Reviews and Submissions

[High Treason]

This raises a question for me, if there is a reactor to destroy, is it unfair to assume that the player should expect a huge explosion in the area almost immediately?

[MSandt]

It also makes your review more open to criticism.  Take the texturing score, for example.  3 out of 5 is 60%.  That's pretty bad.  I have played maps with bad texturing, and this wasn't one of them.  Then it gets docked a point in each of the following areas:  shading, sprite work, and detailing/trimwork.  A point in each area doesn't sound like much, until you realize that makes each area only 80%.  Compare that to, say, Red 3, which you gave perfect scores in all of those areas.  I like Red 3 a lot, but was it really that good looking?  You scoring system forces you to say about each of those areas that it is either perfect (5/5) or very flawed (4/5 or less).  And more importantly, the way you break it down does not allow you to evaluate the map as a whole.  The only way to get around that would be to decide on the overall score first, then go back and make sure that the different areas add up to what you already decided.  But of course that would be cheating and would make a joke of the whole reviewing scheme.

The problem is that Forge has fixed parameters. For example, the parameter for the variable "texturing" is only 0.05 (assuming a scale from 0 to 100 for "texturing"). So you could have the worst texturing in a map (imagine the whole BobSP1 covered with the default brick texture) and its effect on a score of 100 would still be only -5 points.
Moreover, since Forge only applies integers, there are some discontinuities. For example, as you quite specifically implied, the jump from 3/5 to 4/5 is worth 20%. This could be fixed with a modified version of the equation Forge uses:

Score = 0.05(texturing)+0.05(lighting)+0.10(ambiance)+0.20(architecture)... etc.

Each variable would have values between [0,100]. This would preserve the weights Forge applies but allow for more continuity. But then again with a weight of just 0.05 every, say, 10 points is worth only 0.5 points so the issue you brought up doesn't really matter. It's the fixing of parameters that causes problems.

[MSandt]

This raises a question for me, if there is a reactor to destroy, is it unfair to assume that the player should expect a huge explosion in the area almost immediately?

I'd say that depends on the distance between the reactor and the player. "In the area" is quite vague.

[Forge]

I've mentioned that all parameters rely on one or more other parameters several times. They are not as "fixed" as you like to believe.
A texturing of an entire map with the default brick would effect texturing & ambiance. Potential for -15 points right off the top. Since you are using the same texture, there could be little to no detailing. So now you have a potential for -20.
More points would be lost under Gameplay/Design. Having an entire map in default brick is going to effect the ambiance. Ambiance affects the gameplay. I don't care how good the game play is, if you're in a map made with only one texture, your mood is going to sour and make the gameplay alot less enjoyable. "Design" is also my "catch-all" category for examples like the one you used. More points lost at my discretion.

[Forge]

I've been contemplating over all this math that's been applied to the breakdown I use to score maps. I've never bothered to consider the percentage difference of a 4/5 compared to a 5/5. If I were using that as a base for what I was doing, every category would have 100 points, then I would figure out the average to get the overall. Doing that is just as flawed as the method I currently employ.
When I start a map it starts with 100 points. If a certain area has noticeable and prominent flaws, that area loses points in relation to how flawed it is. To me 1 point = -1% from 100% no matter what parameter it applies to.
If we really want to beat up my method, lets discuss why certain areas only carry so many points compared to others.
The two main areas are how it looks & how it plays.
Looks = Texturing(5), light-shading(5), sprite work for detailing(5), architectural detailing (trimwork)(5), architecture(sprite or sector based)(20), ambiance(10) = 50 points
Plays= gameplay(15), layout(20), design(15) = 50 points

Since most aspects rely on other aspects (even between aspects from the two different main area (i.e. architecture can effect layout), it's not an exact science, but it works for what I want to do

so dissect away

[Micky C]

I see you've reviewed the WGRealms episode. Doesn't its counterpart episode in WGRealms 2 make the original somewhat redundant? I recall William saying that the WGRealms 2 version is a lot more how he originally imagined it, or something along those lines.

[Forge]

I don't see anything wrong with hosting the original.

some people might prefer the original for whatever personal reasons.

[MSandt]

They're very different so each should have its own review.

[Merlijn]

some people might prefer the original for whatever personal reasons.

I'm one of those people; I thought the remake was way too overdone, especially the overuse of the cyberdemons was pretty annoying. So I'm glad to see the original here.

I recall William saying that the WGRealms 2 version is a lot more how he originally imagined it

Yeah well, that's also what George Lucas says about every new version of Star Wars.. 

[quakis]

Noticed a mistake in the map listings and reviews. Shrunken is under my name in both areas, but it's supposed to be under Ryan Lennox.

[Puritan]

^Oh shit...my bad. Corrected now.
I'm very sorry 

[quakis]

Don't worry about it, I just wanted to help correct a little mistake after noticing it.

[zykoveddy]

Thanks to Forge for the review of Kill City and Moonbase accident!

I would disagree about one thing, though: the second secret level in MA may look like a mess, that has nothing to do with the plot & space theme, but I actually put a lot of effort to this level and I still like it a lot. Boosting the number of levels in the episode wasn't my goal, I just wanted to create something weird and wacky. I think this is that the secret levels is all about - weird and wacky stuff that can't be put on the actual levels.

Still, the review was cool and I'm satisfied with the score

[Forge]

Pjsloth1

A canyon styled map. Duke starts at base camp on the open valley floor with the objective of summiting the nearby mesa. To do this the player must navigate around the mountain base ascending up ramps, traversing rockslides, and navigating along terraces loaded with stacks of crates. I have no idea why the area is loaded with crates, there's nothing around but cliff faces. Maybe this is where the term, "box of rocks" comes from. Moving through the map is fairly linear, but there is the option of gaining the next level up the mesa by either taking a lift or climbing up rock piles. Most locations are pretty wide with lots of room to maneuver; you'd either have to be pretty clumsy or very unlucky to fall off the side of the mountain.

The theme of the map is to move from start to finish and live to tell about it. There are no puzzles to solve or locks needing keys searched out; just surviving is all that's required. As the player travels through the map they'll encounter wave after wave of enemies; each progressively getting harder with more numerous and tougher aliens, until the finally is reached which will put some hair on your chest (regardless of age or gender). Supplies are strictly limited. There are only a few weapons available, and a meager amount of bullets and health are doled out between each wave of resistance. If you're lucky, the bad guys will drop some ammo for you to collect; if you're not so lucky then I hope you invested well in running shoes.
 


Texturing/Lighting-Shading: 8/10
Sprite Work/Detailing: 8/10
Ambiance: 8/10
Architecture: 19/20
Layout: 19/20
Gameplay/Design: 28/30
Overall: 90/100

[Puritan]

Very nice review, Forge 


It seems to me that the you and Merlijn are way beyond....
I really appreciate your affords.
This community is small but I have a certain feeling that the last words haven't been spoken....or in other terms: The fat lady haven't reached the stage yet