What Are You Working On?

Because that totally worked for Grifball.

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 15, 2017 ---

Sudden changing timelines that force judges to make bad choices

 

This is the only 1v1 map that matters. Fight me.

 

Fun factor involves all other aspects, including balance, creativity, and how fun the map is to move around in. It's a meter for the overall experience.

And of course it's ****ing subjective. If map design is inherently subjective (your own words, xzamples) then any judgement whatsoever must be a subjective one.

Yes, creativity is based on the other 1v1 maps I've seen, which is all of them in Halo 5.

Holy **** that was a stupid post.

 

Seriously how the **** do you judge a Grifball map past aesthetics? How many people judged in that?

 

Name a Forger who enjoys Halo 5 and isn't a casual, because most of the people who are good at the game don't.

 

I agree with the subjective opinion. This is why more judges is a good thing more opinions, more bias, more styles. Leads to better winners

 

Because they break the game. Sprint lets you run away from fights, which forces you to design punishing maps if you want any sort of skill or competitive element to your map; Thrust lets you immediately get cover or fly across the map to influence spawns before your spawning weapon can kill, so you're forced to make pourous maps full of sightlines or cluttered maps full of obstructions; clamber lets you go wherever the **** you want; and ground pround ruins every vertical engagement by giving you a win button when you're already in an advatangeous position. And don't get me started on what Spartan Charge does to CQB. I've played maps in this game that would have been fine in any other Halo, but they're absolutely horrendous to play because of Spartan Charge alone.

The game is bad, and people who fail to understand why are far less qualified to judge a good map. And don't worry, there are far more competent Halo players than me who feel that way.

 

You don't need to like something to understand it. I like design, I dislike Halo 5. I understand both and how they interact.

 

Yet, you argued for objectivity when I initially said that. So, which is it?

So, creativity is, from your perspective, defined by what hasn't been done in forge? Good to know.

 

It's not a trap, it's just the truth. I haven't seen an articulate defense of Halo 5's Spartan Abilities on any forum since the game released. Most people just say the old games were slow and Halo 5 is "faster", but that demonstrates a lack of understanding for the gameplay or the level design.

The only reason I'm vocal about it is because a year of playing Destiny competitively showed me that problems with a game's design could be hand waved away so long as someone found it "fun", and there weren't any heatmaps to prove it was a problem. Nobody wants to use their brains anymore.

 

Yes. Creativity is literally defined by something that hasn't been done before.

Also, I never argued that map design is completely objective. There are demonstrably objective elements, but that's not the same claim and you know it.

Your deflections are incredibly transparent.

 

Slowly raises hand

 

rank/stat check, do it you wont

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 15, 2017 ---

You can start by not having colorblind judges.

 

Aww he referenced me :3


Halo 5 is an utter corruption of what the series is defined by, from the art styling to the music to the game-play. The only "objective" (don't even bring up an argument of simplicity forcing ingenuity....don't you dare.....f**k you don't do it) improvement Halo 5 brings to the table is Forge...and maybe the dedicated servers IF you aren't paired with players outside your general locale. I personally, subjectively, kind of like the design of the plasma pistol and maybe the idea of weapon skins.

 

Seriously though, will no scholar share their opinion about what makes a good 1v1 map?

 

I could've elaborated a few years ago during Halo Reach, since 1v1 was my forte then. Biggest lesson I learned was that you always need to give incentive to the player to keep moving. Part of the reason many good 1v1s in Halo 3 and Reach had weapons and powerups on such short timers (usually 90 secs or less) were to play into keeping the player moving. The most unique aspect of a 1v1 matchup is that every kill is an extermination. In any higher player counts, there will more often than not be encounters that leave part of both teams alive. This is important to consider because it is much harder to set up in the most optimal position on the map when any number of the enemy team is still alive.

When I was primarily designing for 1v1s, every powerful area of the map would go under scrutiny to make sure that there were at least two viable counters to that position. Naturally, when a kill is made in a 1v1, the killer will seek to make sure he is in as advantageous of a position as possible for the next encounter. Generally, this would be a spot of high elevation and/or good sightlines over much of the map. These power positions are not inherently bad; your map is going to have positions that are more powerful than others no matter what you do. If there are no reliable counters to the best position(s) on the map, you've got yourself a bad map. If there's only one reliable counter to the best position(s) on the map, you've still got yourself a bad map, as it will be very predictable how the respawning player will approach the next encounter. So that's where I got my general rule of thumb for 1v1s.