1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

Schema scheming

Discussion in 'Nali City' started by AMmayhem, Jul 6, 2004.

  1. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Alright, lets quickly move the review schema to a new thread as Mass has suggested. I'll post some of the comments already posted that bring weight to the discussion. Plus I won't put them in the quote format, so it's easier to quote from, if that makes sense.
     
  2. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Posted by Hourences:

    maybe like giving him 5 fields to type in, 1 freestyle field, and 3 others are meant for talking about visuals, technical and gameplay
    so its like


    Review : omgblabla


    Conclusions
    Visual : OMG LIGHT SUX AND TOO MUCH BLUE AROUND SO THIS DRAGS DOWN MAIN SCORE
    Tech : OPMG ALL WALLS ARE NON SOLID
    Gameplay: BlA

    Overall : Great map for all low grav insta players ! specially the unique technical things make this map stand out !


    so that reviewer HAS to write a short text about all 3, just to sum it up, freestyle field can still hold anything else he wants like it is atm
    just an idea
     
  3. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Another post by Hourences:


    3 numbers as bot said is way to confusing
    say youre a noob
    you open nalicity, see a number and within 0.1 sec you must understand whats the deal with the map, without first having to read some faq on how to read it
    people leave then

    the names really are overly complicated too, and certainly for non native english speakers, cast wtf, awe wtf, only build is more or less understandable
    i still have no utter idea whats the real meaning behind the word "awe", i know its suppose to represent visuals on nc, but further then that i have no idea what kind of word it actualy is

    when i review ironblayde i play map and i just come up with a number, it pops up in my mind in big giant flashying red neon light, 6 6 6 6 6 6, so i give map a 6 and then go see "how can i divide this 6 so it fits the awe cast and build score, oh lets do 1 for that, 2 for this, and then we have erm, 3 left so lets score other one 3"
    that doesnt work
    you feel what quality a map is like, you dont start ut and say "oh awesome this is a 2/3 build map and a 1.5/3 awe map", no you feel the general score
    anything else is not natural

    when this system was chosen there was a discussion about pleasing 2 groups of people, on 1 hand the group who like everything in numbers and very precise, and on other hand the people who want to know if a map is good or not but dont care at all about numbers, the group who wants a happy smiley face and a 2 line conclusion saying what the map is like
    a single number review is the middle of these 2 groups, it is rightly in between the 2 opposites and has an element of both sides
     
  4. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Posted by Shadowlurker:


    i like the idea of havng three different sections but the sections themselves suck and confuse

    Should just be
    Visuals-
    Gameplay-
    Technical-

    rather than
    Awe
    Cast
    Build

    because there are things in cast that link directly with things in build.
    Make more sense to just call them by what they really are, IMO.
     
  5. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Posted by Ironblayde:


    Bot: True, but the individual category scores are already listed at the top of every review, and users have the ability to search for maps using category scores as search criteria... so what's the harm in having the final score listed as well? There should be some measure of a map's overall appeal.

    Hour: Actually, I do come up with category scores in my mind before worrying about the final score. Nine times out of ten, when I add them up, I look at the overall score and find that it sums up my thoughts nicely. Once in awhile I'll end up with a final score that strikes me as a little high or low, and I'll go back and look at the categories more closely to see if I was perhaps evaluating something incorrectly, but for the most part the category approach works for me. It's all a matter of preference, I suppose.

    Also, I know that a lot of people who visit the site haven't read the review schema, and go by the final score alone when checking out our reviews, but eliminating the categories isn't going to make things any easier for anyone. The final score is already there, and it's already representative of a reviewer's overall opinion, so what's the problem? If someone doesn't care about how the score is broken down, let him just ignore that part of the review. Someone else will care about all the details, though, and so it's good to have the additional information at hand.
     
  6. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Posted by Bot_40:


    I was a fan of keeping scores completely seperate, and calling them something more obvious like Envioronment, Gameplay and Technical. Then a score just shows up as (5,7,7) or something like that so at a glance you could see if a map is good gameplay wise of good on visuals etc.
    Of course I guess that would be pretty impossible to impliment now I guess


    And later:


    If there is an overall score max of 10 then you also now have the problem of how you split that into 3. Might be better to have all 3 scores out of 10 then just use the average like NC2 but with less catagories?
     
  7. Nahand

    Nahand !!! God Of Random !1?

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,018
    Likes Received:
    0
    ... erhm... i'm a little confused but... apart from the renaming of the criteria names (and subsequential switches of some categories to others, like pointed previously), the current system seems just fine. (Hourences)

    If the problem are 1 line reviews... that's about the reviewer i guess. I won't do 1 line reviews, but i still refuse to spend more time in a review of a map that the author did building it. That doesn't mean i'll completely skip some details. Check CTF-B3 map review (still up, i think) at review list. I did inform in comic-relief style (if you want), but the details that made it suck were explained.

    My opinion...
     
  8. MassChAoS

    MassChAoS echo "NaliCity";

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd like to restate that renaming the current categories is really easy. :)
     
  9. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    For me, I tend to review things like Ironblayde. I look at the awe, build, and cast, individually, and the score comes out to about what I think the overall should be. There are exceptions though, (CTF-Orodruin for one), ones that just seem to deserve a better (or worse) score than what's coming up with the 3 categories; so I can understand where Hourences is coming from. But just deciding on one number overall with nothing else seems too random. Users may find it difficult to figure out where the reviewer "came up" with the number, but I suppose that's what would be discussed in the review.

    I don't like the idea of forcing a reviewer to type the review in a certain way. There are different styles used by us reviewers. Qualthwar has always kept his short and sweet. I type my reviews in more of a format style, clearly separating the categories, and Ironblayde does similar as well. While Shadowlurker and Hourences tend to just discuss the map without the formalities that I do, but still keep things flowing.

    So where's the middle road at this point? Damned if I know right now.... :hmm:


    As for Bot's suggestion of having the categorical scores separate and visible. They already are at the top of each review. You can also search by the categories themselves. I do think it would be better though when searching this way, that you could see the score of the category(s) that you searched by, but I'm not sure there's enough room to add that. We could eliminate the combined user and review score, seeing that those two are already seen, and I think the user can figure the difference between them.
     
  10. Sarevok

    Sarevok ...

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    722
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm with Hourences on this one, there's no need for a score for each catagory
    just give the overall score on the map and you can just discuss the other categories in the review like gameplay, visuals etc.
    we're making things to technical and mathematical here, let's keep things simple
    also as I said in the other thread we should get rid of the 9 point scale and go back to the traditional 10 point one, doesn't make much sense for the reviewer to rate on a 9 point scale while the people who comment rate on a 10 point one
    and finally we should get rid of the final point being dependent on the comments scores, the system is to abused with high scores to have any credibility, the final score should be up to the reviewer and that's it
    http://nalicity.beyondunreal.com/map_hub.php?mid=311
    just look at the scores here, there's such a huge gap between them, then you have assclowns throwing out 10's to anything so the map gets the extra point to put it at 2
     
  11. darth_weasel

    darth_weasel I won

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    0
    yeah sometimes one part of a map is good enough that it makes another irrelevant, example: dm-lego looks like **** but its gameplay is so good its not fair it only counts as 3 marks

    im with leaving it down to the reviewer to discuss his own breakdown of the score in the review, taking it to a /10 scale, but not allowing reviewers to gives 10's (which they wouldnt/shouldnt anyways), so 9.5 would be the highest score, but dont score it like 9.5 is the highest, so we'd see more 9.5's than we currently see 9's, yknow? at the moment it seems since 9 is the highest score, you can think 'well this map isnt quite perfect so ill give it 8.5', even though the 9 is there for 'not quite perfect' maps.
     
  12. Chrysaor

    Chrysaor Lord of the Pants

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,020
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think renaming them would help immensely, I don't get the names still. And I speak the language fine.

    "Architecture is the masterly, correct, and magnificent play of masses brought together in light." Le Corbusier

    I wrote a 12 page paper on how level design is architecture, and architecture is usually split into 3 categories revolving similarly around what you have divided now. I like when reviews talk about the individual categories, but they do interact to give that general impression.

    I'm sure you guys will figure it out.
     
  13. Twrecks

    Twrecks Spectacularly Lucky

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2000
    Messages:
    2,606
    Likes Received:
    1
    1st off Hourences is ghey. Scoring maps as Art is absurd, remove any objectivity and be dispositioned to "suXXorz" and "OMFG this map Rulez!".
    I'm the first to admit the naming is "gimmicky", as was meant to be. Review previous discussions on the schema as to its origins. As to what "Awe", "Build" and "Cast" mean? FFS click a link from time to time, it's spelled out and the root meanings of the headings are about as confusing to non-english speaking ppl as any other words you might like to choose, unless we code the site to display multiple languages... NOT.

    The 3 catagory system was developed as a medium between the 10 catagory each with 1-10 range each weighed differently AND the 1 score for all as suggested by the "Art" ppl. Only a MAX score of 9 because NC was deemed idiots for map reviews like Scimitar. We even have a review approval system for maps that score 7 or better BTW, Maz and Yoda would need atleast 1 more admin/reviewer to agree before posting trite like that ever again (of course we were new and all that BS)

    The purpose of the 3 catagory system was also to force reviewers into justifying their scores. Sure, no matter what it's opinion based on reviewer experience/knowledge. But that's got to be better than some neon sign from God flashing a score, one would think anyways.

    Next was S I M P L I C I T Y .
    Adding 3 scores together I know is rather taxing. Reading a review to find out how that score was derived is even worse. Shoot, you wouldn't want anyone to actually visit our site or take interest in the drivel written here. Nexus files had no written reviews, just a number attached to each map, oh that roXXorz, not even a frickin screenshot LOL!

    As to AMmayhems/Bot40 last comments on seperation, the UMP (or Unversal Map Profile) was abondoned early on. I mean if ppl get confused so easily now, just think if you gave a map a 627? (that's 6 for Awe, 2 for Build and 7 for cast), that's a 7.5 average right? You would need Jesus to tell you that every time.

    To quote Michael Jackson, the schema now "is as easy as A B C, 1 2 3" I'm not saying that because I developed it, I mearly condensed what had been said in the past and came to a logical compromise. Really, if you guys want to dig up the past, search the forums first, previous discusions were far more detailed and constructive.
     
  14. Hourences

    Hourences New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    oh oh oh i pissed someone off :)
    oh wait, its the same person who was also already pissed at me 3 year ago when the review scheme got created i said it was bad
    loosing calmed is weak

    -a. mapping is art, and if something is art then it should be reviewed like art
    in fact i wrote a 2 page article about this for vandora full of arguments and thoughts, you are thinking of art in the wrong way
    if mapping wouldnt be art, then any dickwit could make good maps
    if you think its not then ill be happily awaiting a few pages of arguments and thoughts about the subject
    -b. please explain what suxoromfhg glrules has to do with mapping as art, i really do not understand the connection between the two

    -so you are saying, if a first timer visits NC he should go take a dictionary or search the site just to understand some of the basics the site offers
    thats not userfriendly. that would be like making a map where you spawn in a small room with a hidden exit and let the guy search an hour for the exit
    he wont play that long, the names are just very not straight forward
    -multiple languages has nothing to do with this, creating unneeded steps to further confuse potential users does
    one of the base rules when creating user interfaces: make it dumb simple

    who are the art people, apart from "the people who like art" and why are they art people, any definition for this ? never heard of the term before


    now this was a very noble idea, and a good one but imo at the end it doesnt work out
    instead helping and balancing the scores, by not giving out any of those unrealistic 10's it does the invert
    you dont think anymore like "oh this map is 8/10", you start to think "oh this map is 8/10 but i only have 9 points so its 7.5/9" which the end users see as 7.5/10
    now i dont know about you but to me a 7.5 is "good", while an 8 is really good. and the map would have been 8, deserves 8 but only gets 7.5 at the end, and that is confusing to the users
    for some maps it helps downgrading the score, so the scores are more realistic, not overrated but for other maps it just messes it up
    at the end your reviewers need to be competent, thats all, you cant save yourself with rules like these
    no reviewer would give a map a 10/10 while it sux, and if he does he a. should get fired, b. wouldnt get trough the damn appoval anyway
    and if he rates a 9.5 map a 10 then so what, that 0.5 point..
    + i think all of the current reviewers are smart and realistic enough to never give out a 10


    some people do like this yes, but on other hand some people dont...
    at the end you are using maths to calculate a score, it stands in the way of the simple thought "is this map good"
    you use 1 group of people as argument, i could user the other..
    + everyone i know whos good can play a map or even just look at screens and say a number, that number just popped in his head and most of the times those numbers are spot on
    where exactly is the problem with that ?

    its about the idea behind it that you use maths to calculate a map, that is absolutely not possible and against and logic and nature
    this is not science, this is art and design, you dont use maths .
    if one cant make a score without doing maths he sucks in judging maps
    and dont overstate things, thats a weak way out, i could do that too

    you know i saw a pigeon today, and it like flew trough the sky, and i also saw an oceancruiser and it was like far bigger then well an ocean cruiser and then this woman came and she trew a brick at the ship and then the ship sunk and this giant wave lifted a monstertruck in the air and like slammed it on the woman

    see, thats interesting

    looking at your text you take it quite personally tho

    hm, i was told to **** off and that all my ideas suck a lot of goats i remember, but if thats what you call constructive then be my guest :)
    I also seem to remember that half the people who made that system now genuily hate nc, wow great
     
  15. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    -Our scoring system is already a 10 point spectrum. 0-9 Technically 20 points if you count the halves. What more do you want? And how many maps are going to get that perfect score?

    -Mapping is art. Yes, I can see what you're saying. But there's also "artists" in the art world that just dribble paint onto paper and somehow get paid millions for it. I don't know about other reviewers, but I'm not going to review maps like that.

    Our scoring system is fine IMO, we don't need to change it. I've got more to say, but I've got to got to work. I'll post more later....
     
  16. Nahand

    Nahand !!! God Of Random !1?

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,018
    Likes Received:
    0
    ... although i follow the review schema, that does not stop me to believe each and every map is indeed a work of art, in a way or another. Of course there's much "artist apprentices" out there :p ...
     
  17. Hourences

    Hourences New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    -i would review such map, and i would score them 1/10 because from a visual technical point of view, it is not good
    i dont see why not review those, just score them like they deserve

    its very small minded to directly associate art with such paintings, art is not about paintings, its about bringing over a level of creativity and emotion for example, and its a very wide thing

    art is also for a large part not opinion and a lot of art is strongly binded to lots of definitions and rules, ofcourse some art isnt but that are exceptions
    lets take tradional art as the example atm

    the scoring system has a 9 scale
    3*x = 9/x
    if you keep the 9 then make it clear to the people that we use a different scale then they are used too, put a big /9 next to the score for example
    and then what do you get ? then you get dude nr 5478721 who reads a review and reads this 7/9, and he then will go like "hmm cool this map got 7/9, but how much would that be at 10, hmh hmh hmhmhmhmh ah it would be 7.5-7.75 !, so 7.5 or hm 8 cause 7.75 is near 8, tho good map !"

    so he needs to think more before hes fully able to understand the score correctly

    and if you simply dont put the 9 behind and give the people the idea that its /10 you get some maps who are scored too low...

    it proves the system is not waterproof
    again changing it right now would also cause a lot of probs so thats not gonna help alot either..
     
  18. Twrecks

    Twrecks Spectacularly Lucky

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2000
    Messages:
    2,606
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I'm still a retard and you're still ghey H.

    12 pages condensed: Mapping is NOT an art, it's a CRAFT. Craftsmen must balance the available tools and the intended use to derive a final product. Maps are a product, and any asshat can make a map and get paid for it, hence they must be "good" right?
    Art is made solely for appreciation, unless you are making a flyby, most maps are interactive and by gametype imply purpose.

    At NC we are attempting to qualify a score, in regards to "art" scores have no place. However inquiring minds want to know HOW their map stacks up, so we try to answer that question. If they need a dictionary to read the review than maybe they will also learn something from the experience. If they don't want to read anything we still post a single number as a review rating, can we get any simpler?

    Art ppl? They know who they are. Arrogant bastards who have no regard for value in "sub-standard" work. Standards that are often over inflated and subject to wims. nuff said.

    Scoring was kept to 9 because the new NC wanted to change its image. I don't really care if it went to 10 again. If anything give the reviewer an extra +1 catagory for Art's sake.

    Perhaps we are trying to hard to make map scoring a science? uh, NO. The schema is pretty lax. Weighing every aspect of a map is daunting and is subject to varied opinions. If a better solution exists I'm game. Some math must be used if their is to be a score, even a single score, the reviewer must asess the whole by a sum of its parts and compare them in a common scale. It must be possible or their would be no review sites. Numbers popping into your head or anyone else's is based on that same criteria, subconcious or conciously. A reviewer must/should qualify that score, it's their job really. We allow user comments, and sometimes those scores there are justified... sometimes.

    "you know i saw a pigeon today, and it like flew trough the sky, and i also saw an oceancruiser and it was like far bigger then well an ocean cruiser and then this woman came and she trew a brick at the ship and then the ship sunk and this giant wave lifted a monstertruck in the air and like slammed it on the woman"

    WTF? Somebody just exercised their 1st admendment rights.


    EDIT:
    And the score is x/10, user comments fill the gap.
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2004
  19. Hourences

    Hourences New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    ah calmer already, weird, everytime i say that the next post always is a lot calmer

    explain why im ghey
    cause i dont follow your points ?
    any further explanation, arguments etc ?
    and not just your opinion ?

    ok so what if its not art, do you care to explain to me then what for example compositing light colors is about ?
    thats surely art ? art is about colors composition etc
    thats what you do when making a map, that is art
    someone who doesnt understand all that can make a map yes, but it will look terrible so i dont know if you could qualify that as a real map
    its like building a little shed with wood, and then saying im a woodworker or whatever english word is

    no youre not then, youre just a guy who made a shed thats about to collaps because of technical mistakes
    you wouldnt call that a shed either

    this is the same

    no art, no map, thats nothing to discuss about that is a fact

    i know people who know ued to the max, 100 percent, but who still cant make good maps because they lack the art aspect, they dont feel nor see what is good and whats not

    you still have not explained yet from what moment on something can be defined as art scores
    i score everything like i described above, so in that regard all my reviews are art scores, thank you
    it also was about simple words basics words that are needed to understand the site, and not the review text itself, dont twist things around, it makes people believe less in you

     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2004
  20. Bot_40

    Bot_40 Go in drains

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    2,914
    Likes Received:
    0
    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 :p
    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.

    And I just don't like the whole scoring being out of 9 anyway simply because it's just natural to think in terms of out of 10. If you see a map with a score of 5 most people wouldn't even bother to look at it when actually it's above average. Same goes when you ask for a review of a really good map expecting 8/10 and suddenly it get's labeled "7".

    I think the Cast Build and Awe are more important issues, they aren't self explanitory, and I did have to read the schema just to see what the hell it was supposed to be on about. I just think if it was Environment Gameplay Technical then it's completely self explanitory and nobody has any problems. I'm not saying completely change the way ratings are done or anything drastic, all it is is changing 3 names so first time visitors can actually understand it.
    And don't just say "Go read the schema if you don't understand it", nobody who just visited the site for the first time, or even prolly the 20th time is going to bother to read the schema, they're just more likely to go elsewhere. And they certainly aren't likely to find it when it's 10 miles at the bottom of the page in size 0.1 font.
     

Share This Page