This is a process that will organize a system of elimination for maps to be put into Matchmaking. It will be a eight step process, that will take three weeks. It may seem tedious, but if you think you have the best map for matchmaking then it should be easy. Step 1 of map election process Community will submit their maps for the current election. Step 2 of map election process The Creators will have a week to post all the information possible about the map (Ex: Walk Through, Building Process, Time Laps, Short Film, Etc.) Step 3 of map election process The top 50 maps will be voted by the Forge community at the end of the first week. Step 4 of map election process The creators of the top 50 maps then have one week to fix problems/bugs (environment and or scripting) that have been reported, then must resubmit by the end of the second week. Step 5 of map election process The Forgers will also have the second week to post all the information possible about the updated fixes on map (Ex: Walk Through, Building Process, Time Laps, Short Film, Etc.) Step 6 of map election process The Top twenty five maps will be voted on by the Forge Community three days after the second submission. Step 7 of map election process The Cartographers will have four days to examine the top ten maps. Step 8 of map election process Community Matchmaking maps will up at the end of the third week.
In theory this works, but you have one major flaw. We have seen time and time again that the vast majority of community members, even forgers, push and put down maps based solely on aesthetics.
Three weeks honestly isn't enough time even for serious play testing to find all flaws/exploitations for any map. I think it would be great to have a timeframe and organized system setup, but not all forgers that produce content have the time to get the map out there, get feedback, make adjustments and post said all progress due to their life responsibility's. 343 also has to run their internal tests on the maps and fixes on it before it can be uploaded for matchmaking. I do think this is a great idea, but we would honestly need dedicated play test lobby's every night for the eligible maps with feedback posted on said maps thread so the creator can adjust the map. I think if 343 were to cycle the community maps every three months for Halo, that would allow people enough time to build, test and update including 343. It would help quite a bit more if the matchmaking curators were full time active on this site creating threads and responses to the community for two to three hours out of their work week schedule dedicated to community interaction.
I truly believe we can figure a system out, a new system that other games have not used. We can have one of the best competitive multiplayer games being fueled by its community. Yes theirs bumps and obstacles, but we can still make it happen.
Time tables, exclusion of maps made prior to date, and popular vote? No thank you. The system is fine despite its short comings. We don't need a revolution to improve it, only improved transparency of the process.
No one is making you produce maps for matchmaking game types. We can keep producing maps and having fun as forge should be. But why can't we also have a established organized system for the people that want the challenge of producing AAA forge maps for matchmaking.
Because we already have a fair system that works. Because popular vote doesn't yield good results. Because, and hate me for this, the vast majority of "experienced forgers" aren't capable of making AAA maps, and your little voting system would only empower their subpar creations.
Do you study political science? Explain to me how we would have a negative majority influx in a very small operation when theirs multiple rigorous procedures you have to go through that takes weeks to complete with no final destination?
Ah, I see we have here an ambitious polisci undergrad trying to flex his academic vernacular capabilities. GG kid.
So instead of giving me a answer, you decide to internet analyze me? (You completely got me wrong) And that's a simple business operations question. NEXT time you want to prove a theory just give facts instead of insulting. Now let's end this and talk about forge. I like your magnum post, really good info that I'll get to use for the future.
tyranny of the majority is the huge flaw in this proposal. we don't want a system where people can manipulate it to their advantage, which in the past forgehub favorites have proved just this.
Sorry man, but academic stylized write on a gaming forum gets under my skin. Let's agree to disagree and move on then.