The only time lighting does it's own thing is when you use natural lighting, when you chroma box you essentially have complete control which is why I asked if there's any chroma'd map out there with better lighting than Oblivion.
Sad. I always strive for interesting lighting in my maps, but I guess I am just another "no-effort" forget haha
1: That wasn't hypothetical I was actually asking to see other maps with good lighting 2: I just looked at your maps and they're not chroma boxed. I asked for chroma lighting because it's the only way you can actually control it in this game
Dreamstalker (mine) and Avalon (me and Chunk co forge) are chroma boxed. I mean none of my maps are what I seen perfect but saying most forgers put no effort into lighting is a stretch imo.
@MultiLockOn I'm not interested in whether you value my opinion or not. It is an opinion shared by a decent portion of people for a reason you're too proud to accept. It can be the prettiest lighting in the world, but it has a negative impact on gameplay, so it is a problem. I stand behind the maps we selected for the contest. Sorry you're upset Legion wasn't selected.
I didn't build Legion for the contest I built it for me. If I wanted to appeal to your preference I would've built a generic ass blocky solo map like every single map you chose. The fact that to this day you still won't admit Malta was atrocious should tell everyone everything they need to know.
He did submit Bloodsport, which I personally considered to be a functionally symmetrical map. I've said this about 20 times by this point, but I'm still waiting for someone to point out the great symmetrical maps that were submitted, but overlooked in favor of sub-par asyms. I guess I'll also re-iterate that people take the results of these contests too seriously sometimes. The winners are a result of personal opinions. Those opinions are often based upon playtests with a very small group of people. And often times the people playing are not high level players, so there can only be speculation about how maps will play at a super competitive level. It's almost pretty much inevitable that each judge will use different criteria, or prioritize different things, which often results in greatly differing opinions on any given map. The playtesting itself is also a challenge. In contests where there are a lot of submissions, it's logistically unrealistic to test each map to the extent that people would like. Some of the finalists in that contest I think I probably played around a dozen times. It was enough to get a general idea of how each map would play, but not enough to have all of the flaws be obvious. TLDR - Contests are imperfect. Their primary purpose is to keep the community active and involved. The results are based upon personal opinion, and should not be interpreted as a declaration of unquestioned superiority. Anyone who takes them seriously should lighten up.
Oh I don't care for symmetrical maps I was making a joke. I would agree that it wouldn't be a big deal if thousands and thousands of players in matchmaking weren't forced to play some of the god awful maps that were chosen because they got shoved in doubles playlist.
If i ran a contest, all the judging would be 100% transparent, only people with expertise in at least one of the fields would be brought on to judge, each map with Top 20 potential would be played at least thrice, and only the best content will be chosen based on clearly defined and strictly followed objective criteria. That criteria will not be selected lightly, and I wouldn't allow people to pick and choose what part of it mattered most to them to keep the judging consistent and unbiased. E.G. If the map isn't original, then it loses X amount of points. Results wont be about superiority - because that's subjective - but on execution, which can be more impartially quantified. Nobody would care if ForgeHub contests didn't often correlate with 343's matchmaking updates. But because they do, the contests should not be judged based on "personal opinion"; the results are representing the Forge community to the greater community. I can separate my personal opinion from a list of criteria, which I'd go through based on my experience and understanding, and not on my preferences.
But as a judge for that contest, I was judging maps for the contest, not for matchmaking. I don't believe I ever even tested them with matchmaking settings. The fact that all of the matchmaking maps were submitted to the contest, and that I helped judge those maps is beside the point (to me, at least). People can interpret it as if the maps were being judged for entry into matchmaking, but that wasn't the reality of the situation from my perspective. It was something that happened alongside the judging, but the results were (for me) entirely based upon how the maps played with the settings we tested them with. During the vast majority of the judging process, I had no idea that the maps would end up in matchmaking. You can be pissed about the choice of maps that were put into matchmaking, but if you're laying the blame for that collectively on the shoulders of the judges of the Throwdown contest, it's just misplaced blame. I get a bit irritated with it, to be honest. --- Double Post Merged, Mar 22, 2017 --- I can appreciate that approach. It's not something I'd be interested in myself though, either as a judge or a submitter. I love the fact that personal perspective is an aspect of contests. It's part of what makes them interesting to me. This is one of the biggest reasons I hated the idea of the GITS contest. When it becomes a situation where people are simply trying to check off boxes, the maps AND the results suddenly become much less interesting. LIke seriously...disqualifying maps because they don't have a tree in the middle...lol. That's just stupid. I realize that's an extreme example, but the type of system you're proposing would have a similar impact on how people would design their submissions.
That's fair and I can understand that. But I honestly clearly remember very early in the contest the information that the maps were being used for mm as well. I believe that you weren't judging for that however, maybe there was miscommunication I don't know
I personally found out that the top 10ish maps would be going into matchmaking once we were down to about 12 or so (I don't recall exactly, but it was somewhere around there) maps remaining in the judging process. I honestly don't know who knew prior to that. It's certainly possible that other people knew about the matchmaking thing before that point. So, I was judging for it in a roundabout way, but not directly. As I said in my previous post I was judging the maps for the contest, not for matchmaking. The fact that they would be going into matchmaking was beside the point as far as I was concerned, and didn't impact my rankings in any way. I signed on to judge maps for the contest, not to choose maps for matchmaking, so that's what I did.
I think Multi should judge a contest and the prizes could be divided up from one of his big Treyarch checks Given, Xandrith and Goat couldn't enter but could help judge.
Well, if you built a generic ass blocky map with bad spawns, an awkward teleporter, poor lighting, and a floating rock that basically halts flow, I probably wouldn't choose it.