Schema scheming

Alright kiddies, lets chill out a bit and discuss this rationally and without attacks.

Bot_40 said:

hmm, first I don't like user comments swaying the score around, you may as well just have some code that decides whether a map gets +1 or -1 on the review score completely randomly given the amount of sensible, critical comments
Even if 100% of the comments were sensible, I don't see this system fully working. Say a reviewer rates a map 7/9 but everyone think's it's worth an 8, so everyone rates it an 8 but the review rating still never goes up because it has to differ by two. If the overall score was to change then everyone has to rate 9/10 which just messes everything up.

Click to expand...

If there is a 7/9 and everyone rates it an 8... the review score is an 8. It only has to differ by one.

-i am chill, read
-i didnt do anything at all, i defend myself
if someone attacks you on the street you defend yourself too
and if you then kill the attacker and go to court, theyll even let you go without punishment

Well, the attacker isn't going to kill you, so you don't need self-defense, but I understand.

To consider maps art, someone must be ghey. If they are art, then they rank as transient art, akin fashion, hence again... ghey. I've seen too many maps that in no ways could be considered art, yet they remain maps, sometimes ghey maps. This is my personal opinion and in no ways an attack. Can be, YES, are NO. If H thinks they are are art, that's his opinion. 1st ammendment bro.

deleted rant about sheds for Mass.

You impune me against H's comments Mass, flames are so much more fun.

AGAIN, AGAIN, I am against the 1 score idea. Hourences has not stated any strong supporting arguements in its favor. If I can't strongly disagree or be vehement about it, why argue? My anger and frustration, yea duh! 1 score sucks on many levels and not being able to convey that to H is frustrating the piss out of me. I'm on the verge of crying! I can't handle it anymore!! GOOD BYE CRUEL WORLD!!!

The system does work, As H stated, there is no such thing as a 10/10 map, no one will disagree. And have we had any since? It remains a possibilty none the less. Only the reviewers score is curtailed, we still have a scale of 0-10, we reviewers just can't actually give a map a 9.5 or 10 anymore. Call it enforced censorship. If the users truely believed in a 10/10, there have been a few maps that have rated a 9 by other reviewers.

Everyone, Give it up on getting rid of the catagories, Only 1 score is bunk. PPL will think the less of NC for it. Hey, we used to do 1 score, gee wiz, that's why we adopted Luquado's overburdened 10 point schema, remember that?. 1 score can be abused (hello user comments) and religates reviews as opinion. Searching for validation here, help out okay.

Seriously, my angst is not with H, just the 1 score idea. Opens the site up for "Art ppl" again.

Of course I find the schema names to be self explanitory, too close to be objective I'm afraid. If indeed all that is wanted is better nominclature, then go for it. PPL will still need to read the reviews or some explanation to know what is meant by "Environmental, Technical and Gameplay", and to see how the score breaks down. I choose small words to fit the A,B,C,1,2,3 theme, a rose by any other name.

So AGAIN, if anyone wants to change the names of the catagories, it really isn't up to me. If anyone can give sufficient cause or reason, it will happen if Mass decides to do it. Not me, however I am free to give counter point. 1st ammendment right. I agree "CAST" was a bit of a reach, but I couldn't come up with another name that started with a "C". Though I think "AWE" and "BUILD" relavent, and better than "Environment" and "Technical", too many letters and ppls own definitions. If you think of "CAST" in movie terms: the set and characters and how they relate positively/negatively to the story it isn't that bad of a choice. Perhaps I'm being from California slants my POV, while others may take "CAST" as being a pouring process to form an object in a mold. Then again, how well does the map fit the mold? It might just work on multiple levels, MUhahaha!

Now you must all die.

Hourences said:

if mapping wouldnt be art, then any dickwit could make good maps

Click to expand...

Now there's an odd comment. Does an activity need to be artistic in nature in order to be challenging? I can name plenty of purely technical or scientific pursuits that not just any dickwit can pull off. The realms of the artistic and the technical are not mutually exclusive. There are plenty of things out there that combine the two, and mapping is one of them. After all, we devote a third of every review score to an assessment of a map's technical merits.

On the review schema, I'm not going to say much more. I favor leaving it as it is. I outlined my thoughts in the other thread, and others have already defended it in this one. I'd be fine with renaming the categories if we want them to be more descriptive, but whether or not we do that doesn't make much difference to me.

I have an idea, why not post a schema link below the AWE, BUILD, CAST score table on each review? You know, just above the screenshots.







At the bottom of the main page is pretty obscure.

Well, the only thing you guys haven't argued against is changing the names (besides Twrecks standing with the names). Anyone else against it? Anyone for it? Anyone that doesn't care?

Twrecks said:

I have an idea, why not post a schema link below the AWE, BUILD, CAST score table on each review? You know, just above the screenshots.

Click to expand...

Mmm, I like this idea too. Changing the names of the categories would make them more descriptive, but at the cost of their succinctness, as has been said. A small-text link below the category scores would improve the situation at no cost.

I like changing the names of the categories to what Bot penned a lot. It's more natural.

Now the hard part.

Mapping is a fucking art. Technical and Aethetic aren't mutually exclusive, but they sure have different goals. You can't tell me that a n00b who makes an assmap doesn't atleast pick this mesh or that texture because it looks cool. They put this big ugly flashing purple bunny rabbit in the middle of the map because it looks cool. They use one misaligned texture on every single surface because they REALLY like it. There is an artistic purpose to every level designers decision.

The problem is that 98.5% of the mappers out there don't get it. They aren't conscious of color pallettes, lighting compositions, texture choices, what actual architecture is, and OMG they couldn't spell "style"*. Even though they don't get it, they sure try to grasp at it. People play the Epic maps first, then they map, they try to recreate this crap, but they will never improve on it because they don't understand mapping as an art.

Also, there are two meanings to art as used in this thread. First, there is the mastery of every aspect of a work into a productive level. Second, there is the appreciation of a minimalist sculpture. Making levels and more importantly RATING them for users falls under the first definition, not the one I think Twrecks is using, and that is the purpose of this site or so I've understood it to be for the last 3 years.

*style is really what's lacking in the mapping world. If there were more maps with style then we could have maps judged solely as works of real art. CTF-Catherine really the only shining example of style. DavidM had style too, I guess, and that rubbed off on everyone.

Just because mappers fail at making something a work of art, doesn't mean they aren't trying. Twrecks, maybe consider that 98.5% of mappers as 2nd graders making pictures with fingerpaint for their parents. Mommy and daddy will say it's art and put in on the refrigerator, but a professional artist clearly would get a better score if a public service, say a newspaper or a website, rated them on the same scale. Mapping is a very young art, just because most people haven't accomplished what Hourences and company have with it, don't sell their work short.

I have stated that mapping CAN BE an art form, and at the least a CRAFT. But not all maps are art IMO. A child given crayolas shoves them up their nose and then scribbles because it's told to is not creating art. Nor is a nOOb following a tute a mapper. If you ask any beginer Ued user, they will tell you they would like to be a mapper, not an artist. Anyone who has been exposed to Ued and gets addicted because then it becomes a means of expression, they are by their actions, Artist, of a sort. You may argue "bad art" is still art. There is no counter agruement to that claim. Beauty remains in the eye of the beholder.

Does man unintentionally create art by his actions? Rather phillosophical for this time of the day... A craftsman may create art through skill and vision, the appretice may if by virtuoso also create art, but more likely create only something to learn from. Mommy and Daddy's priceless green scribble on the refrigerator door is only a sentimental scrap to remind them of a fleeting time, yet only really a bugger blotched parchment that holds no memory in the mind of the child that made it. Maybe snot kid liked yellow crayons more than red ones, gee he's an artist because he made a concious choice! An over simplification of texture usage I'm sure, just as the word art is over generalized to describe landfill. I can appreciate landfill, it makes flat land for more homes with refrigerators.

I can appreciate talent or hard work when I see it. Yet don't be surprised if I balk at waxed mucous. Is it a serious attempt at art? Or someone having fun? Can art be fun? I can understand why Hourences views mapping as art, because to him it is. To me it is a commercial exploit, a technical challenge, and even an obsession. Maps were initially made for one purpose, to make money. Because of advances in the Engine they are increasingly less available to individuals. If it was not for the MSUC far less ppl would be even interested in learning Ued. Funny to think ppl would actually WANT to map for recreation?

As to the renaming, I've thought about this before the current schema aswell...
"Environmental" brings in many other conotations, such as sound and spacial relationships that govern flow. I think it should be made clear that it is a culmination of atmosphere, visuals and continuity. It will be someone's task to spell out what it means to NC.
"Technical" has its merits, however simplicity in design can be deceptive. A box is a box, but a low poly map that looks good cannot be judged on the number of brushes used. This catagory requires the reviewer to actually open the map in Ued and make an evaluation on the process used to create the map and if/how those tools were used. There are many Actors players never see.
"Gameplay", okay this becomes a real catch all. FPS is gameplay, item placement, pathing, flow and the space requirements of movement and weapon types are all gameplay elements. Some of these are dependant on Gametype. Okay, I lumped these together too.

Please add or detract/rewrite what you think should or should not be considered in each catagory. I fail to see the need to rename the catagories, augmenting the current descriptions should suffice. Bigger words, do you really need them? They certainly sound more scientific, and is that the message we want to send?

Holy cow, Batman!

Whilst I have my own opinions on art, as someone who studies it and does it a load as a hobby, I won't (and can't be bothered) to state them in full.
Mapping is an art, as much as science is an art, and carpentry is an art. An art is, technically, anything that can be learnt but requires natural skill and judgement, something that you evolve and master, to understand or explore.
So, technically, mapping is an art, regardless of what content you are looking at.

On the other hand, in "real" art you get all this modern **** and absolutly insane stuff like the turner art prize where a room with a flashing lightbulb, nothing else, is concidered art, or a picture of someones ass. I don't, personally, like this art or believe in it being as strong as, say, a huge wall length oil painting that took half a year to perfect.
This applies to mapping too - a 2 cube map and a masterpiece are both of the same form and created using hte same fundamental tools.
As long as we review every map released on the same schema every map is linked, and therefore every map is a form of art however loosely related.

I do think that Cast, Awe and Build should be changed to something like Enviroment, Gameplay and technical. Makes a hell of a lot more sense, is easier to understand and theres no reading of schemas needed because it is self explanatory.


I think every shema suggested has flaws and advantages. Single score ratings are common and easy, and they are a direct opinion of the reviewer. I've not anything against it but I think having subcatagories is needed.
I think it should be out of 10, though. Whats the point in having a 10 when no one is ever going to use it? Well, simple. 10 is there to be unobtainable... by lowering the choice on our side to x/9 you are just changing the 10 to a 9, whatever the users may pick and do.

While we're at it can you kill all the 10 rated reviews in teh past and change them to 9s or something? Theres are lot of undeserved stuff and jokes that could really do with cleanign up before the new people see them and get carried away. It's an open invitation.

btw twecks, for the majority of UTs lifetime people did map for recreation, there was no money to be earnt. So that arguement is kinda flat. A lot of people just think it'd be cool to make your own level, the same as people see some piece of art and say "wow, I wish i could make one of those"

you think that enviroment, gameplay and technical sounds more scienctific that cast, awe and build?
IMO it just sounds confused and not concrete in it's meaning. Far more people understand what an enviroment is than the awe-inspiring qualities of a map, and also enviroment has a much less vague covering.
Cast and gameplay have no real verbal link at all, from my perpective. Gameplay is universally known... makes far more sense.
Build/technical... not really much difference only that computer-related things are more technical than building a shed

Shadowlurker said:

btw twecks, for the majority of UTs lifetime people did map for recreation, there was no money to be earnt. So that arguement is kinda flat. A lot of people just think it'd be cool to make your own level, the same as people see some piece of art and say "wow, I wish i could make one of those"

Click to expand...

Not an arguement, a fact. I said "Maps were initially made for one purpose, to make money. " They were a commercial release as part of a game. "Funny to think ppl would actually WANT to map for recreation", as you agree. I hope you also agree that not all maps are art, some are rip-offs and some are intentional jokes. Is painting an art? I can paint a shed. I can map a textured box with a player start. Ability to create does not always make art. Where does art begin? Above zero? As was pointed out, skill does not make art. And what do we score, skill or art? Perhaps the new schema names should be Art, Skill and FFS...

Shadowlurker said:

I think it should be out of 10, though. Whats the point in having a 10 when no one is ever going to use it? Well, simple. 10 is there to be unobtainable... by lowering the choice on our side to x/9 you are just changing the 10 to a 9, whatever the users may pick and do.

Click to expand...

I disagree. On a ten-point scale such as Insite uses, I don't think I would ever give out a ten. However, I don't consider a nine from NaliCity to be unreachable, because the final score is the sum of three category scores. I think we would all agree that a 3.0 category score is not out of reach; I've given them out several times, and so has everyone else. If it were out of reach, then theoretically no map could be better than a 7.5, which would be ridiculous. Thus, given that a map can reach the 3.0 mark in any given category, it is conceivable that a truly expertly done map could reach that mark in all three, and take home a 9.0 review. If I encounter a map that deserves that honor, I'm certainly not going to dock one of the three category scores simply because a map shouldn't obtain the highest possible rating.

This is one reason I like our scale. A nine-point scale is functionally equivalent to a ten-point scale in which nobody ever hands out a ten, and it works well with our three-category approach.

Twrecks said:

Perhaps the new schema names should be Art, Skill and FFS...

Click to expand...

I will say one other thing on the proposed alteration for category names. I don't like the use of "Technical" to replace "Build," simply because it's an adjective whereas the other two suggested replacements are nouns. Let's have congruity in parts of speech, please.

imo environment should be called visuals, even more clear, env. is still pretty wide or open to different interprentations

i mean, env., it could be read as theme, what if someone enters a themeless map that still looks solid ?
a map with a lack of true environment, atmopshere and dynamic stuff, but still looks visual solid and well made, but it would score 2 or 2.5/3 then for "environment", might be confusing too

To consider maps art, someone must be ghey. If they are art, then they rank as transient art, akin fashion, hence again... ghey. I've seen too many maps that in no ways could be considered art, yet they remain maps, sometimes ghey maps. This is my personal opinion and in no ways an attack. Can be, YES, are NO. If H thinks they are are art, that's his opinion. 1st ammendment bro.

Click to expand...

-im not american, and im happy about that, so stop slapping around with ammendments cause i have zero idea what they all mean
-mapping is art, its not because it loads in ut that it is a map, then it is a file
a true map is art
tell me why its so hard to make good maps else ? any idiot could make one if it only required pushing buttons and knowing working methods but its not, its about more, and that factor x cant be teached by someone
you have to feel it
and thats art
gameplay is design, and design isnt a craft either

please explain what color composition, color choice, general composition, texture compositions, creation of emotion are all about then ?
"craft" ?
isnt for example music a craft too ? and not art ?
i could download some cheap prog, slap together a few sounds and then i made music and im a muscian ?
i think not

deleted rant about sheds for Mass.

Click to expand...

oh common, i wanted to have read it

You impune me against H's comments Mass, flames are so much more fun.

Click to expand...

wait, wasnt it you who said i was immature and flamish etc ?
why are you doing it yourself atm ?

Hourences has not stated any strong supporting arguements in its favor.

Click to expand...

you have ?
except from all your highly subjective flame i mean

GOOD BYE CRUEL WORLD!!!

Click to expand...

yeah fake that youre not getting frustrated by it, having re read your previous posts i conclude youre not really happy right now

Only the reviewers score is curtailed, we still have a scale of 0-10, we reviewers just can't actually give a map a 9.5 or 10 anymore. Call it enforced censorship.

Click to expand...

imo we need at least 9.5 but ok
see it was a noble thought but at the end it translates wrong in half the peoples minds
what you said is purely theorectical, in theory we have 10 points but lot of people dont feel like it
thats the prob, its like shad said, it moves the problem, the 9 became the 10, and all scores downgraded to stay in scale with the 9

Seriously, my angst is not with H, just the 1 score idea. Opens the site up for "Art ppl" again.

Click to expand...

ok but who the hell are the art people(still no answer nor defintion while you keep using it as an argument)
i guess me and davidm
oh wait, david sucks a lot in art actualy, hes a gameplay guy
i dont see at all what all of that has to do with it anyway

few lines above that you said that the scheme makes sure it feels less like opinion
and you are right about that in a way, but then again, only works for a limited group of people who indeed need and want that
sunspire thing for example didnt gave scores, it only gave thumbs up, down or in the middle, and it were still high quality and believable respectable reviews

the abc thing and using short words IS a good idea BUT its also not clear to a lot of people
and imo making it more clear is most important
i made mods, other sites etc, and you really cant believe how incredible blind some people are if you read the questions you get sometimes, make it simple for them

posting scheme link next or close to score is good idea

and im for changing names


__________________________________

Mommy and daddy will say it's art and put in on the refrigerator, but a professional artist clearly would get a better score if a public service

Click to expand...

see if i say that, i would be called an arrogant piece of utter sh1t whos a fu<ked up kid
but the quote is fully true

__________________________________

But not all maps are art IMO.

Click to expand...

ok some maps are more dependant on a lot of other things then on art
but you could go discuss that, did this map fully succeeds ? because it lacks an important part
look outside ut too, mapping in general

If you ask any beginer Ued user, they will tell you they would like to be a mapper,

Click to expand...

if i ask a kid what he wanna become later he might say a painter, a sculpturer, ...

You may argue "bad art" is still art. There is no counter agruement to that claim. Beauty remains in the eye of the beholder.

Click to expand...

it is indeed harder to counter, but you hold the thing against the rules and you see, did this thing succeed ? was it from a visual point technically correct ?
and with those questions you can get pretty far already, and without too much opinion
classic art has alot of rules too, they even teach all that in school
where to place objects, where to go site in a room, how to find lines of composition in paintings etc
those are clearly defined rules and defintions, and they are behind the paintings, including all the old famous ones

To me it is a commercial exploit, a technical challenge, and even an obsession. Maps were initially made for one purpose, to make money. Because of advances in the Engine they are increasingly less available to individuals. If it was not for the MSUC far less ppl would be even interested in learning Ued. Funny to think ppl would actually WANT to map for recreation?

Click to expand...

well then you are more of a thinker and more of a gameplay guy perhaps
a true artist doesnt care about money, its all about the love for the thing
that same love comes back when making them, its not about money
nor is msuc motivating people, most noobs are even pretty demotivated by it because they know they have little chance to win
there are 6000 ut1 maps, a lot for a game where you cant get money from..

you make maps because you love what you do, this unstoppable urge to create and not because you have blinking dollar signs in your eyes or because you wanna be leet pro
youll never get anywhere with such attitude

the stuff you said above that quote holds truth in a way but you cant start comparing those things to art
and forget modern art
take classic art, thats way more complicated then just drawing lines, there were emotions and rules behind those lines

there have been reasons given against the 3 equal score format. not all 3 parts should be worth the same percentage of the overall score on every map. somtimes the gameplay or looks on a map are so good it deserves more than 3 of the marks and deserves to be more important than the other 2. also i find 'build' is largely irrelevant, sounds counts towards build but not awe? not right. brush work? bad brush work would be naturally marked against in awe anyways right? it seems unfair this gets as large a say as gameplay or looks. AI seems to be half divided across build and cast, scoring one thing in two categories is asking for confusion.

ive been speaking english as a first language all my life and i had to look at the schema to see what "cast" was meant to be. hell, even looking through its sizable dictionary entry i dont see why anyone would think "gameplay & playability" when they read "cast".

atmosphere(covering looks and sound), gameplay and technical would seem less poncy, easier to understand names. it would require a bit of shuffling, to move sound into atmosphere(awe) where it should be. the problem still is, technical is almost irrelevant if a map looks good and plays good, and its still putting an equal amount towards the end score.