| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Timetwister22
United States538 Posts
Some topics worth discussing: -Should the union promote maps for teams? Or should teams promote their own maps? -How many should be on the council? How do we pick them? -Website, writer, graphic designer: Are they available? -Should we just turn motm into the monthly highlight? Or do we keep it separate? -What other current community ran events could be merged under the union? | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: Of course, anyone can form a union, but the doubt expressed is in no small part if the union is going to hold any authority. I mean, I can form a union this moment, sole leader: me. I am the leader of the SC2 mapmaking community, you will do my bidding or be expelled from my union!The criticism is by all means welcome, and greatly appreciated. It seems however that the criticism comes with doubt rather full opposition. Thus, I feel the general idea of the union should be pushed forward and is by all means worth trying. We should instead shift the discussion into what we think about the role, services, and details of the union. Of course it doesn't work that way, you are of course welcome to try but I remain sceptical that the union is going to hold any authority and that tournaments are going to listen because well, currently they have no real incentive. The reason KeSPA got tournaments to listen is because they just pulled their players out if they didn't. I guess you can pull mapmakers out if tournaments don't listen? | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
ulfryc
Germany115 Posts
On October 21 2012 16:12 Archvil3 wrote: Holy walls of text and tinfoil hats, how did this thread become this? Well this is a [D] for Discussion :D. And I think a huge project like this needs to proberly discussed before being implemented. On October 21 2012 13:22 SiskosGoatee wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 21 2012 08:55 Timetwister22 wrote: Yeah, I realize this is a bit stepping on toes and messy but I'm going to have to use Diamond as an example of why we can't have nice things.caustic, you make some very valid points. If all mapmaking teams stepped up and put in the effort that Diamond has for ESV, the community would be more successful. This model could still very well work, but the problem is that it hasn't. This approach is not only easier on the mapping community, but on tournament organizers as well. It's an alternative approach that has potential to work better. If not, then we can just go back to teams. Diamond is basically wholly unqualified to do whatever it is he's trying to do (I'm not even sure what exactly, that's a bad thing). The man has systematically been burning bridges with the people he needs rather than being diplomatic. LS's map gets changed by MLG without his permission, what does he do? He starts a drama on twitter, TL and Reddit, rather than opening a channel behind closed doors to diplomatically handle the situation. Look at what Blizzard did with the whole eSF vs KeSPA conflict. They said they would make a statement, then they probably jumped a mile in the air as eSF announced their boycot, it meant that they didn't have to make their statement, and they didn't, even though they promised they did. By not making a statement they do not alienate KeSPA, people whom they need. I'm sorry Diamond, but take a page out of Alex Garfield's book, constantly calling the people you need, Blizzard, MLG and whatever retards and saying they're dumb isn't furthering your goal in the slightest, it's counter-productive as. You need friends; not enemies. Other than that he doesn't seem to realize how the market works at all when you talk with him about why mapmakers don't get paid. He has no clue how to attempt to reach that goal. He has admitted that he doesn't know the legal artistic rights of mapmakers. He's a fine sample of the scene in general, the StarCraft scene for the most part is run by amateurs; not professionals. I would almost say that Diamond is hurting the interests he seeks to protect more than advancing them. Calling Blizzard or Sundance retards in public is not going to make them more likely to include your maps in their respective pool in case you didn't realize. I'm going to have to side with iamcaustic on this particular issue in nigh fullest. It's a cute idea but you won't be listened to per se, especially if you call it a "union' as said before. Apart from that it's important to understand that tournaments have their reasons for static map pools as I outlined before which you must first understand in order to convince them to stop doing it. They aren't ignorant, they are in general shrewd businesspeople that have built larger tournaments than the KR Weekly, they are doing what they think is best for their business. If this idea is to become a liaison to inform tournaments of the many fine maps that exist, they have no interest in that. If this idea is to become an actual player who holds power to assert its ideas and make tournament organizers listen. Good luck trying to find that authority. What are you going to do? Go on strike? Boycot the OSL? As I outlined above, weekend tournaments have a very tough time introducing a new map into the pool that will get picked up eventually by other tournaments. Your biggest hopes at this moment are the IPL and NASL because they run longer tournaments which rewards players investment to learn new maps. However note that Kevin Knocke has said that players actually aren't that happy with Khaydaria being in the IPL pool because it's the only tournament that has this map and they don't really like it. It has a tendency to get picked last. I do not agree with what you said about Diamond in your post, I think he is quite an intelligent man. But it doesn't really matter. Because we are talking about a union here. Meaning more then one guy. Before someone does something stupid, he will have to talk to the other members of the union. Yup, it might be true that they are all amateurs and not professionals. But that is because none of them gets payed, and no one in the map making community is expecting to get payed any time soon. Most people only want some recognition of the map making community. On October 21 2012 14:27 iamcaustic wrote: It's all a matter of people stepping up to the plate and making the necessary changes. I outlined a few over the course of this discussion, which includes running map making teams in a more business-like fashion, having properly maintained websites and easily accessible business contacts, among other things. Seeing as there are signs of people stepping up and wanting to right the ship (the existence of this thread is evidence of such), I simply think directing that passion toward managing map making teams properly would provide better results and would avoid a lot of the potential pitfalls I've noted earlier. A monthly community update of things in the mapmaking community could very well be useful and/or effective, but the real question to ask about that is this: do you really need a top-level "union" to achieve such a thing, particularly one as outlined in the OP? My opinion is "no". I think it'd be a fantastic project to undertake, but isn't an argument for why an overarching union would be the right path to take for the map making community. Mapmaking Teams are not the solution IMO. Because then tournament organizers would have to choose between many teams to contact / maps to feature. Players would have to choose between many maps which to train. It's need to be made easier for them, there needs to be some go-to-entity, to make those choices easier for people. I don't really agree with the whole business point you are trying to make. Selecting the map pool for a tournament is not a business decision. If a tournament chooses to not have Entombed Vally (a Blizzard map) but rather Cloud Kingdom (an ESV map) or Abyssal City (a Crux map) in its pool, this is not going to have any impact on their business, the same players will compete and viewership numbers wont change. Afaik map making teams don't expect to get compensated, so I dont really see how this is a business decision. This only changes if a tournament will feature completly new maps, which will result in getting them a lot of hate, because they are unkown/untested/untrained maps. This is why the mapmaking community needs to step up, and somehow showcase what they as a whole have done the best. So that it's possible for many tournaments to have the same map pool, and not each have to talk to a different guy, who advices to only use maps made by his own team. Go ask any pro player, they have been saying for years that they want a unified map pool for all tournaments. On the point why a monthly update by some guy wont suffice: because no one would care. Map making teams would ignore his opinion because he either isnt neutral to them or simply because he doesnt have enough clue map making. Players will ignore what he says because, he doesn't understand enough about the game. This is why there needs to be people from every map making team, neutral members from the community and players on such a union. | ||
|
ulfryc
Germany115 Posts
On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: -Should the union promote maps for teams? Or should teams promote their own maps? I think this is one of the main functions a union could serve, and one which the current system (map making teams) lacks. On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: -How many should be on the council? How do we pick them? I think atleast one person from each of the map making teams. Plus someone neutral like Barrin. Plus 2 to 3 players. However this greatly depends on which persons in the community actually want to participate. We'll have to wait for some big figues in the community to step in here before anything is discussed on this topic. On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: -Website, writer, graphic designer: Are they available? I could volunteer as a coder at this point. But I don't think this matters much as of now, since a union would have to be formed before that. And many members in the community have those talents. On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: -Should we just turn motm into the monthly highlight? Or do we keep it separate? -What other current community ran events could be merged under the union? I think this union should start out as small as possible to function. Over time other projeccts can be integrated if they want to. But getting the thing going is more important than planning. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 17:48 ulfryc wrote: I concur.Well this is a [D] for Discussion :D. And I think a huge project like this needs to proberly discussed before being implemented. On October 21 2012 13:22 SiskosGoatee wrote: Are they not professional because they don't get paid, or are they not get paid because they don't act professionally?I do not agree with what you said about Diamond in your post, I think he is quite an intelligent man. But it doesn't really matter. Because we are talking about a union here. Meaning more then one guy. Before someone does something stupid, he will have to talk to the other members of the union. Yup, it might be true that they are all amateurs and not professionals. But that is because none of them gets payed, and no one in the map making community is expecting to get payed any time soon. Most people only want some recognition of the map making community. At further risk of sounding personally (I definitely do not mean this personally in any way but it needs to be addressed). What further council members? EatThePath was suggested? At the current point the mapmaking community is a giant circle jerk. iamcaustic wrote one of the most eloquent and detailed explanations for why he doesn't agree and it shows an absolute understanding and experience on the matter. And EatThePath basically called iamcaustic a troll and some other non nice things. Is that a good council member? Someone who responds to people coming with very articulate and detailed criticism on why something won't work like that? No, it's not, not at all. And this is why the mapmaking community is currently a circle jerk that places people in high positions who simply tell people what they want to hear and that simply agree with them and stroke their ego. Diamond may be intelligent, but he, self admittedly, doesn't have a clue on how to run what he's trying to run, and calling people you need retards publicly instead of behind closed doors is definitely not the way to do it. I don't really agree with the whole business point you are trying to make. Selecting the map pool for a tournament is not a business decision. If a tournament chooses to not have Entombed Vally (a Blizzard map) but rather Cloud Kingdom (an ESV map) or Abyssal City (a Crux map) in its pool, this is not going to have any impact on their business, the same players will compete and viewership numbers wont change. Afaik map making teams don't expect to get compensated, so I dont really see how this is a business decision. This only changes if a tournament will feature completly new maps, which will result in getting them a lot of hate, because they are unkown/untested/untrained maps. This is why the mapmaking community needs to step up, and somehow showcase what they as a whole have done the best. So that it's possible for many tournaments to have the same map pool, and not each have to talk to a different guy, who advices to only use maps made by his own team. Go ask any pro player, they have been saying for years that they want a unified map pool for all tournaments. And this is the naïvety by which the mapmaking community can sometimes approach this issue. Sure, you can h ave a great map, fantastic, balanced. But does it further tournament's business? Do viewers care for balance? What's all still in our minds above all things? Fruitdealer winning GSL 1. Why? Because he overcame balance on terrible maps. Crossfire as far as mapmaking goes is absolutely terrible. The balance numbers alone speak for themselves. Yet how long did it stay in the GSL while other maps were phased out before it? Do you think Mr. Chae doesn't know these numbers? Imbalanced map in a way create spectacle and memorable games and that's their business. How many times was on reddit "omg guys, check this vod of John Protoss having an amaaaaazing hold against Jack Zerg's hydra all in on crossfire!", what makes it so amazing? Because it's imbalanced. On the point why a monthly update by some guy wont suffice: because no one would care. Map making teams would ignore his opinion because he either isnt neutral to them or simply because he doesnt have enough clue map making. Players will ignore what he says because, he doesn't understand enough about the game. This is why there needs to be people from every map making team, neutral members from the community and players on such a union. Sundance doesn't need a clue in mapmaking. He doesn'te ven need to know what the maps look like or watch the games to select them. All he needs to know is that people watch the vods of games that happen on map X disproportionally more than on map Y, Y is out, X stays.And these are the business decisions that these companies make where the majority of the mapmaking community is ignorant of, Sundance doesn't give a damn about good maps, he cares about stream and vod numbers. | ||
|
ArcticRaven
France1406 Posts
Stop nurturing your petty crusade. All you're doing here is disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing. I'm not saying you're wrong on all of your points, but most of them seem to be there just to disagree. Also if you don't think mapmakers deserve more recognition, guess what ? No one cares. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:24 ArcticRaven wrote: This bleeds through in statistics. If stats show that Crossfire has more people tuning in and more people watching VODs on than say Terminus, then Terminus is out and Crossfire stays. It's that simple.What you're not thinking about is every awful game on Crossfire or Antiga that made the tournament not as good as it could have been. Stop nurturing your petty crusade. All you're doing here is disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing. I'm not saying you're wrong on all of your points, but most of them seem to be there just to disagree. I, and to a far greater extend iamcaustic, am offering criticism on the idea and got dragged into a discussion about the professionally of the mapmaking and sc2 scene in general. You are in no position to call me out on 'just wanting to disagree' since the obvious only reason you quoted me is to tell me how much you disagree with me, you're not actually replying to anything I said or advancing a discussion.Also if you don't think mapmakers deserve more recognition, guess what ? No one cares. Case in point. You're just being angry right now. | ||
|
ulfryc
Germany115 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: Are they not professional because they don't get paid, or are they not get paid because they don't act professionally? At further risk of sounding personally (I definitely do not mean this personally in any way but it needs to be addressed). What further council members? EatThePath was suggested? At the current point the mapmaking community is a giant circle jerk. iamcaustic wrote one of the most eloquent and detailed explanations for why he doesn't agree and it shows an absolute understanding and experience on the matter. And EatThePath basically called iamcaustic a troll and some other non nice things. Is that a good council member? Someone who responds to people coming with very articulate and detailed criticism on why something won't work like that? No, it's not, not at all. And this is why the mapmaking community is currently a circle jerk that places people in high positions who simply tell people what they want to hear and that simply agree with them and stroke their ego. Diamond may be intelligent, but he, self admittedly, doesn't have a clue on how to run what he's trying to run, and calling people you need retards publicly instead of behind closed doors is definitely not the way to do it.. I haven't been part of the map making community for long enough to name any imporant people. But I think everyone who wants to participate and who can get people to vote for him, should be able to. The funny thing is probably no one discussing in this thread would be part of this union, the closest being maybe timetwister because he's on ESV. On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: This is honestly a naïve conception. I can guarantee you that Sundance has weekly statistics coming in from VOD viewing which tell him which maps get viewed the msot, as in, which maps are most likely to generate exciting games. I'm pretty sure he knows the viewer numbers during the live stream as well for each map. It's everything business. We're talking about a tournament that admitted to make it easier on NA players because viewer numbers drop once the last NA player is eliminated, they mean business.,, And this is the naïvety by which the mapmaking community can sometimes approach this issue. Sure, you can h ave a great map, fantastic, balanced. But does it further tournament's business? Do viewers care for balance? What's all still in our minds above all things? Fruitdealer winning GSL 1. Why? Because he overcame balance on terrible maps. Crossfire as far as mapmaking goes is absolutely terrible. The balance numbers alone speak for themselves. Yet how long did it stay in the GSL while other maps were phased out before it? Do you think Mr. Chae doesn't know these numbers? Imbalanced map in a way create spectacle and memorable games and that's their business. How many times was on reddit "omg guys, check this vod of John Protoss having an amaaaaazing hold against Jack Zerg's hydra all in on crossfire!", what makes it so amazing? Because it's imbalanced.. I think you are overinterpreting what tournament organizers actually do. But we will never known unless some of them comes in here. Of course viewer numbers weigh in one the decision of maps used, but not to much. Think about it we would have seen tournaments featuring much crazier maps like Kulas Ravine, which for sure would get them better numbers, instead of the 5000th game on Antiga Shipyard. Tournaments actually care about using balanced maps, because else many games will become boring, and pros will call out these tournaments, because they will get frustrated. On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote:Sundance doesn't need a clue in mapmaking. He doesn'te ven need to know what the maps look like or watch the games to select them. All he needs to know is that people watch the vods of games that happen on map X disproportionally more than on map Y, Y is out, X stays. And these are the business decisions that these companies make where the majority of the mapmaking community is ignorant of, Sundance doesn't give a damn about good maps, he cares about stream and vod numbers. I dont think this stat exists. Do you really think there were more or less people watching the recent GSL finals on Set 3 just because it features Antiga Shipyard, and this old and imbalanced map makes it more interesting for them to watch? Tournaments actually rely on having a balanced game on balanced maps because else in the long term no one will care about the game anymore. And a stagnant map pool is not the solution because maps will get old and boring and the meta game will shift revealing imbalances on older maps. And blizzard maps just suck. | ||
|
ArcticRaven
France1406 Posts
On October 21 2012 06:27 iamcaustic wrote: Finally, Dream Forge: 1. No obvious hub for latest maps. 2. Announcements available at http://dreamforge.forumotion.com; no known Twitter/Facebook. 3. No clear business contact. 4. Using a free forumotion account, do I really need to say more? I have no idea how these guys ever want to be taken seriously with their current setup. This is not the look of people that mean serious business. Not even so much as owning their own domain -- an incredibly simplistic feat to achieve. You're right. We've been awful in that regard. Now, back to you, Siskos - At the current point the mapmaking community is a giant circle jerk. I'd disagree. I'm sorry, but melee mapping already gets far more attention than it deserves. There are currently GM players of which no one knows anything who are far more hardworking and far more talented than melee mappers. Furthermore, there's UMS mappers which is far more daunting and complicated, to create a good UMS game than to create a melee map. There's some extremely impressive UMS games made and no one knows about them. Seriously, I'm kind of appalled by the self-righteous and entitled attitude of the melee mapping scene. Of basically everything in esports, it's probably the thing that requires the least amount of talent. I'm not disagreeing with you on a lot of points - but replies like that make you look like you're just here to prove your greater point of "Mapmakers feel too entitled". It seems that's all you're replying for - disagreeing and crusading to prove your point. Mapping doesn't require talent ? GM players deserve more recognition ? True or not (I'd be inclined to disagree, but whatever), this is irrelevant. Can we make the game better ? Yes. That's all that counts. One last thing : However, apart from all that, understand that it probably won't ever be that profitable, supply and demand. This shows you haven't understood anything to what we're discussing or the global mindset of this community. No one ever asked to be paid for maps. | ||
|
Timetwister22
United States538 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: Are they not professional because they don't get paid, or are they not get paid because they don't act professionally? Because we don't get paid. I would be dumbfounded if you thought otherwise. On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: At further risk of sounding personally (I definitely do not mean this personally in any way but it needs to be addressed). What further council members? EatThePath was suggested? At the current point the mapmaking community is a giant circle jerk. iamcaustic wrote one of the most eloquent and detailed explanations for why he doesn't agree and it shows an absolute understanding and experience on the matter. And EatThePath basically called iamcaustic a troll and some other non nice things. Is that a good council member? Someone who responds to people coming with very articulate and detailed criticism on why something won't work like that? No, it's not, not at all. And this is why the mapmaking community is currently a circle jerk that places people in high positions who simply tell people what they want to hear and that simply agree with them and stroke their ego. Choosing who will be on the council and how they will get the job is something we still need to discuss. Listing names at this point is slightly useless. However, in defense of EatThePath, I regularly see him posting large amounts of helpful feedback on almost every map thread I have seen posted in the past month. Thus, I would by no means be concerned with someone who has made such a community contribution to be on the council. On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: This is honestly a naïve conception. I can guarantee you that Sundance has weekly statistics coming in from VOD viewing which tell him which maps get viewed the msot, as in, which maps are most likely to generate exciting games. I'm pretty sure he knows the viewer numbers during the live stream as well for each map. It's everything business. We're talking about a tournament that admitted to make it easier on NA players because viewer numbers drop once the last NA player is eliminated, they mean business. And this is the naïvety by which the mapmaking community can sometimes approach this issue. Sure, you can h ave a great map, fantastic, balanced. But does it further tournament's business? Do viewers care for balance? What's all still in our minds above all things? Fruitdealer winning GSL 1. Why? Because he overcame balance on terrible maps. Crossfire as far as mapmaking goes is absolutely terrible. The balance numbers alone speak for themselves. Yet how long did it stay in the GSL while other maps were phased out before it? Do you think Mr. Chae doesn't know these numbers? Imbalanced map in a way create spectacle and memorable games and that's their business. How many times was on reddit "omg guys, check this vod of John Protoss having an amaaaaazing hold against Jack Zerg's hydra all in on crossfire!", what makes it so amazing? Because it's imbalanced. I feel you are speaking WAY out of your league here, and it is comments like these that might lead people to not take you seriously. You are not a tournament organizer, and thus are basing this entirely off assumptions. This by all means makes this section of your argument irrelevant and pointless. Also: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NCiQA.png) Map stats are what matter most. Not view counts, vod counts, interesting gameplay, etc. Just balance stats. Yes I'm sure. On October 21 2012 18:13 SiskosGoatee wrote: Sundance doesn't need a clue in mapmaking. Pretending Sundance is indeed in charge of the MLG map pool, which I'm pretty sure he's not, he obviously does need a clue. They've been using the same maps for ages, and by all means watching games on Antiga Shipyard is no longer interesting. The tweet I posted was one of many that came with the outcry against MLG for using such a stale and boring map pool. MLG has been so stubborn, I don't think they have even opted to use newer GSL maps like Whirlwind or Abyssal City. Thus, keeping the map pool interesting and fresh is by all means not on their list of priorities. Overall however, I feel the the general topic of your concerns, as well as those by others who have previously posted, have already been expressed in great detail. Therefore, answering the discussion questions I posted above would contribute much more to the discussion. Would be greatly appreciated. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 18:46 ulfryc wrote: It's a factor of things, in the end how much viewership a map weighs due to a combination of all these factors will be very important.I think you are overinterpreting what tournament organizers actually do. But we will never known unless some of them comes in here. Of course viewer numbers weigh in one the decision of maps used, but not to much. Think about it we would have seen tournaments featuring much crazier maps like Kulas Ravine, which for sure would get them better numbers, instead of the 5000th game on Antiga Shipyard. Tournaments actually care about using balanced maps, because else many games will become boring, and pros will call out these tournaments, because they will get frustrated. I am pretty sure MLG doesn't give a damn about balance, though balance influences viewer numbers and therefore they indirectly care, they don't directly. MLG has basically made a couple of farce tournaments specifically designed to give NA players a better shot for those almighty viewer numbers. And they should probably do that if they wish to remain afloat. I'm however quite certain that picking the map pool in this sense and deciding which maps are out definitely is based heavily in how much viewers a map tends to attract. I dont think this stat exists. Do you really think there were more or less people watching the recent GSL finals on Set 3 just because it features Antiga Shipyard, and this old and imbalanced map makes it more interesting for them to watch? How do you think they decide which maps are out next season and which stay in? That they just do this on a whim? Just wet fingerwork? How else can you honestly explain that Crossfire stayed in for so long. I can assure you that these decisions are not made lightly and viewer statistics play a big role in it. Tournaments actually rely on having a balanced game on balanced maps because else in the long term no one will care about the game anymore. And a stagnant map pool is not the solution because maps will get old and boring and the meta game will shift revealing imbalances on older maps. And blizzard maps just suck. This is something you want to be true, but this just isn't true. I'm sorry. Fairness and balance, no one cares about that in the end in the corporate world. Again, MLG purposefully designs tournament formats to make it easier for NA players.Basically, build a tournament as big as MLG from the ground up and then tell Sundance how to run his business. There's a reason that the KR Weekly is extremely small compared to MLG or IPL or Dreamhack. I mean, look at NASL, they came out of no-where and managed to build a giant league, it didn't slowly grow and even they are known for their technical difficulties but they still managed to create something bigger than ESV could ever hope to accomplish. Because they are actual business people who carefully weigh their decisions and most certainly don't go around calling people they might need in the future retards and idiots on twitter. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 19:06 Timetwister22 wrote: I have no doubts in his capacity as a mapmaker whatsoever. But I agree with iamcaustic, is this to have any shot, it must be ran as a business. Is he good with that?Choosing who will be on the council and how they will get the job is something we still need to discuss. Listing names at this point is slightly useless. However, in defense of EatThePath, I regularly see him posting large amounts of helpful feedback on almost every map thread I have seen posted in the past month. Thus, I would by no means be concerned with someone who has made such a community contribution to be on the council. Ideally you want a mapper who also understands business of course. I feel you are speaking WAY out of your league here, and it is comments like these that might lead people to not take you seriously. You are not a tournament organizer, and thus are basing this entirely off assumptions. I mean, most sponsors and team owners have made no secret of the fact that they don't care about good players, they care about marketable players. This is no different, tournaments don't care about good maps, they care about marketable maps. New maps are inherently less marketable unless they prove themselves, so who's going to be the first to risk it? Vicious was in one tournament, then never again. IPL used Darkness Falls, Sanshorn Mist and Atlantis Spaceship, the last of those got on and got used in the GSL. This by all means makes this section of your argument irrelevant and pointless. Also: So you say. But MLG makes money from ads and PPV. A map which generates more VOD views will bring them more adviews. That is the only justification they need. If a terrible map keeps producing more VOD views for whatever reason then it stays because it brings them more money.+ Show Spoiler + Map stats are what matter most. Not view counts, vod counts, interesting gameplay, etc. Just balance stats. Yes I'm sure. Also, one has to understand that a large portion of the people who watch MLG and all those tournaments aren't high level players and don't have a strong conception of balance, they might as well just like maps because they are pretty. Pretending Sundance is indeed in charge of the MLG map pool, which I'm pretty sure he's not, he obviously does need a clue. They've been using the same maps for ages, and by all means watching games on Antiga Shipyard is no longer interesting. The tweet I posted was one of many that came with the outcry against MLG for using such a stale and boring map pool. MLG has been so stubborn, I don't think they have even opted to use newer GSL maps like Whirlwind or Abyssal City. Thus, keeping the map pool interesting and fresh is by all means not on their list of priorities. And yes, they're stubborn, but they are one of the biggest tournaments around so they must be doing something right? There is at this point no evidence that a fresh and interesting map pool increases their viewer numbers. I trust they have their reasons to not change them. It's so easy to just try out new maps. I am quite sure they have their reasons. I would again like to point out the above that relative to the majority viewers of MLG, we are experts, we know things of map balance they don't know, nor care about. Which is also probably one of the reasons neutral depots are not on the ladder. A large portion of ladder palyers does not follow the tournament scene and often doesn't know such a thing exists and they would be confused as hell seeing those neutral depots there. Overall however, I feel the the general topic of your concerns, as well as those by others who have previously posted, have already been expressed in great detail. Therefore, answering the discussion questions I posted above would contribute much more to the discussion. Would be greatly appreciated. You're welcome, likewise I must admit you made me think about a couple of things, which is always good. | ||
|
Timmay
United States112 Posts
There is nothing wrong with attempting any of the services in the original post, although some of them will likely not make a difference. Anyone who is still involved with Map of the Month would also likely be involved with this new organization, so that would remain unchanged. Chat channels for custom melee maps have been tried before, and they have always failed. However, if you could actually get a channel to be popular, that would be a great benefit for us. I do agree with some people here that many of these goals could be accomplished through map making teams. I do not think we need to force one unified map pool (Timetwister does not seem to want this, but others do). If there were two or three respected map teams providing their own suggested map pools, it would still be pretty easy for tournament administrators to find the maps they need. However, if the teams are not filling the roles they could be doing, it would not hurt to have a new organization do them. Considering the state of the current teams, something needs to change. What I do not want to see is an organization pretending to be something it is not. This community is small enough that we could probably find 3-7 people who most people would be comfortable with, but some people will be disappointed with the selection. It will never represent everyone, and it should not attempt to do so. On October 20 2012 14:50 SiskosGoatee wrote: Of basically everything in esports, it's probably the thing that requires the least amount of talent. If everyone made maps like these, I would agree with you. Thankfully, some people have more talent or put more effort into making melee maps. On October 21 2012 16:52 Timetwister22 wrote: Thus, I feel the general idea of the union should be pushed forward and is by all means worth trying. We should instead shift the discussion into what we think about the role, services, and details of the union. I would recommend not calling it a union. This seems like a more extensive Map of the Month kind of organization, rather than a union encompassing everyone (which is unobtainable). On October 21 2012 17:03 WniO wrote: iccup, oh i mean tpw will just crush this down as they dont want competition. when one mapmaker elevated his skills to where his peers could only look up... the great one they banned him from the entire site. fair warning to those aspiring mapmakers. What are you talking about? Chuky500 has not been banned. On October 21 2012 17:48 ulfryc wrote: Mapmaking Teams are not the solution IMO. Because then tournament organizers would have to choose between many teams to contact / maps to feature. Players would have to choose between many maps which to train. It's need to be made easier for them, there needs to be some go-to-entity, to make those choices easier for people. People get upset by the MotM results. Imagine how much angrier people would be if some organization was the only channel to get maps into all tournaments. A new organization should promote a solid map pool, but it should not be the only option. Consider what Timetwister wrote about this: On October 21 2012 13:26 Timetwister22 wrote: As I mentioned in the OP, the union does not replace teams. It is just an additional method in promoting maps. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 19:29 Timmay wrote: I completely agree with the majority of your post, except that part against, SiskosGoatee, surely you can do better? You haven't even made references to the obesity of his maternal parentage.If you wish to create an organization to promote the map making community, that is something I can support. If you wish to be the one body representing the entire map making community, you are trying to accomplish something that cannot be done, and you will fail. There is nothing wrong with attempting any of the services in the original post, although some of them will likely not make a difference. Anyone who is still involved with Map of the Month would also likely be involved with this new organization, so that would remain unchanged. Chat channels for custom melee maps have been tried before, and they have always failed. However, if you could actually get a channel to be popular, that would be a great benefit for us. I do agree with some people here that many of these goals could be accomplished through map making teams. I do not think we need to force one unified map pool (Timetwister does not seem to want this, but others do). If there were two or three respected map teams providing their own suggested map pools, it would still be pretty easy for tournament administrators to find the maps they need. However, if the teams are not filling the roles they could be doing, it would not hurt to have a new organization do them. Considering the state of the current teams, something needs to change. What I do not want to see is an organization pretending to be something it is not. This community is small enough that we could probably find 3-7 people who most people would be comfortable with, but some people will be disappointed with the selection. It will never represent everyone, and it should not attempt to do so. If everyone made maps like these, I would agree with you. Thankfully, some people have more talent or put more effort into making melee maps. I would recommend not calling it a union. This seems like a more extensive Map of the Month kind of organization, rather than a union encompassing everyone (which is unobtainable). What are you talking about? Chuky500 has not been banned. People get upset by the MotM results. Imagine how much angrier people would be if some organization was the only channel to get maps into all tournaments. A new organization should promote a solid map pool, but it should not be the only option. Consider what Timetwister wrote about this: | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
It's not like we try to gain anything here and personally I was never into mapmaking mainly for seeing my map being played, but just because I want to see the best SC 2 possible played. Frankly I can't get myself to enjoy SC 2 on this super stale (and partly super idiotic) map pool anymore. Unfortunately only Korean tournaments seem to even grasp the importance of maps for the game and the viewer experience. I find the idea that mapmaking teams should become a lot more professional and put more effort into it, at this point is actually hurtful. What should mapmaking be about: What maps are the best and should be played or which team/person has the best organization and PR to get their maps played? Combining into one union will let fewer people who do organisational stuff achieve more. Thus I hope it will actually give us a better PR and stronger voice in the community as a group, while also letting us focus on the mapmaking aspect more. As Timetwister said, this is actually helping tournaments (and Blizzard) a lot of they want to get in touch with us, because they don't have to decide between different mapmaking teams etc but can just straight up contact the mapmaking community as a whole. In a way the map featuring stuff is just what MotM does as I think iamcaustic pointed out(?). But I hope this could be much more. Where MotM was just a contest to point out the best maps, this should be an organization that actively showcases the maps and communicates with tournament people, Blizzard and the community in a way that it speaks for the majority of the mapmakers. While before it was mostly individuals and sometimes map teams communicating their individual thoughts, which mostly didn't have much weight. I will try to answer some of the questions about organization Timetwister had later. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 20:24 Ragoo wrote: I'm still pretty sure the only reason GSL can get away with adding new maps is because it's a large, long, tournament. MLG can't really introduce their own new maps because no one is going to train on them for a weekend. They could of course take over the GSL map pool though.In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to change but Blizzard/tournaments would change their approach and actually come to us and use the content we provide for free all this time, instead of us having to come to them and repeatedly shove our maps in their faces until they use them. It's not like we try to gain anything here and personally I was never into mapmaking mainly for seeing my map being played, but just because I want to see the best SC 2 possible played. Frankly I can't get myself to enjoy SC 2 on this super stale (and partly super idiotic) map pool anymore. Unfortunately only Korean tournaments seem to even grasp the importance of maps for the game and the viewer experience. NASL also comissioned some of their own maps and made interesting changes to some maps. I honestly think the idea of Shattered Temple with modified rocks that break down more easily was interesting at the least. NASL can do this because it's a long tournament with a huge prize pool, they can expect players to study and get accustomed to their own maps. Odyssee was also honestly a very good addition to NASL. As outlined before, it also might not be in their commercial interest to have 'good maps' in the pool. One has to appreciate that the majority of viewers don't know a thing about map balance and just want a pretty looking map. I find the idea that mapmaking teams should become a lot more professional and put more effort into it, at this point is actually hurtful. I agree, it's not ideal, far from it, but this is how the world, sadly, works. If you want good maps in pools you're going to have to sell yourself.What should mapmaking be about: What maps are the best and should be played or which team/person has the best organization and PR to get their maps played? | ||
|
ulfryc
Germany115 Posts
On October 21 2012 19:29 Timmay wrote: If you wish to create an organization to promote the map making community, that is something I can support. If you wish to be the one body representing the entire map making community, you are trying to accomplish something that cannot be done, and you will fail. This is indeed a legimitate fear. However if it were possible for the current map making teams to unite I would not see anyone falling short. It would however be required for this organization to be neutral and also accept maps/opioins from people outside of the teams. But I have no concern there, because there is no money in the map making scene, plus there are way less retards in the map making subcommunity than in starcraft 2 itself. On October 21 2012 19:29 Timmay wrote: People get upset by the MotM results. Imagine how much angrier people would be if some organization was the only channel to get maps into all tournaments. A new organization should promote a solid map pool, but it should not be the only option. Currently there is no way for map makers to get their maps into tournaments or even the ladder. The only examples being Crux, because GSL is the only tournament which gets the importance of maps, and ESV because they won the TeamLiquid Map Making Contest, showing how Team Liquid factors in. A union could establish a way for the big teams to get their maps into tournaments. However a union would not block the existing ways to get your map out there (MotM, ESV KW, what else is there really?). A union could still hold a biyearly TL Map Making Contest or something similiar, even helping out aspiring map makers. Side question: As I wasn't following the starcraft community during boodwar, how did Kespa cope with this issue? I know they constantly got new maps in (obv not blizzard made). What was their approach for this? Were there only a few korean guys responsible, or the whole korean map making community? Did foreign map makers have any chance to get their maps into big leagues? | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
But obv these mapmakers could work more professionally and also the whole thing was better structured, cos it wasn't just about making individually good maps but they could also consider what map pool they make and how they influence the metagame as a whole during the process. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On October 21 2012 20:51 ulfryc wrote: How, I'm very sceptical towards this? That a union would accomplish this, I'd pretty much see that tournaments are going to listen as little as they will to Diamond with his continued insistence on better map pools.A union could establish a way for the big teams to get their maps into tournaments. However a union would not block the existing ways to get your map out there (MotM, ESV KW, what else is there really?). A union could still hold a biyearly TL Map Making Contest or something similiar, even helping out aspiring map makers. The reason the TL map making contest was such a success was because it was done in cooperation by Blizzard and those maps were added to the ladder and from there the GSL. 1 of the top 3 maps that got added into the ladder also arguably failed. No idea why, I though Korhal Compound was more solid than Ohana but it didn't get picked up by tournaments as much.Side question: As I wasn't following the starcraft community during boodwar, how did Kespa cope with this issue? I know they constantly got new maps in (obv not blizzard made). What was their approach for this? Were there only a few korean guys responsible, or the whole korean map making community? Did foreign map makers have any chance to get their maps into big leagues? They had a few regulars doing it. Also, the OSL and MSL work differently in terms of maps, the entire tournament basically only works with 4 maps, 2 of which typically are replaced next season but this wasn't fixed. You tend to have 1 macro map, (large) 1 micro map (short), one average map and they sometimes threw in experimental things which did bonkers stuff like neutral creep everywhere, a neutral command centre in the middle to give infested Terrans in ZvP or destructible assimilators which when destroyed would actually be like a collapsable rock tower. | ||
| ||
|
|
BSL: ProLeague
Cross vs TT1
spx vs Hawk
JDConan vs TBD
Wardi Open
SOOP
NightMare vs Wayne
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Cure vs Zoun
Solar vs Creator
The PondCast
Online Event
Clem vs ShoWTimE
herO vs MaxPax
HupCup
GSL Code S
GuMiho vs Bunny
ByuN vs SHIN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
