Schema scheming
- Thread starter AMmayhem
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
I don't think we can use emoticons in reviews is one problem, though we can hyperlink now and use fancy keystrokes like " and '
Another project might be a total map rating stystem. Maps are rated 1 trough X, where X is the number of maps in the database. Unrated maps get a 0 until they are placed in the ranks. This system would include all maps from all gametypes and versions of Unreal. This would supplant all prior rating systems, no score woud be given just a rank. User comments of :tup: and :tdown: would push a map up and down the ranks. Just think, It would confound any sense of numerical scores. PPL could only argue over what map was better. Our rating would be meaniless to any other review site and BU would report stuff like "DM-Turd recieved a 1054 out of 7243 from NaliCity".
Of course I'm joking, an "absolute" system is ludicrous, instead we could just use a scale of 0-10,000 develope a 100 catagory schema where each catagory was scored 0-100 for a total possible score of 10,000. The reviewer would not say anything, just fill out a scantron e-card and bar graphs generated for every map. Oops, still not being serious.
Another project might be a total map rating stystem. Maps are rated 1 trough X, where X is the number of maps in the database. Unrated maps get a 0 until they are placed in the ranks. This system would include all maps from all gametypes and versions of Unreal. This would supplant all prior rating systems, no score woud be given just a rank. User comments of :tup: and :tdown: would push a map up and down the ranks. Just think, It would confound any sense of numerical scores. PPL could only argue over what map was better. Our rating would be meaniless to any other review site and BU would report stuff like "DM-Turd recieved a 1054 out of 7243 from NaliCity".
Of course I'm joking, an "absolute" system is ludicrous, instead we could just use a scale of 0-10,000 develope a 100 catagory schema where each catagory was scored 0-100 for a total possible score of 10,000. The reviewer would not say anything, just fill out a scantron e-card and bar graphs generated for every map. Oops, still not being serious.
I like the overall rank idea!!!#!!!#@@@@@@#!! Lets implement that and scrap reviews all together.!!!#@$#! You know what that means, Twrecks wouldn't be needed anymore! Yay!
j/k
j/k
Smilies.....
I was thinking more about user comments and ratings. I think I was joking too, at least a bit............Twrecks said:
The new scheme is being schemed behind the scheme..errr...scene. 
And good god, this thread is 4 years old. Though if things are moving along behind the scenes for NC4, we could use to discuss reviewing schema.
And good god, this thread is 4 years old. Though if things are moving along behind the scenes for NC4, we could use to discuss reviewing schema.
yea, 4 years!
I spent last night reading over this thread and am still thinking what the answer is...
perhaps we could use new names, same 0-10 scale:
ART 0-4 for Art's sake, like awe ,but simply subjective, as in "is it? or isn't it art?". Yea, 4 points, because looks are important, and for some people this is all that matters. Of course this could get really detailed, like fit and finish, polish, details. I said details twice because this canvas has sight and sound, if it doesn't have either, then it just smells bad and no one will touch it.
Gameplay 0-4 This is what players want to know, no BS, just does it play well, well does it? Do you want to play it again? and again? well do ya? Sometimes you have to face the fact that looks aren't everything. If it doesn't play, art is for hanging on your wall or storing in a remote corner of your hard drive. True, there's no such thing as bad sex, even if it really hurts, however there's really super steaming sweet sex, and which would you rather have? Okay, if it smells bad and you won't touch it... probably never got to first base therefor gets zero play.
Merit 0-2 Only 2 points! Is the map techinically complete? Screenshot, music, sound effects, light sourcing, readme, and all the rest of the details that say "this is a finished map, now download it!". Reviewer could pop a technical detail to boost the score, like "wow. that kismet sequence was life changing!" or "the custom texture pack and meshes, absolutely incredible!". Sometimes you want to throw a mapper a bone, and some times they just need to be boned...
And there you have it., or not
Note: This is almost the same as Insite's AVA/Gameplay schema, plus a possible 2 "merit" ponts. If both sites are similar it wouldn't hurt BU IMO
I spent last night reading over this thread and am still thinking what the answer is...
perhaps we could use new names, same 0-10 scale:
ART 0-4 for Art's sake, like awe ,but simply subjective, as in "is it? or isn't it art?". Yea, 4 points, because looks are important, and for some people this is all that matters. Of course this could get really detailed, like fit and finish, polish, details. I said details twice because this canvas has sight and sound, if it doesn't have either, then it just smells bad and no one will touch it.
Gameplay 0-4 This is what players want to know, no BS, just does it play well, well does it? Do you want to play it again? and again? well do ya? Sometimes you have to face the fact that looks aren't everything. If it doesn't play, art is for hanging on your wall or storing in a remote corner of your hard drive. True, there's no such thing as bad sex, even if it really hurts, however there's really super steaming sweet sex, and which would you rather have? Okay, if it smells bad and you won't touch it... probably never got to first base therefor gets zero play.
Merit 0-2 Only 2 points! Is the map techinically complete? Screenshot, music, sound effects, light sourcing, readme, and all the rest of the details that say "this is a finished map, now download it!". Reviewer could pop a technical detail to boost the score, like "wow. that kismet sequence was life changing!" or "the custom texture pack and meshes, absolutely incredible!". Sometimes you want to throw a mapper a bone, and some times they just need to be boned...
And there you have it., or not
Note: This is almost the same as Insite's AVA/Gameplay schema, plus a possible 2 "merit" ponts. If both sites are similar it wouldn't hurt BU IMO
Last edited:
But is Nali City even going to return? I assumed it was not going to, seeing as how there are currently no plans for it.
It has already been too long, along with UT3 being a new game, now all the old UT stuff will fade away, and without a constant main front page, nor map uploads other sites will take the helm by default.
and the UT series is dwindling down for mapping, most need to learn 3dmax, and have hefty hardware to get the real jolt from UT3
The site should have been reworked in 3 days max, new equipment along with paid help.Not sure what QA Pete thinks but my bet is he don't care about it anymore.He already got his fortune.
As for maps, filefront has them all, so, who knows.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pete has supported NC for 9 years. There is no "paid help", and the sites at BU are relatively ad free. I can't say what NC's future is, only that it does have one.
Hey everyone, haven't posted in the NC forum before, but Nali City was certainly one the first sites I ever visited and hope to visit it again in the near future
I really think the Awe/Build/Cast schema worked fine. I think all three are equally important and mutually exclusive terms that comprise the overall quality of a map. I just disagreed with the "fun factor" point. I think the user giving a score and if that score was higher than the review score it got a +1 had issues. Bad maps almost always got a point and great maps never got a point. It should have been a "thumbs up if you like it, thumbs down if you don't," +1 if there are lots of thumbs up, -1 if there are a lot of thumbs down. I still loved the idea of the user being in control of the final point in the review, but I don't think it played out that well in practice.
And yes, the terms Awe, Build, and Cast are rather enigmatic, so perhaps better names are in order. At the same time, I can't think of any term more succinct than those
yea, 4 years!
I spent last night reading over this thread and am still thinking what the answer is...
perhaps we could use new names, same 0-10 scale:
ART 0-4 for Art's sake, like awe ,but simply subjective, as in "is it? or isn't it art?". Yea, 4 points, because looks are important, and for some people this is all that matters. Of course this could get really detailed, like fit and finish, polish, details. I said details twice because this canvas has sight and sound, if it doesn't have either, then it just smells bad and no one will touch it.
Gameplay 0-4 This is what players want to know, no BS, just does it play well, well does it? Do you want to play it again? and again? well do ya? Sometimes you have to face the fact that looks aren't everything. If it doesn't play, art is for hanging on your wall or storing in a remote corner of your hard drive. True, there's no such thing as bad sex, even if it really hurts, however there's really super steaming sweet sex, and which would you rather have? Okay, if it smells bad and you won't touch it... probably never got to first base therefor gets zero play.
Merit 0-2 Only 2 points! Is the map techinically complete? Screenshot, music, sound effects, light sourcing, readme, and all the rest of the details that say "this is a finished map, now download it!". Reviewer could pop a technical detail to boost the score, like "wow. that kismet sequence was life changing!" or "the custom texture pack and meshes, absolutely incredible!". Sometimes you want to throw a mapper a bone, and some times they just need to be boned...
And there you have it., or not
Note: This is almost the same as Insite's AVA/Gameplay schema, plus a possible 2 "merit" ponts. If both sites are similar it wouldn't hurt BU IMO
I really think the Awe/Build/Cast schema worked fine. I think all three are equally important and mutually exclusive terms that comprise the overall quality of a map. I just disagreed with the "fun factor" point. I think the user giving a score and if that score was higher than the review score it got a +1 had issues. Bad maps almost always got a point and great maps never got a point. It should have been a "thumbs up if you like it, thumbs down if you don't," +1 if there are lots of thumbs up, -1 if there are a lot of thumbs down. I still loved the idea of the user being in control of the final point in the review, but I don't think it played out that well in practice.
And yes, the terms Awe, Build, and Cast are rather enigmatic, so perhaps better names are in order. At the same time, I can't think of any term more succinct than those
Okay, I haven't posted in a while, but here's my idea:Awe --> Visuals (Does it look 'realistic' for lack of a better word?)
Cast --> Gameplay (Will it warrant online and offline games for days, weeks, or months after download?)
Build --> Build (Are there any technical problems that affect either visuals OR gamplay?)
Score 5 points for visuals, 5 points for gameplay to make your total of 10. Under build, if there are any major problems that interfere with visuals (HOMs) or gameplay (black holes, invisible walls) then you take away points. A truly 'great' map would have great visuals, great gameplay, and few if any build errors, warranting a high score. If a complicated map with great visuals and gameplay has a lot of errors, that affects its score as well. A simple map will have few if any errors, but lower gameplay and visual scores.
Okay, feel free to pick this idea apart now.
I love this thread
Good times...
Glad Houences is still in the biz. BTW nice tutorial site, and LOL @ "The Art of Level Design", only in regards to my hack arguements versus Art and not at the book.
Having fun doing industrial design for the last 5 years, and everyone is a critic
Good times...
Glad Houences is still in the biz. BTW nice tutorial site, and LOL @ "The Art of Level Design", only in regards to my hack arguements versus Art and not at the book.
Having fun doing industrial design for the last 5 years, and everyone is a critic
Shed still standing. Can't say the same for NC or any of the 1000's of maps.
Made a map for the Unreal game "Red Orchestra", TE-Yakovlevo-Ca (CA stands for combined arms AKA infantry and vehicles)
Too big and realistic, didn't fit the run-n-gun player base, oh well. It'll be vapor soon too
Maybe I'll check back in another 5 years.
Made a map for the Unreal game "Red Orchestra", TE-Yakovlevo-Ca (CA stands for combined arms AKA infantry and vehicles)
Too big and realistic, didn't fit the run-n-gun player base, oh well. It'll be vapor soon too
Maybe I'll check back in another 5 years.
