with a different partner before judging.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (06:14)

minion_of_pi has a good idea, we could have an annual moa pack, to log our progress, but we should stick with the now. the purpose of the pack is closely tied with the judging standards of the judging unit. so if the purpose is truly to showcase our generation's finest mapping (which i think chaostar intended it to be anyway), then the judges' standard should be objectively the finest maps of the generation, regardless of mapmaker? that sounds consistent. i'm all for it. i think that just about covers everything; we'll accept anyone to make maps for the pack, but when it comes to judging, only a certain quality will pass through.

http://nmaps.net/user/KlanKaos · Postby **KlanKaos** » 2009.02.15 (06:17)

Exactly.

So now that we've got most of the process fleshed out between the five or six of us who have been posting, I think we should leave it overnight and give other people a chance to pick at it before it's finalized. After all, there are certainly ideas we can't have =P

I have to go to bed soon anyways =) Good timing.

And if we're going to have a regular map pack, I'd say it should be two years, because in all honesty, this is going to take easily over a month to compile. And if we spend one twelfth of every year working on this, I think it should be every two years. But that's a totally different discussion.

http://nmaps.net/user/yungerkid · Postby **yungerkid** » 2009.02.15 (06:19)

sounds good. this pack has potential.

Metanet Forums

Map Pack- Memoir Of the Ancients

Who is online