Kew wrote:I see that, notwithstanding the fact that a modified version was used and this fact is well known now, the review of the Alin'gar map remains as it was, right at the top of the list.
Frieza pointed out, and he is probably right, and I quote "the first thing people turn to to check out whether a pack or map is worth playing is going to be review scores." The only good thing I can say is that the Illhaven 2012 thread has received 5 or 6 thousand hits on this site alone inside 2 months. It is fortunate then that it was published before any review on this site was released, bearing in mind Frieza's quote. In fact I shudder to think of any forthcoming reviews.
The update was posted yesterday
. I'm sure given enough time a review of the more current version will be done, granted the reviewer plays through this other version with the restored story logs. I agree the review could be removed for the time being to avoid confusion.
As for your, erm, concerns...
With the exception of Delacroix who seems to recognize that a good map is one that is greater then the sum of its parts, what qualifications do these elitist "holier than thou" map reviewers have to judge maps made by those early mappers who pioneered the way in this field. That they may have very high review scores on the very same site in which they judge is not persuasive.
The criteria sadly missing from the score chart are ORIGINALITY and CREATIVITY. To me, originality is the very foundation of anything creative. After all, anybody can knock up a copy or redux of someone else's idea. I did mention the "fun factor" once but that was negated simply by suggesting it was subjective. Simply because someone doesn't like a blue hue in the fog of a creepy castle suggests to me that these reviews are subjective already.
I guess you can tell I am tired of getting kicked about in reviews. It would seem to me that if these mappers are so brilliant (you know, scores of 80%+ etc), I fail to understand why they haven't been snapped up by the industry. Perhaps they have. If so, what are they doing writing condescending reviews?
As you can see, I am tired of condescending reviews. In fact I am getting fairly tired of making maps, particularly when in the process of doing so, someone dredges up a modified (for the worse) old map of mine and then deigns to give it 38%. It is discouraging to say the least. And yes, I am proud of my reputation.
Yeah....I don't really know where to begin with this. It's hard to know quite how to respond respectively when you are (collectively) accused of elitism from someone who, obviously, displays a very high opinion of their own work. Teridex and Delecroix are new reviewers for the site, which has otherwise maintained a small hand of maybe five of less people who have written them in the past. Clearly a review of the latest version of any map or mappack is the intention of the site. Mistakes happen, and I'm sure Teridex would have reviewed the most current version of your levels if he knew they were the most current. I've made version mistakes on some reviews I've done as well and they always gotten edited in due time.
Scores, in theory, are for the player. For quick reference. Because it's easier than being expected to read. If I ran the site you can best believe a review would end with either a smiley face or a sad face, with a slightly interested face in between and that's it. It simply isn't worth debating schema ethics with the kind of arrogance displayed by people like you, Kew, who feel owed something more
than praise and our relentless obligation to support levels made over a decade ago. You and people like you want something more. Kew, I have a horrible revelation for you. The site doesn't exist to make you feel special, unless having a dedicated community around supporting your work for years is enough to make you feel special (it should be). You talk of condescending comments in a review; where? The only one talking down to anyone here is you.
Being upset that an obsolete version of your work got reviewed over a refined version is perfectly valid and it is our job to make it right. But the rest of what you posted...well, let's just say that if it is your reputation you are worried about, posts like that do nothing but tarnish it.
I've maintained stridently over the years against scoring systems, and mostly it because of crap like this. It always comes out of this unspoken competition between mappers; people wanting their stuff to get a gold score, as if anyone is getting paid for this. Nobody sure as hell isn't sending UnrealSP checks to keep talking about this gametype. The bottom line is that levels with fun moments have flaws that players need to know about. The reviews are not about ego stroking, and one thing I can say positively about this site is that it wasn't founded on this intention. We tell players how the levels are because we are playing them too. The fact that some of us also map sometimes is largely irrelevant (would you expect reviews to be made only by other mappers?). That's what sites like Nali City succumbed to and it sucks when it happens. We are players that have simply been hanging around playing this game for quite awhile, letting other players know just how these levels play, what's in them, and why they might want to try them. To date we are probably the only site left that bothers to include such comprehensive reviews. Otherwise we would just be a HUB for download links.
Originality and Creativity. Kew, there are maps as old as Illhaven, older, that have gotten what you might consider "rave" reviews and high scores because they were good levels, yet no more sophisticated in scope as your own. I point to One Day, and Tower of Shrak, as well as others like Hexephet (by Grayson Edge). When something original and creative takes place inside a mappack they are often the most mentioned
aspect of a level. You know what gets mentioned maybe a shade more? Bugs and other gameplay issues that hinder player fun and enjoyment
Kew, how exactly does a person put a score on originality and creativity? I'm asking you, because you are clearly the professional. Tell me how it ought to be done. Give people time to play and review a proper version of your older level and you can rest assured the refit will be taken into consideration. We ain't perfect and we are willing to admit it. But...if you're already feeling the itch of impending butthurt over what score Illhaven 2012 will receive then it might give you some degree of ease when I say that I for one have no intention of writing one. Perhaps you can request one of the writers on our staff to give it a shot if one reviewer seems more gentler for you, but chances are you aren't going to be happy regardless. People will play it either way.
just another amateur nobody (that plays your maps)