DM-Suddendeath - Review

  • 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.

Twrecks

Spectacularly Lucky
Mar 6, 2000
2,606
10
36
In Luxury
www.twrecks.info
Originally posted by BangOut
I can tell by the screenshots it's not a 7.

Delete the "To the author" part. It's very pretentious whether or not you've already seen it in NC reviews.

Don't do .gif review images. I like being able to see all the map pics at once at a glance.

I glanced at the review: it's very complimentary of the map.
I glanced at the screenshots: the rooms are a bunch of few-sided cylinders with platforms and crates.

^ Not a 7.

Me agrees with BO.
State your opinions, do not make corrections, only suggestions. Iif it's a AI problem then sure go ahead, that's totally objective. Like "your lift exit tags were mis-labelled" or something similar. Don't get stuck in a trap of always fixing mistakes. General comments like "your lifts weren't set up properly" and rescue the rest of the readers from the technical dietribe to ensue.

I'm sorry for ever starting using gifs in NC reviews, the pics viewed together should transpose a feeling of place and a clear indication of the maps general form. Though the only one I rember doing was for CTF-ProjectX2 because 4 pics weren't sufficent IMO. Most reviews are limited to 2 pics to ease storage, reviews by NCreviewers are 3 while admains can add a fourth, that may change with NC3.

From the pics I would say this is a "ho-hum" map. I wouldn't d/l this map as a score of 7 and your words of praise would lead me to believe I should.
 
Last edited:

UnrealGrrl

Enemy flag carrier is Her!
Jun 16, 2000
1,696
6
36
www.unrealgrrl.com
thatd be cool if there are more pics... yay nc3
always thought 1-2 pics wasnt enuff to translate a good view of a map unless it was awful, very small or both :)
 

FreakinMeany

Booga booga boo!
Nov 20, 2001
448
1
0
Humid as hell, FL
www.mapraider.com
Originally posted by Twrecks
State your opinions, do not make corrections, only suggestions....
I'm sorry for ever starting using gifs in NC reviews, the pics viewed...
From the pics I would say this is a "ho-hum" map. I wouldn't d/l this map as a score of 7 and your words of praise would lead me to believe I should.
Thanks for the comments, and you're right. This was actually the first review that I wrote of the three, so it was the most... uh... f'ed up :)
 

Twrecks

Spectacularly Lucky
Mar 6, 2000
2,606
10
36
In Luxury
www.twrecks.info
Mo pics, mo better.
I'd like to see a limit of 4 still just because of the impact on our database if the cap were lifted. It's more of a file size issue than the number of pics really. Most of the previous pics wieghed in at around 15k (173x231 jpeg), multiply that by the number of reviews (over 1000 for UT maps) times the number of pics per review and it adds up.
Well...
Maybe it is a number of files issue, each referenced specifically by a specific review...
Heck, maybe we could push the envelope a little more with a cap of 6 ???
 

FreakinMeany

Booga booga boo!
Nov 20, 2001
448
1
0
Humid as hell, FL
www.mapraider.com
Originally posted by Twrecks
Mo pics, mo better.
I'd like to see a limit of 4 still just because of the impact on our database if the cap were lifted. It's more of a file size issue than the number of pics really. Most of the previous pics wieghed in at around 15k (173x231 jpeg), multiply that by the number of reviews (over 1000 for UT maps) times the number of pics per review and it adds up.
Well...
Maybe it is a number of files issue, each referenced specifically by a specific review...
Heck, maybe we could push the envelope a little more with a cap of 6 ???
IMO, four pics would be perfect. Six would be welcome, but might be overkill for some maps. I'm assuming, of course, that the reviewer could choose 1-4 (or 6) images per review. You're right about the filesize issue. If I did my math right:

15,000 (image filesize) x 4 (images) x ~5200 (maps) = 312,000,000 (312MB)

(That'd be 60MB for the existing 1000 UT reviews you mentioned)

Yikes.