Make Something Unreal Best Graphics in Map category

[SmokeRingHalo]

No it wouldn't. HOLP maps haven't won any 1st places. Yet have provided by far the best gameplay for CTF and DM gametypes. They get played in competitive games where as CBP maps don't.

Some people don't care what a game looks like they just want it to play well..

First of all, that's highly subjective to say that HOLP maps have great gameplay.
Some do, some don't. The HOLP label doesn't necessarily or automatically mean greatness of gameplay in a map.
Secondly the "best map" categories judge on gameplay first, above looks. 'Best Graphics" category judge solely on looks. (What part of this don't you understand?)
Those entries that win 'best map' because of their gameplay qualities are also the best looking maps usually and have a far better chance of winning both, imo. It's not absolutely certain by any means, nothing is, but I'd stick with playing the odds.

 

[SmokeRingHalo]

Here's a quote from Jim Brown, Epic's lead level designer on level design feedback from phase II.

Finally, despite the presence or absence of all other things, the two most important factors that must be present in your map are gameplay and fun. Your design has to demonstrate a solid understanding of the core gameplay loop and fundamentals of the gametype. I don't care how pretty, memorable, or polished your map is if you've just dropped in two Power Cores and called it a Warfare map. A good map is designed specifically for the weapons, vehicles, and gameplay present. A good map is balanced, well thought out. Most importantly, a good map is fun to play - everything else is just pretty wrapping and presentation.

http://utforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=657261

 

[Cr4zyB4st4rd]

tl;dr

I didn't start the conversation...

Apparently i can't have an opinion, and the fact that no CBP3 maps are used competitively (that i know of) kinda backs up the point..

 

[Angel_Mapper]

Graphics vs Gameplay vs Why Can't It Be Both. Serious business.

 

[Ignotium]

Cause it's quite easier to make a map look "good" (or should I say "impressive") than to make a map play great. There are many factors involved into making a map good to play, which at the same time is not necessarily fun, there's a lot of stuff that you have to understand and so on.

For some reasons, this bring flashes of the 3DBuzz contest and how badly people started to flame, bash and practically insult them after they posted their results. hmmmmmmmm

 

[Sjosz]

Cause it's quite easier to make a map look "good" (or should I say "impressive") than to make a map play great. There are many factors involved into making a map good to play, which at the same time is not necessarily fun, there's a lot of stuff that you have to understand and so on.

For some reasons, this bring flashes of the 3DBuzz contest and how badly people started to flame, bash and practically insult them after they posted their results. hmmmmmmmm

I'll go and disagree with you here, since making a level look good is as respectable and hard work as making something play well, or make something fun.
It's kind of a moot discussion point to claim the need to make a category for just gameplay, especially as people will easily disagree over what is more fun. What works well for competitive play does not necessarily equal fun and non-competitively played levels are not bad levels because of it. Some people call originality in gameplay elements gimmicks because they're used to 100% static environments for the sake of compatibility with competitive play, and some people find levels built for competitive play boring because they do not contain innovation on the gameplay front. Whoever is in the business of picking finalists and winners from the submission has a job I would not want to do, because taking all of that in account and then making a call what you deem fair (no matter how many indignant, insulted or otherwise annoyed responses come from it) is not an easy thing to do.

Out comes the drama llama.

 

[M.A.D.X.W]

Graphics vs Gameplay vs Why Can't It Be Both. Serious business.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[raziel31]

Cause it's quite easier to make a map look "good" (or should I say "impressive") than to make a map play great.

Well, thats just your opinion, i think twice can be difficult imo

 

[Mozi]

Here we go again!

Graphics vs. Gameplay FIGHT!

 

[Bi()ha2arD]

/me hides

 

[UBerserker]

I only played Oztoc and Stratus in those lists. Good job everyone anyway! D:

 

[hal]

Ideally a level has a good balance of gameplay and graphics. There are times, however, when you want to lean more heavily one way or the other and I think that all have their merits and all have particular audiences.

I always loved downloading levels from authors like Angelheart and Scarface because it was fun to just explore the spaces they created. Screenshots from these maps all but demand a download and authors deserve to be rewarded for the painstaking work they've put into them.

I love HOLP-style maps that are simple, clean and fun. I appreciate authors that take time to carefully balance a level and the items within. Elaborate decoration isn't typically desired by people that like this kind of level and as a result they tend to look less impressive... and don't generally win awards.

Some maps strike a good balance and while they might not be attractive to the hardcore crowd, they appeal to the widest audience. This is typically a more "retail-ready" approach and one that Epic seems to favor.

So why NOT have a category that focuses more on gameplay? If it's okay to do with graphics, then why isn't the other end of the spectrum okay? I'm a fan of them all and others are as well.