If I remember when I have more time, I can expand on this slightly, but for now I'll just say that every map competition we run that isn't specifically stated to be an aesthetic competition will be judged with a heavy focus on how well the map plays competitively. In this case, we assumed that would be obvious when we stated that the winning maps would be used in a tournament. I apologize for the confusion. It certainly wasn't intentional.

I don't think it is your map that has people offended, it's these pity posts about "if you would have known"...
The only reason I posted in response to you is because I have seen you complain about this in different threads now.

Truly if you wanted to make another map for this contest you had plenty of time, no one Said you could only submit 'UNSC Jade Harbor'.

I submitted 5 maps myself. So I know it can be done. But that is all I will say about that.

Forge is about creativity and helping the community. Let's forget about this contest already and get back to that.

Take care,
Lotus

PS. The intro camera on Jade Harbor is legit and I did go into forge the first time I saw it to see what unique pieces you used. It was like stepping into Alien the movie. Never played a match on it, too tight quarters for competitive Halo.

I'll keep it simple: I like UNSC Jade Harbor, both aesthetically and "competitively."

The reason for the quotation marks there is my distaste for the maps that are currently considered competitive by the halo community. I can't tell you how many times I load up a disc map or a forge feature and I think "Really?!? This looks so boring!"

This is the humble opinion of a mediocre-at-best halo player and a yet-to-be-featured forger. Nevertheless, the vast majority of those playing and forging are in this boat with me.

I'd prefer to see more content and contests posted with a typical player in mind, not someone that views Halo as a sport.

I want a clean, no-frills basketball court, soccer field, running track, etc.,

...but give me a paintball course or a Halo map that's DIRTY. It should be a location first, an arena second.

Halo and other FPS games simulate war, which is not fought in clean little arenas. We should be forging accordingly.

Okay, whew. Rant over. I'm still appreciative of ForgeHub for hosting the contest. I'm sure there will be at least a couple maps I enjoy once the results are announced.

Peace.

Because arena shooters simulate war. SMH That is just a bad take. Arena shooters are not Cod( I am excluding the new cods), BF, CS, etc. They do not simulate war in anyway. I know halo has moved away from it's roots but it is still closer to that than something that is supposed to be based off reality.

So arena shooters should go away from what originally made them great that is the type of thinking that ruins a franchise. Wait it already did, thanks 343.

So the next halo will have the ability to hide behind cover and you will mover slower than a turtle. Because that is what the average player wants I guess. Not Halo. This is the type of thinking that ****ing poisons games and causes them to lose their fanbase. Let's make every game muddy as possible trying to please everyone and have it just end up being ****.

The example at the top is the only way the maps you are describing would ever work in a non ads shooter. I am sick of opinions like this. These types of opinions are the reason halo is basically dead and Microsoft has to throw crazy money at it to get people consider it.

I am triggered beyond repair right now.

We disagree.

Well there is nothing to disagree on because you just don't get it. That simple. You are the rot that comes to every gaming community at some point or another and unfortunately the rot became the masses in halo. You could have at least tried but the rot never tries. All they do is hope the site has strict policy about banning people so they can get those that are disgruntled by causing them to rage. They then replace them as the majority. If this were any other site I would be banned for this. The only way people get banned here though is by posting too many links to porn sites. You guys do realize like anything it is about making your customer happy. The customer here were the judges. The customer in comp. are the pros. When 343 listens to the average gamer, who are usually trash at everything they play, we get Halo 4 also known as The Worst Halo of all Time.

I'm done. Back to just posting in the Overwatch thread. I hate all of you. Just kidding, only some of you.

You make a lot of assumptions about strangers.

It's so refreshing to see somebody else triggered by ignorance.

No really... I'm actually eating popcorn rn

I make a lot of assumptions based off the only two posters who have taken this position on the subject and past experiences dealing with this sort of ****. I know this ****ing song and dance from both sides. I have had to fight for types of maps to get some love. You also have not defended your point. You have given me plenty to use as my basis of saying what I have said. Now are you going to defend your point? Do you have a defense? Are you going to continue to defer and avoid the points I made initially.

**** man we are strangers to ourselves.

Schnitzel could you keep your insults more PG-13.

See you all Monday. Someone take over for me.

Here are my feelings on judging criteria...(wall of text incoming)

Unless it's explicitly stated that a map contest is focusing entirely on aesthetics or entirely on gameplay, there's not really much point in saying which will be more important, because ultimately a map will need to be strong in both areas to have any chance of placing near the top. In this particular contest, there were beautiful maps that were cut because their gameplay wasn't up to par, and there were maps that played very well which were cut because they weren't up to par aesthetically.


I'm personally against laying out or following explicit grading criteria when it comes to judging. This is not an Olympic competition. I've always felt that when you dictate very specific criteria for judging forge contests, you do more harm than good. The maps submitted to a contest with strict criteria lack in variety and creativity, because the forgers (naturally) prioritize excelling in particular areas that will net them a higher rating.

Strict criteria are equally harmful to the judging process. I know that there has been a long supported movement to remove personal bias from judging processes, and I have to admit that while I understand this perspective, I very strongly disagree with it. I think that any judge worth their salt should be able to recognize their biases, and look past them to be able to recognize a quality map even when it doesn't play or look the way THEY would want it to play or look (and I've personally seen judges do this many times). However, what's the point of having judges if you remove their personal perspective/opinion from the judging process. Their whole purpose of being in that position is to judge the maps.


The only way to remove bias is to have an enormous amount of people actually grade each map. This isn't really a viable solution either though, because it then becomes nearly impossible to guarantee that the people voting have actually even downloaded the map, much less played on it. In a scenario like that you end up with results that are very watered down. This is essentially what happened when voting was allowed to determine which Breakout maps made it into matchmaking. There was very little separating the maps percentage wise, and I believe all but one map ended up making the cut as a result. In my opinion, the results of the voting absolutely did NOT reflect the quality of the maps.


I view freedom of expression and freedom of interpretation as being extremely valuable when it comes to forge. Forging is a combination of science and art. When you try to take the art portion of the equation (which is the expression of imagination, and requires an individual perspective) and quantify it, you're unintentionally removing a great deal of what can make a map special.

Obviously, allowing personal interpretation to play a part in a judging process means that the results will often be controversial. I'll gladly accept any backlash that results from it, because I truly believe it's the best approach.


TLDR - Strict judging guidelines are counterproductive. When you provide strict guidelines and judge submissions with as little personal interpretation as possible, you get worse results.

My apologies to the forum owners for accidentally inciting such a level of vitriol among some of your members less willing to communicate like mature adults.

If not for the positive experiences I've had with this forum up until now, I would kindly remove myself from this corner of the Halo community as suggested. However, as I've observed at least one of these individuals belittling strangers on a regular basis, I'm not surprised that he eventually got around to me. I will respectfully not link him to my overall impression of ForgeHub.

I lurk this site daily and I'm often very impressed with the posted content. My friends and I have enjoyed Halo 5 much more thanks to the efforts of this forum and its community.

I've even enjoyed the content posted by those currently lashing out at me because we differ in opinion. I suspect we agree more than we disagree, but I may never know because I don't often see a mature, constructive debate being born from such disrespect and disregard for building community.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 3, 2016 ---

Very well said, sir.

I'm hardly belittling you, I'm having fun at you're expense.

Edited by a Chunk

I wouldn't say it's a humble opinion when you are also trying to dictate how maps "should" be Forged.

Variety and variables are essential to keeping the game interesting, but "competitive" maps will all generally feel the same because that's how Halo is played at a high level.

Thanks for the reply. My apologies for not being more clear in my initial post. Perhaps I may clear this up:

My intent was to suggest and encourage more recognition of variety in maps, not to dictate how any one forger should do his or her work.

I find the clean-cut maps are certainly enjoyable for what they are, and I am confident that they will always be there.

If my opinion that they are oversaturated is unpopular, I hold nothing against anyone who may disagree with me.

I enjoy playing on maps that present unique challenges and provide experiences that may not be found in matchmaking. Therefore, I appreciate when maps like UNSC Jade Harbor are posted, and dislike them being belittled just because they don't fit a mold.

Again, I'm all for variables and a variety of creative ideas. That particular map just failed to meet the criteria we were looking for.

It wasn't tournament worthy or matchmaking worthy because 1. it had major framerate issues and 2. it had exploitable geometry (small dance floor, rooms to hide in). It was a stunning map visually, and I wouldn't insinuate that the map wouldn't be fun to play. It just wouldn't have been a strong competitor as far as how Halo is actually played, wherein players tend to stress the map as much as possible to achieve victory.

Some designs don't work when money is on the line and they don't work when people are trying to rank up or otherwise win the match. You'll have people camp in the rooms or crouch behind chokepoints that are difficult to contest, and it just wont play a very consistent match in a serious setting. But there's no law against maps with unique challenges or creative ideas. Some of them just don't have strong synergy and it holds the concept back.

I find this perfectly reasonable. My post wasn't trying to argue that it should have done better in the contest or that the contest requirements weren't clear enough. I simply didn't like seeing it get so much undeserved flack.

For the record. Whether something is oversaturated or popular has no bearing on its quality as a map. It doesn't matter how many midship clones we get because midship is one of the greatest Halo maps of all time and that formula will always hold true to that. Emulating a battlefield, as you put it, means **** bumpkiss to myself or any other level designer.

Maps are here to perform a role, which is to give varied experiences within a set sandbox (the game mechanics). That's accomplished geometrically, not through art. If you think the map you choose should be over commended because of its setting, you're wrong. At least in relation to actual gameplay. You're free to enjoy the art side of making maps but at that point you might as well go paint something with water colours.

Ok, fundamentals first, then interior design. You can start with one or the other, but a finished map needs to be both. Clear? Jeeez peeps!

Ah, now this has potential to be a constructive debate. Thank you.

Midship and its clones are a good example. Regret is my favorite one because of the aesthetic direction and therefore the increased immersion into the experience.

I know many people may disagree with the following, and that is fine. It's been my opinion ever since we were given forge back in the day:

No matter how well a map plays, if the aesthetics are weak and it takes too much effort for me to suspend my disbelief, I'm not likely to keep it bookmarked.

A forged map should not look or feel like a forged map. Especially given the tools we have now. With each update we have less excuses.

Maybe not everyone thinks about Regret being a "crashed-landed and deteriorated" Midship map every time it loads up, but I do, and that immersion is why I find it superior.