Looks win? It sure is a dissapointment that Good looking maps are all the rage now. As appose to exceptional design. I mean if you take a look at the highest rated maps as of now, don't you notice a trend? To extend an olive branch here, i think it goes without saying that the visual apeal of a map goes hand in hand with design ofcourse. And who wants to play a **** on a stick even if the design philosophy is stellar and perfectly executed. Halo 5 forge comes with Amazing new potential for artists to distiguish and impress. So much so that, it just may be sweeping attention to design under the rug...
The one thing people don't seem to understand is that there are plenty of good looking maps that don't play well, but not vice versa. Unless it is a complete accident, any designer who creates a good layout will do their best to make it look good as well.
Of couro Most good designers have the potential to make there map decent, and clean at the very least. As as well as an exceptionaly talented artist, can pull of a decent layout if they put effort into it. All the grey areas in between included ofcourse. The problem i'm begining to notice, and what i'm more specificaly adressing here is that; Top notch visuals are taking center stage as oppose to top notch design. Perhaps a fad, i hope. I played an amazingly fun map the other day, and it made me realise that was the first map in H5 i'd actualy been impressed from a design perspective and not a visual one. And wouldn't you know it... It was also the first map i wanted to keep playing on.
Visuals have always and will always get more (short-term) attention. This is a thing in basically all map creating communities regardless of game or tools. Nice looking visuals grab people's attention and can be easily judged based on screenshots while good design isn't something that is instantly as clear.
I also feel like people are generally giving more attention to maps that look great even if they don't play well. Even The Epidemic featured a "competitive" map based solely on how well it looks even though it plays pretty awful in many people's opinions. I believe that maps do need detail to an extent, but it is more important to focus mainly on gameplay and only have the aesthetics be a second consideration. The exception to this would be using the aesthetics to make a map more readable.
I agree with your statements especially if you are going into forge with the intention of making a competitive environment. I also believe there are different types of forgers who have different goals. Personally I know my limitations (weakness) in putting a good well thought out design on paper before building a map. What i love about forge and how it keeps improving over time is the ability to take a theme and flesh it out as much as i possibly can so that people really get a sense of a new environment when they play my levels. This may not appeal to everyone but I also do my best to have decent design philosophies in mind, even if they are not front and center. Those kinds of maps are what I enjoy, and everyone will have a different point of view on the results. This is just pointing out the other side of the "argument" but it would be best honestly if we could get both, and the map being well designed obviously lends to its desired replay-ability which is great.
I'm aware this has been an issue, but why must it continue? And no less on forge hub? We all agree remakes are great, and yeah that new color palet looks pretty. But CAN WE GETTA FILTER DOE??! DX
I'm gonna add that i don't believe this is really an issue. Remakes are a different conversation because they are literally taking existing halo (or other game) maps which were intended to be somewhat balanced and making them available in this game. Also i'm not sure what there being a color pallet now has to do with it. Having maps in general be better at both design and aesthetics is desirable, i wouldn't go so far as to put down anyone who enjoys making one or the other. There is the categories on the left of the maps page that lets you only look at core maps to avoid remakes, mini-games, etc. I don't see a way to filter "good design" maps from "good aesthetics" maps without tearing the community apart.
Yh Of course, and thank you for your input. I admire that creative ability, it is surely a skill set all on it's own. --- Double Post Merged, Mar 5, 2016 --- Not not my intention, i just want New, well designed, and at the least clean maps front and center.
1) There's nothing stopping maps with a good layout from having good aesthetics as well 2) In the long run maps that play well float to the top, especially among Forgehub features 3) The very nature of aesthetics makes it easier to judge maps based on that so I don't see any way of changing this behavior
Of course, if nothing else you could always have another help in that department. I'll take your word for it, in my experince i've yet to see that be the case. I don't believe that. For me anyways if i see a pretty map i say ooh that looks nice, and is IMMEDIATELY followed by cautious optimism.
Someone can make something look great at first, which is fine in my opinion, as long as they're willing to accept feedback and go through the work of changing the layout accordingly to not only make a nice looking map, but an enjoyable one, gameplay wise, as well. I'll admit that I absolutely suck when it comes to visualizing what would play well and what wouldn't (I mean, I'm not completely incompetent). I do love making things look good though, and I'll take any feedback to try and make it the best possible playing experience. Which is one thing, I believe, everyone should be doing. Just two cents from someone who is a little lacking in the gameplay design skill set.
This is a really interesting thread. Personally I don't have an artistic bone in my body. I'm never going to be the guy who makes that really beautiful environment that just spirits you away to another world. forge is a tool I can use to try and create a really cool experience based on interactions between players as opposed to aesthetics. Now don't get me wrong here I've only completed two maps thus far and so I'm not saying I'm there yet, but that's what I'm trying to learn how to do. I find that, when I do get feedback, the bulk of it is related to gameplay and so I think the community has their head in the right place there. What I do agree completely with the OP on is that maps that are not strikingly beautiful tend to not garner as much attention off the start. So getting that feedback in the first place can be a little tricky if your map is not soul crushingly beautiful. As an aside, those beautiful maps inspire me. I wish I had that kind of mind and I hope none of the ppl who make maps like that read this thread and have any doubts about what they do.
I know for me, aesthetics is not only what I'm better at, it's also the part that inspires and motivates me. I have so much trouble with block-outs because to me if it doesn't look good, I don't feel like I care about it. I get distracted making cool visual details and then just end up with a pile of cool stuff and no layout to put it on. I can sit and look at a pen and graph paper for hours and come up with nothing because creating layouts alone doesn't inspire me. It's backwards from the way level design works and the "correct" way to forge, I know, but it's the way my brain works. I'm trying to get better at it, but it is what it is for now.
You should be proud! We are two side of same coin. And we both play to our strengths, as it should be.
Making something look good can be easier than making something play well. This is the shortcoming. Most don't want to bother with all the extra work that designing a map to play well takes. If they just make something that looks good and all their friends say it looks cool even if plays like crap, that's good enough for them.
I'm replying to this because I find my self agreeing. I'm a decent forger, and I put design over aesthetics. Why? Because once I have a design down I can then proceed to make it pretty. It's much harder vice versa pretty to functional. However, looks are the first thing people notice, so ultimately they are important too.
What I like seeing is a really good aesthetic on a poorly functioning map being later incorporated by other forgers into better functioning maps. I think aesthetic-minded forgers are a great help to functionality-minded forgers and vice-versa. That being said, I understand the original concern that some very well designed maps might get too little attention because they lack compelling aesthetics. This is the way of the world though, and I believe the greatest forgers are able to incorporate both great design and great aesthetics into their maps.
And an even bigger concern is that, 343 will have a look at the highest community rated maps and throw those into MM. This is what i have nightmares about.
This is why I have our designers at CF playtest the hell out of blockouts. If a map can't be interesting to play as a blockout then it isn't worth the time to make it pretty. Goliath is a great example. It went through tons and tons of testing. When it got to a fun point where the gameplay made people want to come back and play, that's when we decided to put a coat of paint over top and it is gorgeous now. I hear Oath has people wanting to play it more despite using a breakout palette for the blockout aesthetic. I agree it is easy to notice something that looks good. But gameplay comes first. When I see something that looks good I ask them how it plays if it is just bland. Do you have interesting decisions to make? Are the sightlines just as interesting when your pillars don't have fancy do-hickies sticking out? Does the map make you want to play it over and over again? That is what helps us decide what moves forward. It has been nice having the designers and developers be separate. I tell the designers that if you can't convince a developer to want to spend time on the map just because of the gameplay then the map isn't ready to move forward for an art pass. You have to make people want to play on it more and want to make it pretty. If you can't have someone on the same team as you want to spend their time making it pretty, how can you expect the community to spend their time on it just for fun?