It is time for our 5th map design topic for melee map-making. For the next few days, let's discuss map feedback. Believe it or not, this is the most important part of melee map-making. When you test your newly-made map, the feedback you receive will make your map either better or worse, and often can make your map look different in many ways. Whether it's from a map maker or player, feedback will be both good and bad, but what matters most is how you perceive it. Whether you are receiving map feedback in the game or in your map thread, you should be aware of what specific things to look for, as well as watch out for. Feedback is feedback, but not all of it is good or necessary to consider.
Map-makers, let's answer a few questions about map feedback for anyone who might be interested in melee map-making. I don't want to keep these threads for map-maker answers only however... any discussion on the topic matters!
For anyone who is unaware, these map design questions are specifically for map-makers to gather and give their perspectives and feedback on melee map design according to each topic. This has nothing to do with gameplay balance or player perspectives, but for map-maker's opinions and thoughts. In the end I'll make a nice collaboration thread containing all the topics ^^
• What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid? • When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some? • How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad? • Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster? • When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
***WORD OF ADVICE***: Map-makers (veterans and newer ones), it is always worth saving a separate copy of your map and using that to test out any balance changes you want to make before applying it to your official map file.
What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
In the SC2 community, after two years since release, feedback is generally wanted from players who are more knowledgeable and skilled with the game (i.e. masters, grand masters, and sometimes diamonds). This does not mean that anyone in a lower league isn't knowledgable, but experience gradually changes the higher you go, and the higher you go, the more knowledge you can obtain which means you'll have a finer perspective on game balance. With that said, it's better to stick with players in higher leagues for map feedback.
The feedback I avoid at all times is from players who are biased.
When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
I listen to them all, as I think every map-maker should. But map-makers should not be gullible and think that every idea has to go into effect immediately.
How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
Feedback is good when you get the majority of players telling you to change something specific. However, if one or two people say they dislike a particular area of the map, but nobody else is complaining about it, then that feedback can be frowned upon and brushed to the side. Basically, good feedback is what the majority of players will tell you. Bad feedback is what nobody complains about, but one or two people are bugged by it.
The other thing is when I receive potentially good feedback, i'll ask the test players about it everytime I run a test match on the map to see what their thoughts are on it. This is a good, quick way to see if the ideas you were given were really good or bad and if they're worth changing.
Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
Not usually, no. It really depends what it is they're suggesting. Usually players are biased, so be cautious about what higher league players tell you about your map. If they mention how something in your map is bad for their race, it's best not to listen to it. But if they mention how it can mess up something in a particular matchup (such as ZvP), then it is something to consider.
When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
As mentioned above, when the majority of players tell me something specific needs a change, that's when I will go ahead and change it. As testing goes on, and as comments go into my map thread, it will gradually come to a point where there is little to no feedback being given. That is when I can finally say the map is complete - for now.
What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
I want feedback from players or mappers better than me. That's about it. TBH, most of the time, other feedback is pretty useless. The person who knows how to play the map best will be the person who knows how to fix it. Also, having someone see the map from another angle often provides a lot of insight into potential issues and problems.
I'd avoid feedback from anyone who is both lower than masters and doesn't have a history of making good maps. Sure, there might be good advice from that demographic but the odds are so low that it's not really usable in any practical way.
When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
I skim through them all, and immediately sift through the crappy suggestions. The ones that past the test, I try to figure out how it would apply to my map and think about what it would change, whether it would be good or bad, or whatnot. If something is really good, I might try applying it to my map.
How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
Feedback is good if I know it's good. I base it on my previous knowledge of gameplay and map balance. Figure out how it'll plug into the whole equation and just say good or bad.
Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
Masters, no. Grandmasters, maybe. Masters players are most often just those with decent mechanics who know build orders, etc, etc. They are often biased and don't see the opportunities for all races. If by grandmasters, you mean pros, then yes. Pros know the maps best. Even if their suggestion is biased, it still gives me perspective of what their race enjoys and dislikes on maps, and I can simply compile suggestions from different race pros together. Their word is gold to me. If possible, I'd ask every single pro to test it and get everyone's opinions on the map. Even the slightest comment I hear from a pro about the map, I greatly appreciate, and go to lengths to understand.
When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
I change it when there's a glaring balance issue or there's something obvious I have to fix. Alternatively when there's a clear improvement that I've figured out or have suggested to me. A map is never finished. I just run out of ideas to make it better.
• What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
All feedback is good. Although you always look forward to high level players suggestions. Pretty much you look at the feedback and see how it would play out in your map and decide whether you like it or dislike it. At that point you either change it up or just ignore it. I've noticed lower skilled players seem to be able to always point out the random faults in your map, such as places to blink that shouldn't be allowed to, or places to drop that should be unpathable where as a lot of the higher level players seem to just focus on the overview balance of the map.
• When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
Depends how often is it brought up. If I get 10 people saying something should get changed, I'll change it most likely. If only 1 or 2 people say it, then you really have to look at your map and see if you like the change or not. All in all it's your choice.
• How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
Feedback is always good. It's all your opinion if you want to use it or not.
• Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
Depends. If it's multiple players over a period of time that keep saying the same stuff then sure, change it up.
• When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
Eventually your map will be perfect for the majority of players. You'll always get the random feedback, but after your map has been played on enough there's no point in changes little things constantly.
I have only made one map so far and I'm working on my second, so my views on some or all of these questions may change over time when I get more experienced.
• What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
Every voice matters to me though unbiased feedback from experienced players with knowledge of all races seems to be more valuable than that of those who only know/like one race and don't even know the strengths and weaknesses of that one.
I try not to avoid any feedback and often read it a few times, trying to really understand if and why there might be something to it. If it's just mindless ranting/crying/blaming/name calling and whatnot without any constructive suggestion at all though, I tend to read over it without giving it much thought.
• When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
I listen to all of them but of course I still check it back against my own experience (from playing and from watching pros in similar situations on other maps and also from simulating the situation in my head trying to play out if it would really be a problem).
• How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
If it's not constructive at all, it's bad. If it points out flaws, gives reasons for why those things are bad (for gameplay balance and/or aesthetics) it's good, excellent even if it also gives suggestions on how to improve it (with fancy diagrams and stuff).
• Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
Only if it does not give/take any unfair disadvantage/advantage to/from any particular race and only if it's unbiased by their personal race preference. (I don't know if any masters or grandmasters have commented on my first map though because I've only been following the pro scene for a couple of weeks and I don't know all their names and aliases.)
• When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
I change things as soon as the first person stumbles upon something which I can verify to be bad to the best of my own experience and knowledge of the game. If multiple comments from different people address the same issue (unless it's an obvious gang-up) I'll probably change it as well even if I personally don't see anything wrong with it. If I really like a feature or if it's something which basically affects the idea and structure of map as whole, there's very little chance I'll ever agree to changing it though as that would mean to give up all creative freedom and that's something I'll never do.
When is it finished? It's finished when I'm satisfied with it. If there are issues which keep bugging me, I'll keep working on it (this concerns both aesthetics and balance). Even after finishing, if problematic issues arise while the map is being played, I'll go back to that map and make the necessary changes.
Most of my views on these questions are close to my views on receiving feedback on my games and my pixel art and in the world of art, a famous quote from Leonardo Da Vinci goes: "Art is never finished, only abandoned."
These are some wonderful answers so far Keep um coming! Arctic, you are a map-maker. You have every right to respond. No opinion or perspective is worse than another. No two map-makers are the same.
• What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
Everbody. You can learn from the perspective that anybody provides, regardless of their skill. It is just important that you be careful no to take some too seriously.
• When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
If I'm going to make a balance change, it will really only be from one of three options, otherwise I won't change it. 1. My own personal opinion 2. Balance statistics showing imbalance 3. Grandmaster or pro players complaining
• How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
As I said, I believe that every bit of feedback can be helpful in some way- even if it appears to be a troll. They may have somewhat of a point despite how wrong you think it is.
To figure out which to take more seriously than others, look at what skill level the person giving feedback is, how much work or thought they put into the feedback (is it one sentence or is it a complete explanation with pictures), and how experienced the mapmaker is.
• Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
I wouldn't change anything because masters players say you should, because they're probably wrong. A grandmaster- maybe, but not necessarily. Only true pros can really provide the best balance feedback, and even sometimes they miscalculate something. Though if you agree with what they suggest, it might not be a terrible idea.
• When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
Usually a map is finished for me if I don't feel I can add anything to it- I have no ideas to improve gameplay and the balance statistics are fine. But if something comes up to change, I will go back and change it. So as Neobowman said, in a way, a map is never finished for me.
• What types of players do you generally want feedback from? What kind of feedback do you typically avoid?
As a low level player myself, I try to take feedback in broad terms rather than specifics. I understand certain aspects of gameplay, but I know my limitations as a player also make me ignorant to other aspects of gameplay. Typically, I rely on a couple well trusted masters and/or above players for changes regarding serious balance issues. But I also try to let lower players affect the map as well, making sure to provide a fun map for them to experience. To me, creating a fun experience is the pinnacle of map-making -- and even though I seriously doubt any of my maps will ever make it to true competitive levels and tournaments, so long as the few people who do play them enjoy them, than I am satisfied.
Feedback I try to avoid is feedback that is given without explanation, or feedback that is given solely because it is considered standard. I don't believe map-making can improve without experimentation, and thus I will keep experimenting.
• When receiving map feedback (i.e. changing something on it for balance purposes), do you listen to all of them or only some?
I will try to listen to all of the feedback, but I will definitely screen it for biases. I think some feedback is given because there are pre-existing notions of how maps should play, and those notions should be challenged. Who ever said that a player has a right to an easy natural or a quick third?
• How do you know if the feedback you received is good or bad?
Quite frankly, I don't. So I grit my teeth, take it into consideration and if I don't flat out disagree with the feedback than I will try it to see if it improves the playability of the map.
• Is it ever okay to change something because a couple masters think you should? What about a grandmaster?
Absolutely it is. But as a map maker you need to retain your individuality and convictions. So as with all feedback, take what you can and improve it, but don't go with everything everyone says. Otherwise, what is the point in YOU mapping -- because it is no longer your work, rather it is the work of everyone else.
We merely create the pallete to which players paint the scene on. But our pallete influences the way in which the brushes are stroked.
• When do you decide to finally say "Okay, I will change it," and at what point can you say "The map is finished."
If it makes sense with how the game engine determines events happen, and does not impede on those events unless the purpose is inherent and clear, than I decide I will change it whenever I please. But I definitely do not believe myself to be an authority, and so if I cannot explain to myself why I did something the way I did, than it is subject to chane.
The map is never finished. There will ALWAYS be something that can be done to improve it. Whether it be completely re-working a 4th base's layout and avenues of attack down to whether the doodad count is too high or the fog density too much. Analyze, re-analyze, and than analyze your work some more. Never stop critiquing yourself because the instant you do you become a self-serving egotistical pig.
On March 11 2012 12:14 SigmaFiE wrote:We merely create the pallete to Which players paint the scene on. But our pallete influences the Way in Which the brushes are stroked.
Thank you for those beautiful and most sigworthy words.
EPT
.
