I'm not ditching the format, so what's this actually about...
I'm just not going add new features to the old format.
New map format.
Moderator: Moderators
It would be nice if there was some sort of quality control on the maps though. If the quality of the map list was higher we'd get hosts trying new maps. Who's going to bother trawling through all the crap in the list and discovering the good stuff?
There are well made maps in that list, but they're lost in all the shit, so nobody ever tries them.
There are well made maps in that list, but they're lost in all the shit, so nobody ever tries them.
-
hollowsoul
- Posts: 665
- Joined: 06 Jun 2006, 19:49
Theres noway u can get peep to agree to map quality control.
Best u can do is get different peep to release map packs & seperate txt files with lists of maps in each map pack.
Maybe request lobby client to support the txt files to automaticly download the maps in the map pack. That way u dont end up downloading the same map multiple times cause its in a few different map packs.
That way u get to know which peep that make map pack's ( that have similar tastes / standards for maps )
Best u can do is get different peep to release map packs & seperate txt files with lists of maps in each map pack.
Maybe request lobby client to support the txt files to automaticly download the maps in the map pack. That way u dont end up downloading the same map multiple times cause its in a few different map packs.
That way u get to know which peep that make map pack's ( that have similar tastes / standards for maps )
Ok so I haven't been here very long a played OTA alot and I have tried to mke a map for spring didn't turn out very well but that sannother story. Anyway heres where I see the problem is people are going to spend there time doing maps in the new format and we don't even know if its going to be supported in the next relese (other then the exe files that are posted witch by the way have some major problems) And I really don't see the advantages to this new format. Has anyone pondard if it would be posible to emplement a format that would alow you to use a poly fram to use as a heightfeild insted of the gray scale that way you could have things like passable bridges not to mention tunnels for that matter. Just a thought. great job with spring by the way I love it.
-
FuzionMonkey
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 15 Apr 2006, 18:35
Hate to say it but people can't be trusted to rate maps! Everyone's opinion varies; some people like speedmetal, some people like small 1v1 skirmish maps, some people like huge maps. You get the point.
One solution would be to appoint a group of people to rate maps (Although this is a very problematic solution). I have noticed that the map reviews on FU are actually somewhat helpful (the rating bar is what I'm talking about, although the opinions can be useful too). The reason I think there is decent feedback on FU is because the user base is mostly 'advanced' spring players (really good gamers, or modders/mappers).
One solution would be to appoint a group of people to rate maps (Although this is a very problematic solution). I have noticed that the map reviews on FU are actually somewhat helpful (the rating bar is what I'm talking about, although the opinions can be useful too). The reason I think there is decent feedback on FU is because the user base is mostly 'advanced' spring players (really good gamers, or modders/mappers).
Last edited by hrmph on 31 Jul 2006, 20:46, edited 1 time in total.
hrmph, your idea is both insulting to most of the playerbase, and it fails to solve anything. You just make a smaller, less representative pool of voters - and I dare you to find ten people who can claim relative objectivity on the map issue. The best people through gameplay mechanics would be the mappers themselves, and you know we can't do that because of personal contention.
We basically said the same thing with different words....hrmph wrote:Hate to say it but people can't be trusted to rate maps! Everyone's opinion varies; some people like speedmetal, some people like small 1v1 skirmish maps, some people like huge maps. You get the point.
One solution would be to appoint a group of people to rate maps (Although this is a very problematic solution).
This is getting a bit offtopic. Back on track: the more I mess with it the more I like the new map format. After it gets polished (long time from now) I think phasing out the old format isn't too bad of an idea.. Although there are a lot of maps that would be tough to replicate.
No. You proposed a solution and then conceded that it might be problematic. I shot down your solution and demonstrated why it might be problematic.
I personally would just have the community rate it. Few enough of the new players get into the actual extra-play areas of the community, so people without experience wouldn't bother voting anyway. Basic sociology.
I personally would just have the community rate it. Few enough of the new players get into the actual extra-play areas of the community, so people without experience wouldn't bother voting anyway. Basic sociology.
It will be supported, it does have advantages, and thats not going to happen any time soon.maxwilm wrote:Ok so I haven't been here very long a played OTA alot and I have tried to mke a map for spring didn't turn out very well but that sannother story. Anyway heres where I see the problem is people are going to spend there time doing maps in the new format and we don't even know if its going to be supported in the next relese (other then the exe files that are posted witch by the way have some major problems) And I really don't see the advantages to this new format. Has anyone pondard if it would be posible to emplement a format that would alow you to use a poly fram to use as a heightfeild insted of the gray scale that way you could have things like passable bridges not to mention tunnels for that matter. Just a thought. great job with spring by the way I love it.
I know all this has been said before, but I'd just like to throw my two cents in.
I do commend the devs for the work they are doing on the new format, it looks outstanding and it should be a great leap forward. BUT I don't think it should be a valid replacement for the current format. After all the time i've spent learning the intricacies and neuances of it, after all the time i've spent making these maps. I really don't want them to be thrown away just because something "NEW" and "BETTER" comes along.
Its that kind of thinking that is ruining so many other good things in this world. (Going back on track now)
Ultimately I say lets bring on the new format, but KEEP the old as well, I will probably be making a few maps with it, but at the same time, i'll still be using the old one.
Old format FTW!!!
I do commend the devs for the work they are doing on the new format, it looks outstanding and it should be a great leap forward. BUT I don't think it should be a valid replacement for the current format. After all the time i've spent learning the intricacies and neuances of it, after all the time i've spent making these maps. I really don't want them to be thrown away just because something "NEW" and "BETTER" comes along.
Its that kind of thinking that is ruining so many other good things in this world. (Going back on track now)
Ultimately I say lets bring on the new format, but KEEP the old as well, I will probably be making a few maps with it, but at the same time, i'll still be using the old one.
Old format FTW!!!