I'll try to keep this short. How successful I will be, no one knows.
I often relate mapping Starcraft maps to actually playing the game. Not only is there a huge correlation between the two skillsets (for example, Morrow was a great mapper in BW, and despite not being able to devote as much time to mapping in SC2, he still churns out amazing concepts), but there are so many misconceptions that people starting out tend to make. Simply said, some people tend to make maps trying to use unique ideas without understanding the basics.
Quite often, a player new to Starcraft will try to make a new strategy. For example, they'll go carrier rush every game. The problem with this is that they obviously lack the basic foundation to even start getting good with this build. Instead of working on the foundation of their play, they'll instantly try to do something cool and unique. This does not work out. In iloveoov's recent interview, he said this.
On December 18 2011 12:32 iloveoov wrote: The process of instructing players only becomes fun once they reach a certain skill level. Without a good foundation, they won't be able to execute a strategy, and even if they do by accident, it's building a castle on sand. I would say players that are at least a 3 out of 5 in terms of skill are the ones that are capable of discussing a strategy and bringing improvement to both sides.
Now, remember, he's talking about the best of the best. These are professional level Starcraft players. If they played SC2, they'd be in Korean Grandmasters. And he says only the top 60% of these players can discuss strategies with him while getting something out of it. This may be somewhat of an exaggeration. As BW is so refined and perfected, it's increasingly harder to come up with new strategies and mechanics become more important than strategizing. In SC2, new strategies are still popping up every other month. Nonetheless, we can, or rather, we have to apply this to mapping.
Sometimes I read posts on map competitions. They claim they made their maps featuring unique concepts and it was rejected, supposedly because it was too unique and only the standard maps ever get chosen.
I'm not going to mince my words here. The reason the map was rejected was not because it had a far too crazy concept, but because the map was terrible.
New mappers often try to create crazy map concepts they thought up of while playing the game. Like the carrier rush example I gave earlier, this often ends up in complete failure because you do not have the proper foundations to do this. The reason you do not see the concepts that you thought up of in the maps that the best mappers make, is not because they are too standard. It's because, like the carrier rush, it's a silly idea that has a 99% chance of failing miserably in any competitive map. The problem isn't only a lack of testing available, it's that the concept is stupid.
As a whole, we're already pushing boundaries with our generation of maps. We're finding out what works and what doesn't. For example, Testbug obviously worked out rather badly. And that was a relatively standard macro map. It's far too early to start working with Plasmas and Battle Royales of Starcraft 2.
I'm getting off topic here but It's not that map contest organizers are somehow biased against non-team affiliated mappers. It's just that the best mappers happen to be on teams.
Btw, don't get depressed. Keep posting maps on TL and you'll keep getting advice. If you ever need advice on one of your own maps, feel free to PM me. I'll respond. Just don't expect me to honey up my words if I feel it can do with a lot of improvement. Don't worry. My first maps were trash too.
Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
On February 07 2012 07:28 SigmaFiE wrote: Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
On February 07 2012 07:28 SigmaFiE wrote: Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
Normally, to get picked up by a team is to show great potential. When I was the team leader of MCL, we would invite map makers that we felt had great talent and showed maps that became better and better.
On February 07 2012 07:28 SigmaFiE wrote: Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
Make like 3 good maps and we will start talking about you and maybe try to contact you about joining. There isn't rly any other way. If you are just rly desperate to get more feedback for maps and discuss stuff with other mapmakers, there's a skype channel with 90% of the best mapmakers in it that basically "anyone" can join if they ask.
And lol@ neobowman. These things definitely had to be said and I agree 100% with you. But man I'm always terrified when I see you commented on a map of mine. You are not mincing words :D
On February 07 2012 07:28 SigmaFiE wrote: Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
Make like 3 good maps and we will start talking about you and maybe try to contact you about joining. There isn't rly any other way.
Thanks for not mincing words on the process Ragoo!
On February 07 2012 07:08 neobowman wrote: I'm not going to mince my words here. The reason the map was rejected was not because it had a far too crazy concept, but because the map was terrible.
New mappers often try to create crazy map concepts they thought up of while playing the game. Like the carrier rush example I gave earlier, this often ends up in complete failure because you do not have the proper foundations to do this. The reason you do not see the concepts that you thought up of in the maps that the best mappers make, is not because they are too standard. It's because, like the carrier rush, it's a silly idea that has a 99% chance of failing miserably in any competitive map. The problem isn't only a lack of testing available, it's that the concept is stupid.
Could not agree with this more.
I don't think Neo has ever commented on one of my maps, whether that's good or bad, I will never know.
On February 07 2012 07:28 SigmaFiE wrote: Since you made mention of it -- how does one go about becoming part of a map making team? This has always perplexed me (aside from winning a mapping competition and being picked up). Would it be the same as say applying for a job and having a resume ready to be given and judged by the potential employer?
Make like 3 good maps and we will start talking about you and maybe try to contact you about joining. There isn't rly any other way. If you are just rly desperate to get more feedback for maps and discuss stuff with other mapmakers, there's a skype channel with 90% of the best mapmakers in it that basically "anyone" can join if they ask.
And lol@ neobowman. These things definitely had to be said and I agree 100% with you. But man I'm always terrified when I see you commented on a map of mine. You are not mincing words :D
On February 07 2012 07:08 neobowman wrote: I'm not going to mince my words here. The reason the map was rejected was not because it had a far too crazy concept, but because the map was terrible.
New mappers often try to create crazy map concepts they thought up of while playing the game. Like the carrier rush example I gave earlier, this often ends up in complete failure because you do not have the proper foundations to do this. The reason you do not see the concepts that you thought up of in the maps that the best mappers make, is not because they are too standard. It's because, like the carrier rush, it's a silly idea that has a 99% chance of failing miserably in any competitive map. The problem isn't only a lack of testing available, it's that the concept is stupid.
Could not agree with this more.
I don't think Neo has ever commented on one of my maps, whether that's good or bad, I will never know.
I agree. It wasn't until I think monitor came into one of my maps and basically told me why it sucked that I really understood even how to go about improving.
Mincing words is not beneficial at any level of map making skill.
On February 07 2012 10:28 RumbleBadger wrote: I agree. It wasn't until I think monitor came into one of my maps and basically told me why it sucked that I really understood even how to go about improving.
Mincing words is not beneficial at any level of map making skill.
Haha thanks <3. I think my older map feedback was quite questionable (sorry), but at least it gave the right idea to how to improve. And you certainly are!!
This doesn't really have anything to do with mapping, it's just a truism about anything that involves expertise. It's impossible to make an impression on the inculcated without meeting their standards.
I'm not trying to drag you down neo, it's a fine post.
I didn't realize this was a pressing issue? Charlatans will be charlatans. And nobody will give them a break until it's proved they had a point--perhaps by accident. No harm in it.
You had the opportunity to make a quality post here, Neo. Instead you just sound like an elitist jackass.
------
If you aren't part of a team, but aspire to produce great maps the best thing you can do is ask for more opinions and to be as humble as possible. A great example I can make is ArcticRaven. He was driven to keep asking for feedback and he built upon it and Aquamarine went from being a totally garbage map to something a lot closer to being good. Not that it would win any tournaments, but it certainly showcased how quickly one can grow as a mapmaker.
In my case, I wasn't exceptionally driven to grow as a mapmaker and I was too egotistical to directly seek out more experienced mapmaker's opinions. As a result it took a LOT of maps for me to produce a few good enough to be considered to join a team.
If you want more feedback than just the quick snippit from a MotM judge, I'd recommend PMing a mapmaker you like the style of and asking for some feedback. Be humble, listen, and focus on learning and producing newer, greater maps (instead of trying to perfect the one you are working on). Most of us would be flattered to have you directly request our opinion.
The members of ESV/TPW/Crux aren't perfect, and we weren't born as great mapmakers. We all have strengths and weaknesses and we focus on trying to work on the things that may be holding some of our maps back.
On February 07 2012 13:01 wrl wrote: You had the opportunity to make a quality post here, Neo. Instead you just sound like an elitist jackass.
------
If you aren't part of a team, but aspire to produce great maps the best thing you can do is ask for more opinions and to be as humble as possible. A great example I can make is ArcticRaven. He was driven to keep asking for feedback and he built upon it and Aquamarine went from being a totally garbage map to something a lot closer to being good. Not that it would win any tournaments, but it certainly showcased how quickly one can grow as a mapmaker.
In my case, I wasn't exceptionally driven to grow as a mapmaker and I was too egotistical to directly seek out more experienced mapmaker's opinions. As a result it took a LOT of maps for me to produce a few good enough to be considered to join a team.
If you want more feedback than just the quick snippit from a MotM judge, I'd recommend PMing a mapmaker you like the style of and asking for some feedback. Be humble, listen, and focus on learning and producing newer, greater maps (instead of trying to perfect the one you are working on). Most of us would be flattered to have you directly request our opinion.
The members of ESV/TPW/Crux aren't perfect, and we weren't born as great mapmakers. We all have strengths and weaknesses and we focus on trying to work on the things that may be holding some of our maps back.
I have no idea how your post contradicts anything I said.
I may have gotten overly passionate about a certain group of people who may not represent the whole demographic. I mention in the end not to get depressed but I should have emphasized that part more. My bad.
EPT
