EPTIt doesn't have to be about fame, or money, or enjoying it. Using better and newer maps is basically in everyone's best interest, so of course it's something I want to be happening. Even for someone who does enjoy mapmaking, that doesn't make this any less important.
Blizzard about the map pool - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
It doesn't have to be about fame, or money, or enjoying it. Using better and newer maps is basically in everyone's best interest, so of course it's something I want to be happening. Even for someone who does enjoy mapmaking, that doesn't make this any less important. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 09 2012 11:22 Fatam wrote: Yeah, I also think that commentators get more than players sometimes is pretty darn silly.Yes. It's crazy that commentators get all the recognition when it comes to non-players in the SC2 scene (while getting paid), but the job of a good dedicated observer or a good mapmaker (or even a good production crew, although they also get paid Harder in what way? Certainly not physically, commentators do undergo vocal training to not wear their voice out. Tasteless is a good example of someone who did it far too late, starting with that, and look what happened to his voice, it's not smoking like some people claim. It's what happens to your voice when you shout improperly, it's actually destructive to your body and vocal apparatus. ) is arguably harder.Not harder in terms of raw hours or amount of travel necessary, but difficulty-wise. Having a little game knowledge and being comfortable talking in front of a camera is not as hard as not missing anything while observing, while also catching most/all of the little things that happen in a game that a mediocre observer or caster who is observing would miss. Or balancing a map for all matchups while still bringing something fresh and interesting to the table and making it appealing to look at. And making it fun to play. Well, bad commentators also don't earn that much, all the really good guys like Artosis, Apollo, Day[9], Tasteless, they play the game at quite a high level. I do wonder how much Moletrap gets though for someone who gets that much flack and often rightfully so.So I see where Sidian is coming from as well. Unless you still have a great love for the game and the map creation process (which some of us are fortunate enough to still have that fire - hopefully we don't burn out as well), there's no reason to keep mapping. On November 09 2012 11:28 Gfire wrote: Which the people here are making I'm sure...?Not recognition for the sake of being famous, recognition so that they'll actually use the good maps. It doesn't have to be about fame, or money, or enjoying it. Using better and newer maps is basically in everyone's best interest, so of course it's something I want to be happening. Even for someone who does enjoy mapmaking, that doesn't make this any less important. I am quite sure this is not what Sidian was speaking about, most definitely it was about personal recognition and seeing your maps being used in tournaments, it's just not going to happen, even if they rotated more quickly, there is quite a high amount of aspiring mapmakers out there. I mean, basically all the tournament maps at this point have been made by either:- Jacky - LS - Winpark - EastWindy (only one if I recall) - Superouman (only one) - IronManSC (only one, two if you count Khaydaria) - Blizzard That's 6 people, last 3 of whom only have arguably one map in tournament circles. One might argue that the only mapmakers who ever 'made it' are Jacky, LS and Winpark. There's another person called Attax on Crux I believe but I never saw any map he or she made featured in any tournaments (might have to do with bizarre things like lowground main, highground natural) Let's say tournaments rotate more quickly and we can get that number from 3 to 6. I'm sorry, but the majority of people are still not going to get recognition. Life's a bitch. Majority of people will just never get recognition for their work. I eat bread every day, I have no idea who made it, I never sent that person a thank you letter for all that nice bread. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 09 2012 11:04 SiskosGoatee wrote: Or because you like to make maps? Basically, the problem with map making is that the map making 'skill ceiling' if you will isn't that high, if you're good, say Crux level (analogue to a pro player), you aren't a bazillion times better than your average decent amateur (say a random master league player). If I go up against a pro I will get smashed. This doesn't exist so clearly in mapmaking meaning that it's hard for the best mapmakers (doesn't help that this is subjective) to differentiate themselves. So even if you are the best and you put your foot down and say 'Yo, you can only use my maps if you pay me raw cold cash', tournament organizers will just be like 'Hmmkay, let's go to the second best then, people will hardly notice the difference.' whereas if you're Stephano you can basically call up Mr. Chae and say 'Yo bitch, gimme a GSL code S seed' and they will kick a random KeSPA player they promised it to first out just to get Stephano into it because they know everyone wants to see that. But in any case, if you do something like mapmaking to get recogition then there's not a lot of hobbies out there for you I'm afraid, very few people get recognition in any thing. How does one motivate themselves to continue to map when they have already hit the ceiling of map making? Sidian has had one of his maps played in IPL - that's a pretty significant accomplishment. How does superouman stay motivated when his map Cloud Kingdom is arguably the map of 2012? If there is no purpose, then there can't be a sustainable top tier of mapping. I'll draw an analogy to speed running. Aside from some fame for having a speed running record, there isn't much to strive for once you've reached the ceiling (i.e. hold multiple records). Recently-ish this has started to change with various charity-driven events give more reasons to stay involved and even more recently speed-running 'tournaments' have started to come about. At the moment, there isn't that kind of infrastructure for mapping. There used to be, with regular MotM with tournaments as well as IPL/TLMC picking up maps (and NASL too). Crux are no better (and in many cases, worse) than the best mappers in our community. The defining difference between the two is that Crux have opportunity to get their work out while we dont. Having security in the maps being used in a regular prestigious tournament like GSL is a huge deal. Indeed, if we don't do something about their monopoly on the map making scene then we'll probably end up with a SC1 type situation. How do we solve this? I have nooo idea. With a lack of continuous foreign tournaments (that are important, sorry NASL) and reluctant cooperation between major leagues we're kinda stuck between a rock and blizzard. In my opinion, the only way to create meaningful change in the map pool for non-koreans is via a change in the ladder map pool. Which is an enormously difficult procedure (for reasons that I'm not willing to go into right now, but you should get the picture more or less). I guess I haven't exactly addressed your point, but perhaps you can still some level of a meaningful response from this. There's no reason to keep commentating either, most commentators don't 'make it' and tournaments aren't actively trying to rotate commentators either. There are some mapmakers out there who did make it and everyone knows who LS or JackyPrime are. They do still have something to shoot for and/or aspire to, no? With the way non-Korean map making is, the map community just doesn't have that. | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
Heck, I can speak from personal experience. I won the IPL map contest, they used my map through Team Arena Challenge 2 and also used it in some of their earlier fight clubs. The Playhem daily tournaments ended up picking it up for months after that, it ended up getting well over 3k+ games played on it. Funny part though, I guarantee you 99% of the players who played on the map had no clue I created it. I'll take this a step farther and say I bet you have no clue what map I'm even talking about. I also bet a majority of the people who read my reply will have no clue what map I'm talking about. Do I care? Absolutely not. I'm just happy that a major tournament took the chance to bring in some new maps to at least test them out. To me, it's ridiculous that there are all these brand new maps getting posted constantly and instead we're still stuck with TDA and Shakuras in map pools. Also, before you say crap like Jacky, LS and Winpark are the only mappers who ever "made it" you should also realize that if GSL didn't take a chance with them and playtest their maps they would just be random mapper #7321. Maybe it's about time IPL or MLG to step it up and try to bring something new to the table. edit: It appears Plexa sucked the thoughts out of my head completely. ^5. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 09 2012 11:54 Plexa wrote: It's fun to do? I've honestly hit my skill plateau in SC2 a year back already. However the game is fun to play nonetheless. I'm not aspiring to become better at it. I'm just enjoying myself. Same with the galaxy editor. I don't think I'll ever get a lot better at making maps or getting better aesthetics out of it.How does one motivate themselves to continue to map when they have already hit the ceiling of map making? Sidian has had one of his maps played in IPL - that's a pretty significant accomplishment. How does superouman stay motivated when his map Cloud Kingdom is arguably the map of 2012? If there is no purpose, then there can't be a sustainable top tier of mapping. I'll draw an analogy to speed running. Aside from some fame for having a speed running record, there isn't much to strive for once you've reached the ceiling (i.e. hold multiple records). If you do something for the sake of improvement, no, not really, if you make maps because you like doing it, then yes.Also, that's not what I meant with low skill ceiling, I meant that the difference between a first tier mapper and a second tier mapper isn't as great as that of a first tier player and a second tier player. Crux are no better (and in many cases, worse) than the best mappers in our community. This is the subjective difference of opinion I was talking about earlier. There is a marked difference in design philosophy when it comes to Korean maps and foreign maps. Is either 'better'? I wouldn't know that, what I do know is that I personally like Crux maps more and that the GSL removed Ohana which to me exemplifies the ESV mapping philosophy in favour of a Crux map. Why? While we can't know for certain, I'm going to guess that Ohana had low viewer numbers to which I'm not surprised because the map just doesn't lend itself very well to exciting back and forth games.Basically, what Crux likes is: - Circle syndrome - hard to defend bases - large maps with a long rush distance - a lot of open spaces - lots of airspace for drops and air harass - a lot of different attack paths Which seems to be what the foreign mapmaking community dislikes for a large portion. Which is again, all pretty subjective, I'm not going to call either better, I'm just going to say that in my own personal opinion, the only foreigner map I ever really liked was Cloud Kingdom and I think Crux maps are much better, but again, this is my own opinion. The defining difference between the two is that Crux have opportunity to get their work out while we dont. Having security in the maps being used in a regular prestigious tournament like GSL is a huge deal. Indeed, if we don't do something about their monopoly on the map making scene then we'll probably end up with a SC1 type situation. How do we solve this? I have nooo idea. With a lack of continuous foreign tournaments (that are important, sorry NASL) and reluctant cooperation between major leagues we're kinda stuck between a rock and blizzard. In my opinion, the only way to create meaningful change in the map pool for non-koreans is via a change in the ladder map pool. Which is an enormously difficult procedure (for reasons that I'm not willing to go into right now, but you should get the picture more or less). In part, yes, but I also think GSL simply likes Crux style maps more because they have the capacity to generate more 'back and fourth games' that are exciting to watch. The foreign mapmaking scene in its quest for 'make forge FE possible' and 'give an easy enough to defend third' and 'a long rush distance is bad for Terran' has basically ended up with very dull maps where not a lot is happening.I guess I haven't exactly addressed your point, but perhaps you can still some level of a meaningful response from this. I actually don't even mind that much, I think the discussion in itself is quite interesting, largely because I find myself disagreeing with nearly all of you guys.They do still have something to shoot for and/or aspire to, no? With the way non-Korean map making is, the map community just doesn't have that. I don't think they realistically do any more than mappers. There are actually quite a lot of people out there with a youtube channel commentating games no one heard of, indeed, I once googled my own sc2 handle and found a German cast of one of my own games interestingly enough, never heard of that commentator and indeed, only 2 views on youtube.They either do it out of a delusional hope to one day make it big, or just because they love doing it. A friend of mine wanted to cast with me, I didn't really want to, she just enjoyed doing it she said. On November 09 2012 12:14 SidianTheBard wrote: Yeah, I see what you mean, it's a bit sad if that's what you're after but I'm afraid it's just how it'll always be. Same thing happened in BW. There were like 3 guys who were contracted by KeSPA to make maps, good luck for any other guy to get a map being KeSPA sanctioned.It's not so much personal fame, but more so that if you spend hours, days, weeks creating a map, it would be nice if there was a way to get someplace to actually use your map, or worst case take a look at it. When you spend days making a map only to post it on TL and get at most 20 replies and then it's never seen or heard of again, really makes creating maps not worth it. Heck, I can speak from personal experience. I won the IPL map contest, they used my map through Team Arena Challenge 2 and also used it in some of their earlier fight clubs. The Playhem daily tournaments ended up picking it up for months after that, it ended up getting well over 3k+ games played on it. Funny part though, I guarantee you 99% of the players who played on the map had no clue I created it. I'll take this a step farther and say I bet you have no clue what map I'm even talking about. I also bet a majority of the people who read my reply will have no clue what map I'm talking about. Do I care? Absolutely not. I'm just happy that a major tournament took the chance to bring in some new maps to at least test them out. Well, I know you're talking about Darkness Falls, it aesthetically immediately caught my eyes and I did some research into it. Layout is cool I guess, as well. But yeah, I probably know this mostly because I'm interested in maps.I guess one of the reasons people aren't interested in the names of mappers is because you can't really tell by looking at a map who made it. Mappers aren't that 'stylistic'. If you told me Winpark instead of LS made DayBreak I would've believed you. People care about the names of players I guess because they have something stylistic. And people don't really care about you if you're 'just another Korean Terran' with the same style everyone is. MKP is mad popular because his playing style is instantly recognisable. To me, it's ridiculous that there are all these brand new maps getting posted constantly and instead we're still stuck with TDA and Shakuras in map pools. Also, before you say crap like Jacky, LS and Winpark are the only mappers who ever "made it" you should also realize that if GSL didn't take a chance with them and playtest their maps they would just be random mapper #7321. I'm not saying they made it out of skill, in fact, I'm saying the inverse, like I said, a tier one mapper isn't infinitely better than a tier 2 mapper the way it is in progaming itself. I'm just saying that because of that. GOM can just contract 3 guys to supply them with all their mapping needs, they probably could do with 2, or even 1. That's how the economics of mapmaking works I guess. Tournaments would be fine if there was only one guy who made all maps and just made them really quickly. The player scene is dependent on there being multiple maps.Maybe it's about time IPL or MLG to step it up and try to bring something new to the table. I'd love nothing more. It'll lead to recognition for some, and most importantly to me new cool maps, but it won't lead to anything for most alas. The scene is a bit oversaturated. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
On November 09 2012 11:22 Fatam wrote: Yes. It's crazy that commentators get all the recognition when it comes to non-players in the SC2 scene (while getting paid), but the job of a good dedicated observer or a good mapmaker (or even a good production crew, although they also get paid ) is arguably harder. Not harder in terms of raw hours or amount of travel necessary, but difficulty-wise. Having a little game knowledge and being comfortable talking in front of a camera is not as hard as not missing anything while observing, while also catching most/all of the little things that happen in a game that a mediocre observer or caster who is observing would miss. Or balancing a map for all matchups while still bringing something fresh and interesting to the table and making it appealing to look at. And making it fun to play.Not here to bash casters at all, as they are very necessary and the best ones are quite talented, but it's messed up everyone cares so much about them and not the other important people behind the scenes. So I see where Sidian is coming from as well. Unless you still have a great love for the game and the map creation process (which some of us are fortunate enough to still have that fire - hopefully we don't burn out as well), there's no reason to keep mapping. Well, this is very much like life, why do singers and sports players get such a high salary for such a silly job while teachers and doctors earn very little? A lot of times people do hard work and care, but not get almost anything, while others get all the money. There is a reason why this business is not fair, because it is after all only a business. You can compare it to other things that are similar, like news for example, a lot of time the researchers and and those who actually write what the casters say get almost no credit and their salary is much lower (I presume) than what those who show on TV get. Life is not fair, sadly, but in the end if you truly love something you will do it even if it is low / non paid and no one knows you by doing it. Sometimes I consider map making an art, and it really feels like it, since you created something that is beautiful, and even that you want to see it made public, it is OK if its not. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On November 09 2012 12:19 SiskosGoatee wrote: Also, that's not what I meant with low skill ceiling, I meant that the difference between a first tier mapper and a second tier mapper isn't as great as that of a first tier player and a second tier player. I like to think I've been progressing at a decent rate in this game of mapmaking and I will just say: there are so many subtleties to this that you cannot even begin to fathom as a newbie. Just as you can't comprehend the nuances and thought processes that define top level SC2 play without a solid understanding of the game, when you become skilled enough you can truly appreciate the genius that goes into some of the maps being made. There's an old saying - the more you know, the more you realize how little you know. I still feel quite ignorant in the grand scheme of this. Also, you call it oversaturated, I feel under-represented is more accurate. Oversaturation implies that we've already filled our "quota" for good mapmakers, and those people are the only ones who will ever make anything worthwhile, and that we needn't foster new talent, when that simply isn't true of a field like this. Competition characterizes this trade, having fresh blood is important as well. Our problem is that nothing is being done to incorporate any of our maps into tournament pools. If even 1 map of ours is introduced each year, then the more the merrier, more competition fosters better results. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 09 2012 14:15 NewSunshine wrote: Maybe, but can you numerically quantify this difference in the same way you can do this with progamers? The only numerical quantification you have is that a top echelon mapmaker is likely to draw in x times as much viewers for games on his maps than a lower echelon mapmaker. And my assertion is that that x is very close to 1.I like to think I've been progressing at a decent rate in this game of mapmaking and I will just say: there are so many subtleties to this that you cannot even begin to fathom as a newbie. Just as you can't comprehend the nuances and thought processes that define top level SC2 play without a solid understanding of the game, when you become skilled enough you can truly appreciate the genius that goes into some of the maps being made. There's an old saying - the more you know, the more you realize how little you know. I still feel quite ignorant in the grand scheme of this. Unlike with progamers versus diamond leaguers or whatever, the difference is immediately noticeable to every viewer. That's why tournaments care to attract the best and the finest players, whose skill is also numerically quantifiable in terms of Elo-like ratings and number of tournament victories. Also, you call it oversaturated, I feel under-represented is more accurate. Oversaturation implies that we've already filled our "quota" for good mapmakers, and those people are the only ones who will ever make anything worthwhile, and that we needn't foster new talent, when that simply isn't true of a field like this. Competition characterizes this trade, having fresh blood is important as well. Our problem is that nothing is being done to incorporate any of our maps into tournament pools. If even 1 map of ours is introduced each year, then the more the merrier, more competition fosters better results. Because tournaments don't care, because they can't see the difference between what you call a top tier mapmaker's work and a less than top tier mapmaker's work. And neither can viewers, and indeed, apparently neither can players since they have a tendency to call maps good which are supposedly bad.That's how the market works. You can make the finest bread with the finest ingredients and the finest process but if the people don't taste the difference between your bread and everyday bread they're not going to care for it. Where of course what makes good bread is highly subjective. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
| ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
On November 09 2012 15:13 Fatam wrote: That's a pretty awful argument. Just because you can't numerically quantify the difference as easily between 2 things doesn't mean a difference doesn't exist or is any smaller than 2 things that are more easily quantifiable. I don't think he was trying to say it was a direct argument. Just that there isn't much hope, or perhaps even need, for better maps. If the viewers and everyone can't tell that the map is better, is there even a benefit to having a better map? I think so. A new map can improve quality which is something we should strive for even if it doesn't mean more viewers imo... But tournament organizers might feel differently. Still, I think this improvement in quality will in fact grow viewership or stop it from shrinking as much, even if you the viewers can't directly compare the maps and say the better one is better. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 09 2012 15:13 Fatam wrote: Maybe, but it means tournaments don't care and therefore cannot be arsed to go after what you consider the 'best' maps.That's a pretty awful argument. Just because you can't numerically quantify the difference as easily between 2 things doesn't mean a difference doesn't exist or is any smaller than 2 things that are more easily quantifiable. I'm just explaining why there's not a lot of recognition in mapmaking going on. | ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 09 2012 15:33 Gfire wrote: I don't think he was trying to say it was a direct argument. Just that there isn't much hope, or perhaps even need, for better maps. If the viewers and everyone can't tell that the map is better, is there even a benefit to having a better map? I think so. A new map can improve quality which is something we should strive for even if it doesn't mean more viewers imo... But tournament organizers might feel differently. Still, I think this improvement in quality will in fact grow viewership or stop it from shrinking as much, even if you the viewers can't directly compare the maps and say the better one is better. "Better" maps aren't even necessary. SC2 needs different maps to help reset/refine strategy and keep the game interesting. | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
Noone can argue that it would be nice if maps got a little more recognition, and not be forgotten the next week. Even if you're just making maps for fun that would still be a nice, wouldn't it? And I also think noone can argue that seeing a new map every once in a while is more interesting to many, many people, than seeing the same maps for years. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 09 2012 16:16 Plexa wrote: That is what you say, tournaments disagree and I'm sure they have their media consultants working for them."Better" maps aren't even necessary. SC2 needs different maps to help reset/refine strategy and keep the game interesting. I'm not even sure that faster map rotation is going to lead to more viewers, which is ultimately the holy grail of any media enterprise. On November 09 2012 23:17 lefix wrote: I beg to differ, some people are.Noone is argueing that judging a map isn't subjective. You're just repeating yourself and this discussion isn't progressing any further. Fatam: "Ah, but there are some subjective things that the vast majority of players agree upon, which makes them (for all intents and purposes)"objective".." OxyGenesis: "Antiga is an objectively poorly designed map because [...]" The reason I'm "repeating myself" is because you come with falsehoods thereby requiring me to dispel them. Yes, if you claim the earth is flat I will repeat it is round and tell you why that is so until you believe me because you can't have a sensible discussion based on falsehood. That some people have said that map judging has objective qualities is a fact. Claiming that it no such people have said that is a falsehood. Noone can argue that it would be nice if maps got a little more recognition, and not be forgotten the next week. Even if you're just making maps for fun that would still be a nice, wouldn't it? It is, but I'm just saying that if you expected anything other than it is when you started mapmaking you had unrealistic expectations.And I also think noone can argue that seeing a new map every once in a while is more interesting to many, many people, than seeing the same maps for years. That is in dispute. I think that in reality the majority of viewers don't care, as in, don't care with their wallet. I'm sceptical that tournaments are going to have more views if they try a quicker map rotation.Also, "you're just repeating yourself", you said that before and before you didn't offer a compelling numerical argument back then either. If you're going to convince me or a tournament you gotta come with numbers. One has to appreciate that as mapmakers there is a certain conflict of interest going on. People believe what they want to believe is true. In the end, it is beneficial for mapmakers if map rotation spiked viewer interest. There is currently no conclusive proof whatsoever that it does. I am pretty sure that if tournaments noticed that if they added a new map it would get disproportionally more views because people want to check the new map out they would add more and more new maps. Tournament organizers aren't stupid. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
- What is a good map, what qualities does a map posses for it to be good in your own opinion aside from obviously balance, what is 'good gameplay' that a 'good map' should encourage? - Do you believe that trying a quicker map rotation is in the best interest of the tournament - Do you believe that TO's are bad at what they are doing because they are reluctant to massively try a quicker map rotation? | ||
|
OxyGenesis
United Kingdom281 Posts
On November 09 2012 23:51 SiskosGoatee wrote: Anyway, I'm going to reverse this discussion gentlemen. Why not you (whoever wants to) explain this to me: - What is a good map, what qualities does a map posses for it to be good in your own opinion aside from obviously balance, what is 'good gameplay' that a 'good map' should encourage? - Do you believe that trying a quicker map rotation is in the best interest of the tournament - Do you believe that TO's are bad at what they are doing because they are reluctant to massively try a quicker map rotation? Map making has elements that are both objective and subjective, the same as music, web design, film production and yes even art. By asserting that it is purely subjective you are oversimplifying a complex subject and degenerating what could otherwise be a useful conversation. I'm not saying your points haven't been useful, they have, you just don't need to keep rewording them in every post you make. It's frustrating when other people are trying to advance the conversation and you keep dragging it back, thank you for trying another tact with your latest comment though. I don't fully agree with your 'tournaments will only listen to numbers' argument. Tournament organisers are pragmatic, they understand that putting on a good show will increase their viewers/revenue and I'm sure they are more than willing to listen to good ideas to improve their shows provided they don't cost too much. Hopefully they are already aware of the community's desire for new maps, as that will make them more receptive to our ideas. I work in the graphic and web design industry, so I know something about trying to sell 'ideas' to business people. If there is one thing I've learned it's that no 2 clients are alike, regardless of the size of their business or the industry they are working in. Some clients like the personal touch, others like facts and figures, others just get excited by the prospect of new ideas floating around. What I'm getting at is that sometimes changing your angle of approach can reap benefits and I would very much encourage the map making community to 'mix it up' because clearly the current approach isn't working. To answer your questions:- Asking what makes up a good map is kind of like asking what makes a good website. There are numerous answers to the question, many of which are right and some of which are wrong, but you are more likely to get an accurate answer from an experienced web designer than you are from someone that browsed the site for 10 minutes. I could talk about overarching theories on web design, but it's much easier and more useful to talk about specific web sites. The same goes for maps, you can talk about circle syndrome or the difficulty in expanding in the general sense but it's much more useful to analyse maps on a case by case basis. We don't need a set of rules that governs what makes a map good or not because we make maps and we have an inherent understanding because of that. If you want to know about what is looked at when judging a map then Barrin wrote an excellent post about a month ago titled 'Judging a melee map' or something like that. Map rotation is good because it freshens up what could potentially be a stagnating competitive scene. Tournament organisers are reluctant to introduce new maps because they don't want to be the ones to 'Blink' first. Past experience is inconclusive and in relatively volatile market tournament organisers have so far been erring on the side of caution because it's safer in the short term and no one has come to them with a viable alternative. What we need to do as a community is provide them with a viable alternative. We have the backing of the community (and a whole heap of TL and reddit comments to prove it), now we need the maps, people and infrastructure to bridge the rest of the gap. If we don't, then the mapmaking community will slowly die, as it has been doing for the past year. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 10 2012 03:06 OxyGenesis wrote: Hush, no one would ever argue that. Haven't you read what Iefix would, no one would ever argue that.Map making has elements that are both objective and subjective, the same as music, web design, film production and yes even art. By asserting that it is purely subjective you are oversimplifying a complex subject and degenerating what could otherwise be a useful conversation. No, you're simplifying it by calling it objective, objective matters are in fact far, far simpler than subjective matters my friend. To discuss the length of a rope, which is objective is quite simple, you say the length, and then there's nothing more to discuss. The aesthetics of a painting is a far more complex endeavour to discuss. Objective matters are extremely simple compared to objective matters and if map quality was completely objective, like say balance was the only thing that mattered. The entire discussion would be extremely simple, you pick the map which is the most balanced. The end. Unfortunately it is wholly subjective and therefore far more complicated since you have to please all parties.I'm not saying your points haven't been useful, they have, you just don't need to keep rewording them in every post you make. It's frustrating when other people are trying to advance the conversation and you keep dragging it back, thank you for trying another tact with your latest comment though. I'm "rewording" them to different people because like I pointed out before, they don't get it. Iefix has said, black on white, that no one would say judging maps is an objective process, there we have it, a falsehood. How am I not to repeat myself when someone comes with a falsehood? I'm sorry but I'm going to repeat the earth is round every time someone says it's flat, call it repeating or not but you can't have a meaningful discussion with someone who believes the earth is flat until they are convinced it is round. Just as you cannot meaningfully debate this issue with someone who believes that no one would say that, because evidently there are some people who would say that, you being one of them.I don't fully agree with your 'tournaments will only listen to numbers' argument. Tournament organisers are pragmatic, they understand that putting on a good show will increase their viewers/revenue and I'm sure they are more than willing to listen to good ideas to improve their shows provided they don't cost too much. Hopefully they are already aware of the community's desire for new maps, as that will make them more receptive to our ideas. Okay, so what argument that is numerical in natural do you have in store to attempt to convince them?I work in the graphic and web design industry, so I know something about trying to sell 'ideas' to business people. If there is one thing I've learned it's that no 2 clients are alike, regardless of the size of their business or the industry they are working in. Some clients like the personal touch, others like facts and figures, others just get excited by the prospect of new ideas floating around. What I'm getting at is that sometimes changing your angle of approach can reap benefits and I would very much encourage the map making community to 'mix it up' because clearly the current approach isn't working. So do I, and I've never been able to convince anyone of anything without showing numbers of past result to demonstrate that it works and the market is receptive.Asking what makes up a good map is kind of like asking what makes a good website. There are numerous answers to the question, many of which are right and some of which are wrong, but you are more likely to get an accurate answer from an experienced web designer than you are from someone that browsed the site for 10 minutes. I could talk about overarching theories on web design, but it's much easier and more useful to talk about specific web sites. The same goes for maps, you can talk about circle syndrome or the difficulty in expanding in the general sense but it's much more useful to analyse maps on a case by case basis. We don't need a set of rules that governs what makes a map good or not because we make maps and we have an inherent understanding because of that. If you want to know about what is looked at when judging a map then Barrin wrote an excellent post about a month ago titled 'Judging a melee map' or something like that. This is not an answer to my question, rather it serves to illustrate the point I'm trying to make about this.This won't ever convince any tournament whatsoever. All they care about are viewer numbers, to them, a good map is map which gets viewer a lot, no more, no less. Map rotation is good because it freshens up what could potentially be a stagnating competitive scene. Tournament organisers are reluctant to introduce new maps because they don't want to be the ones to 'Blink' first. Past experience is inconclusive and in relatively volatile market tournament organisers have so far been erring on the side of caution because it's safer in the short term and no one has come to them with a viable alternative. What we need to do as a community is provide them with a viable alternative. We have the backing of the community (and a whole heap of TL and reddit comments to prove it), now we need the maps, people and infrastructure to bridge the rest of the gap. If we don't, then the mapmaking community will slowly die, as it has been doing for the past year. And is a stagnate competitive scene bad for their viewer numbers?Do you profess to know how to run their business better than they? | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:27 SiskosGoatee wrote: Hush, no one would ever argue that. Haven't you read what Iefix would, no one would ever argue that. This sums up your contribution quite nicely: nothing. Is your goal simply to beat your point into our heads until we say you're right? On November 10 2012 07:14 WniO wrote: oh god will you guys stop. just make new maps. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 10 2012 07:17 NewSunshine wrote: I'm sorry, but I've contributed far more novel ideas to this discussion than you have whose majority of insight into it comes down to sharky comments like this. Quite frankly, you just disagree with my, admittedly, fatalistic position and don't want to hear it. You are as guilty as I of what you claim I do, except that I have contributed far more novel ideas to the table than you have.This sums up your contribution quite nicely: nothing. Is your goal simply to beat your point into our heads until we say you're right? | ||
| ||
