I liked the old setup a lot. Wish we could have a combination of both. A reference, for those of you who weren't around before the Maps section was implemented - https://web.archive.org/web/20111010195802/http://www.forgehub.com/forum/reach-competitive-maps/
You hit the nail on the head there. The "Maps" section of the site feels so disconnected from the forums, it feels like it's not even part of the site to me. While that's probably because my bookmark for this site goes to the forums, the disconnect is definitely there.
Here's an Ascension-inspired map that's been in a state of limbo (along with five other maps) up until recently, mostly thanks to Anvil's Legacy adding in material options to a wider piece selection. Currently the weapon set includes a Sniper Rifle (spawns in an indent in the neutral lift) and a Hydra (weapon pad on the walkway near Red and Blue bases), as well as a Wasp that serves a similar role to Ascension's Banshee (does not spawn in CTF, Infection, or Ball-Based Modes), with the additional bonus of being able to go under the map for brief periods of time as a form of cover (the main reason why it doesn't appear in those modes. Spoiler: The Crag (WIP)
Saying you could find a good map back then based on the name of the thread along with its comments and views just isn't accurate. The maps that became popular back then weren't necessarily the best maps, they were simply the maps that the members of the forum wanted you to see. Its possible that quality maps were missed entirely by casual players because they had to click through each thread to see a picture or read the description. Its also worth noting that many map threads during the Halo 3 era had posts with only a handful of words, usually ending with a rating out of 5 from people who likely never played on the map. The new system actually gives every map the same treatment. A casual player that simply wants to download maps is more likely to click on it and read about it if the thumbnail picture appeals to them. This completely varies from person to person, which means that the map they choose to download does not have to be a map that the more intense forgers approve of. That is how the old system worked and it is part of the reason why this place had a bad reputation. People would push their friends maps and other members didn't even get a chance. To put it simply, the map section should be a place for people to find and judge maps based on their own opinions, not based on what someone else thinks. That is why any form of rating system is flawed to begin with. I would rather have every guest flipping through the first 25 pages of thumbnails in the map section than using the same number of clicks to view the top 5 most popular threads in a forum. The latter simply isn't fair to all of the maps and your map is even less likely to get views once it leaves the first page of the former forum system. EDIT: Hopefully I have explained why you need to be able to sift. Without it you would have a curated selection of maps based on other people's opinions. In order to be completely fair we cannot allow people to use threads to bump up maps that they like.
while I dislike the "new" maps section, I absolutely hated the old ways of doing things, so I'm kinda indifferent.
Some prefab stuff for around the house. Just a window, a bird feeding house, a gazebo, a garden shed and a front porch. (Bottle of Jack not included)
Another thing that I felt worked with the thread system was the fact that when a map thread was being actively participated in, it attested to not only the interest, but the dedication the poster had to improving the map. It turned their map into a discussion rather than an be-all-end-all. I'd consider myself to be an "other member" and I felt I had a great chance. I feel like people put Forgehub on a higher pedestal than I think we all know it to be. To me, Forgehub is a community of forgers. You post to get recognition. You participate in topics/threads and become familiar with the members. You give and you receive. With the current map system, sure you can skim and browse maps really fast and find something you want to look at, but as soon as the maps posted it starts dying, in a similar fashion to what you described of the forum system. However, the negative side I see to the recent map section is there's no way to continue pushing it unless you submit an update. You'll have the odd commenter, but that doesn't bring it back to light. It just keeps getting buried by newer and newer maps. Depending on the day, your map could easily get pushed off front page and lost in the thousands of other maps. That give and receive factor completely disappears. In a forum setting, at least a map that had been posted a week prior still had a chance to come back to the front if someone had something to say about it (kudos, feedback, etc.). And just to throw another benefit in there, presentation became all that more important since you had a lot more to present instead of insta-pictures in a slide and "A sick map I made." As the description. I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'M MAKING ANY SENSE. Haha. I'm a terrible writer and I find it difficult to convey what I'm trying to without coming off as a complete douche. I respect your opinion @RPAL and I respect you as a forger to 'cause you have some fantastic maps. I just feel different about the situation.
You're making perfect sense Yekkou. Fortunately, the solution to all this is simple. We can remove the rating system and leave things exactly as they were, which I believe will stimulate more discussion in map threads by a small margin. Or we can remove comments from map posts and place them in a separate forum. Therefore, when a map post is created, two threads are being made: the one in the map page, and then one in a forum with a redirect link to the map page. The forum would then allow ongoing discussion of maps as normal while the map page represents a title card where people can glance at the latest community content. As far as what is healthy for the site overall, fostering discussion is more important than providing visitors with a way to window shop. Nevertheless, this is a way to cater to both without reverting to the previous system, which I still find superior for the fact that threads could be more of an ongoing thing and not a "one and done" deal. Here's the most obvious flaw with the current system: I have two threads for my map Spellbound. If I want to discuss changes I'm making to a map, where do I post them? If i post in the map thread, literally nobody is going to see it because the map is buried. If I post in the WIP thread, it confuses people as the thread features outdated information and implies that the map has not already been posted on the map page, where people should be to begin with. So where then ends up being the best place to post? ****ing WAYWO
Haha. I swear to god it's a complete coincidence that it was on the front page of that link. I just went in planning to pull something from 2011, and that happened to be the day I clicked on. As far as I'm concerned, that was the first real map I made in forge. I had one before that that I submitted to a 2-Base MLG contest, but the only thing I accomplished with that map was learning how to use forge (how to adjust angles, and other basic ****). I rebuilt Avalon like 15 different times from the ground up. That final version was so much different than my first version. I learned more making that map than I have on any other project. It's not very good by my current standards, but it'll always be a special map to me. /nostalgia
I'm sorry but I completely disagree with the notion that the old system was better. Sure, to the Forgehub regular it seemed like a great system, but it gave little exposure to the new member posting for their first time. The regulars were always anxious to chat up each others map leaving their threads at the top of the list while new map posts might quickly disappeared into the pile. Negative feedback rants on a map could also keep it alive at the top of the page. The new system is much better all around, albeit still with it's own flaws. It's great at focusing on the map that is being presented, and it presents it well. It has a forum system for those that want to chat about it. It doesn't bring the map to the top of the page 6 months later, after convincing a buddy to bump your thread. Though you can technically bump the thread by updating it, it's easier to shame someone on that if they habitually abuse it for thread bumping. Overall I like that feature. Following threads is how people keep threads alive. If you like a map and want to continue discussion on it, you follow it. When a new post arrives anyone who cared to follow it gets notified. This way your boring points on your fellow forgers map don't take the light from some other forger showcasing their new map. I do feel that following maps and following in general is flawed. I would much prefer a system where I pop onto my own dedicated map following page. The page would simply list all followed maps and highlight any threads that have replied to. I don't need 18 notification on who liked what, just a simple highlight that shows that there has been activity. Thus keeping my following list clean and easy to use. I feel that in general a map should not be posted to the map post page until it is essentially complete. This means that the thread conversation should primarily be used for talking about the map as it stands. If the OC decides for one reason or another that they want to have a deeper discussion about making changes, then why wouldn't they want to open a separate thread. It's easy enough to post a link at the bottom of your map post stating that your considering changes, as well as it's easy to post a note on the change discussion thread that points back to your map post. As far as I'm concerned they are two different topics. As proof of my initial point, how many legit posts in this thread get proper viewing as us regulars just keep spouting about whatever **** comes to mind?
Wait there's a rating system? I thought that was the usually-unfair-blue-star-and-number-giver-that-occasionally-has-a-huge-wall-of-text-below-it-that-usually-belongs-to-Goat-that-I-just-scroll-over-thingy. Huh...
I always just check 'New Posts'. While comments on a Map don't bump it to the top of the list there, they do show up as new posts if you use that link. I've found it to be the best way to follow map discussions.
That is another way to view posts, but it kind of a catch all. That's why I feel a better following system would make a big difference. I would comment on a making a better map popularity system, but then I look to services like Youtube that fight to find improvements, and I think to myself, "goodluck with that".
It's so hard to find a happy medium. No one will ever be happy! EDIT: Also to make this comment relevant, @PhoenixVax, your pic reminds me of some sort of Cathedral. It's dope.