PDA

View Full Version : BR-UTronic_Rev1


igNiTion
13th Apr 2004, 09:27 PM
Your right Thunderstrike.... I commented on that map after playing it only a couple times, and after playing it more I have liked it less each time and have since towned down my first (enthusiastic) score for this map. But I do believe it scores slightly more than a 6... as it is much more fun with a human ( I played it on a LAN) but maybe not. And the author raving about that was also wrong.... very wrong.... though i didn't want to say it in the comment.

I am no mapper myself, though I am familiar with the editor and can make BSP geometry and place meshes do all the other basic stuff. Maybe some other mappers in these forums can talk to you UTGhost (if they have any comments) or comment on this map.

Homeslice
14th Apr 2004, 01:00 AM
UTGhost is probably one of those mappers where, if they don't appreciate what is said in reviews, they should never request another review. I really didn't appreciate that bashing.

Thunderstrike
14th Apr 2004, 06:20 AM
I think an author is entitled to state that they were disappointed with a score. That's happened regularly, and as long as they're polite about it, take it on the chin instead of to heart, there's no problem. As for the author not requesting any more reviews, that's up to the author. As I said in my comment, authors should take what they can from a review, chew it over and then decide what was worthwhile criticism. I'm glad you've taken the time to play the map a bit more, igNiTion (http://forums.beyondunreal.com/member.php?u=41633). If you think the map should still score higher than my 6.0, I have no problem with that as my score is an opinion, as is HS's review. There's no right or wrong with scores, although our schema tries to make sure people consider all elements equally.

The author, in his expected rebuttle, seems to have gotten confused when referring to my breakdown of scores for AVA and game play, stating that I claimed 3 to be above average where our marking schema states 6. Of course, I'm separating the AVA and game play scores here as you're supposed to before totalling them, but perhaps I wasn't clear in my description. For the record, here's what our schema says a 6 should be:
A good map where the author is obviously competent in the editor. Gameplay and AVA are decent but the map overall is lacking that something that yells ownage.
I'd say that's pretty close in this case, give or take a point.

The author feels his map is above 8 which is:
This map displays a high level of competence with the editor. No rough edges, detail (in both AVA and gameplay) is duly addressed and perhaps excellent in one of those fields.

but just below 9 which is:
This is an excellent map. It has astounding gameplay complemented by equalling astounding AVA. This is a must download.

Homeslice did make mention that lighting was pretty average and ambient sound use was limited, thereby reducing his AVA score, and whilst he spoke well of the bots, after a great deal of playtesting he did find game play to be solid, but nowhere does he rate it as exceptional, so I believe that came in around 3.5/5. That's where his score came from.

Last point, and then I'll endeavour to move on! ;)

The author feels that I was being purile in scoring his map as I did. What he may not realise is that I made note of these points during our pre-review process, and therefore my score had already been settled well before Homeslice's review was even written, and this was part of the reason Homeslice lowered his score from 7.0 to 6.5. All of this well before the author's comments. My score was not a reaction.

Ok, I think I'm done for now...

lophead
14th Apr 2004, 11:31 PM
Before bemoaning a score, authors must take into account that up to 5 other reviewers will corroborate to make sure that a given score is appropriate. So even if a map was reviewed by another team member you can rest assured the score would be very close to that posted.