You're taking these contest results far too seriously. Does any forge map deserve to win anything? This is a forum. The contests are design to promote activity on the forum, not to crown a handful of maps as the greatest thing ever. The only reason there are even prizes is because most people won't participate without them. It's a means to an end, with the end goal being a more active site. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't agree with how the maps were selected for matchmaking, but that has nothing to do with this contest, regardless of anyone's perception to the contrary.
There's a reason I left forging for the most part during Halo 4 and MCC. They both played like ass and the forge pieces looked like ass. Plus college and ****.
I mentioned Salty because I was asking him. I value Salty's opinion. I already said what I had to say about it. I trust Tyrant. He's never given me a reason not to. It's a castle map with Damnation-esque geometry. That alone is enough for me to believe him. You put "help" in quotes as if you didn't need the help: but you did. Tyrant gave you the best map you have forged.
Yup, pretty much. I couldn't stand what forge had become in Halo 4 and mcc. They really did step up their game with Halo 5 forge, although I am worried 343 uses it to much as a crutch. I hope they find an even balance in Halo 6, or whatever the next halo game that features forge is. As for how serious people take forge, I think because we are currently in a content dry spell, people are looking to find something to talk about whether its both possitive and negative. Some people just need to remind themselves its just a game and we do this stuff for fun.. Sure, there are some inconsistencies with how people judge or rate other peoples maps, but its all based on someones unique experience while playing, not some super deep analysis. One thing I see get ignored constently is how conflicting one persons play style is to anothers. That factor alone can lead to a wide variety of opinions, which I think is what is happening in this thread right now.
But it does though, otherwise nobody would care and this wouldn't have mattered a year later. The controversy surrounding the contest negatively impacted community content being pushed for matchmaking. Regardless of whether it was direct or indirect, it was the magic bullet. If you think the Forgehub contests should be "just for fun" and judged all haphazardly (no pun intended), then that's whatever. I disagree with such a lackadaisical approach to running a contest because it's unprofessional, and obviously inefficient the minute it is asked to be anything beyond that. But this mismanagement has extended beyond the contests to dealings related to matchmaking, and that affects all of us. It's a great thing this site doesn't have rules so we can speak our mind, but the fact that it doesn't have any standards either just points to a lack of effort altogether.
May as well put up a poll, if you want contests to be judged on consistent merits where everyone uses the same scale or judged on someone's whims, where one judge can value originality above gameplay and another can judge purely based on whether they enjoyed the map or not. If people like the way things are run now then that's cool. Pretty soon the money pool isn't going to be enough to stir people who lack faith in the panel. --- Double Post Merged, Mar 25, 2017 --- Forge took a great big leap and the editor is in a really solid place right now, but 343 appears to be silent and activity is down because ****'s not going anywhere. There's nothing left to do but shitpost.
Well there was money involved and apparently egos go along with the winners if I were to read xzamples posts at face value. Not to mention the 3 month heads up to make maps so there's a lot of time involved. So yeah, I think it's a bigger deal than you make it out to be. "Does anything deserve to win?" Uh. The BEST maps deserve to win and the best maps did not win. I don't understand how you can't see why judging maps strictly off of nothing but extremely low level gameplay and nothing else, is a problem. It's like you didn't even try to look at the design for potential issues that obviously surfaced.
We shall see for sure when it's all over, but the way the Extermination contest is being run seems to be on the right track of how to run a contest while being pretty open with the judging process.
You're right. What I expressed was my perspective. I don't speak for the site, and I should recognize that people are bound to place some importance on it. I've just never placed any importance on contests or matchmaking or any of that stuff, and it's hard for me to understand why other people place importance on anything except satisfying themselves. It's pretty stupid of me to expect everyone to see things the same way I do. I didn't take the process lightly. I approached it with the same diligence I approach forging, which I also don't consider important, but still approach in a serious manner.
Yeah, they're just now getting to the actual stage where they determine how well they play and such, but I don't have any reason to be believe yet that it won't be as transparent as it has been so far.
Of course I recognize that it's a problem. I just think it's less problematic than what you've been suggesting, which is that the maps should have been judged based upon how we thought they would play at a high level. I wouldn't even necessarily be opposed to having contests judged like that if it was announced ahead of time, but it's a heavily flawed approach also.
I think the maps should be based off how they fundamentally play. And if judges can't see potential issues like that, then they shouldn't be judging. Because some of the maps chosen play like ass, which is kind of ridiculous considering the prize pool and time put into other maps. I just consider that poor judging honestly.
I didn't imply that you bullshitted it or didn't judge properly, but I think some contests need a less subjective judging system.
First of all, are you telling me that Purely expressly told you that Storm Peaks was "basically his map" after or before I called him out? If before, then it's pretty obvious that you're just dragging this on for no good reason. You either trust his word or you don't, so what do you say about this? Exhibit A: Here's him giving me the the full rights to the Idea. Notice how we were talking about a cathedral? Yeah, Not only was the original idea only about half fleshed out before I took the map, but what was there, was nothing like storm peaks. Exhibit B and C: Here's Purely apologizing after I called him out for wrongly taking credit for my work. So, still trust his word? PS: The fact that you think Storm Peaks is a damnation-styled map just shows me how incompetent you are.