This is how subjectivity and objectivity works. Map A and Map B are being tested for a matchmaking playlist. Map A is very vertical and punishing and Map B is more sprawled out and free flowing. This is not a difference between good or bad, but of playstyles. Playstyles are subjective. However, in this example, the playlist requires maps that are accessible to new players and easy to learn. Map A is more difficult for new players to learn than Map B; therefore, Map B is better for the playlist than Map A. However, what if Map B plays worse than Map A? Let's say Map B has problems with its spawns, problems with finding players, problems with sightlines that are too big for you to control, and problems with readability due to poor lighting conditions? Now Map B is no longer better than Map A regardless of the target audience. It is simply a bad map. Map A then gets pushed for the playlist instead. The people who have a hard time playing on the map due to its learning curve will say it's bad, but if it has no actual problems with its design, is it actually bad? No, it just has a different target audience. Judges need to be able to recognize these scenarios.
Damn, that is the darkest perspective of forge contests I've ever seen. The contests' purpose are to bring high quality maps to the community, and to advertise the website. If you don't win, it doesn't mean 'you suck', it just means someone else made a map that better fits what the judges see as a more deserving submission. It doesn't have to be seen in the extremes of best/worst, or even good/bad. Quality is a gradient. However, being unable to look at your map as flawed will hamper your ability to improve, regardless of if you participate in this contest. Your friends patting you on the back and telling you how great your map is might be supportive, but not necessarily helpful. Exposing yourself to the less biased opinions of others may be exactly what you need to learn and improve.
When you want to read some map updates and "things people are working on"... "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling" "Just keep scrolling"
I assume I have zero chance of winning this one but I am still hyped for the contest and will definitely be entering at least one map, if not more. Hopefully I'll learn something along the way and it'll make me a better forger.
Forge contests are about pleasing the judges so yes. Whatever floats your little lopsided boat. The finalist of a contest should all be solid maps, they shouldn't be judged on polish but on quality. This can only happen if you eliminate as many problem as possible, allowing every map to be judge on an equal level. This allows the winners to truly be the best designs and not the map that got played by the most people.
"Forge contests are about pleasing the judges so yes. Whatever floats your little lopsided boat." No they are not. Forge Contests are about stimulating community activity to collectively create maps for a playercount or niche that is underrepresented, or needed for a playlist or tournament. If you go into a contest with the intention of pleasing the judges, then you've already lost. "The finalist of a contest should all be solid maps, they shouldn't be judged on polish but on quality. " Polish and quality are the same thing. The contests last 6 weeks and that is plenty of time to design a good map and polish it for submission. You shouldn't expect to win if you submit a map with poor lighting, boundary exploits, gameplay or weapon problems, and obvious framerate issues just because you have a "quality design". Presentation is part of releasing your map. "This can only happen if you eliminate as many problem as possible, allowing every map to be judge on an equal level." And you expect 4 judges - self appointed community members by the way - to stress test every single Forge map submitted and weed out every single issue with them so that they're all being judged by their maximum potential... The judges are judging what you submitted, not what your submission could be. That is why there is a cutoff date where you are no longer allowed to make changes to the design. Everyone has the same amount of time to design, test, and polish their maps. It is not the judges' responsibility to tell you that a Railgun on a 1v1 map is a bad idea. You should know that the minute you go through the menu and put it on the map, or at least after the first 2 minutes of testing it. "This allows the winners to truly be the best designs and not the map that got played by the most people." It doesn't matter how many times your map got played. It matters how good your design is and how well you present it. This is the Forge mentality that makes absolutely no sense to me. You want all of your problems to be solved by other people during the testing phase of your map instead of designing and solving those issues proactively. You're already setting yourself up for failure at that point.
Every point you highlighted is true and every opinion you made of them is misunderstood. I'm not gonna repeat **** for the sake of arguement, apparently that's what happens here more then it needs to.
Dude what is your deal? Barely a week ago you were going on about how hard you feel it is to design a 1v1 map, and now you're saying you want to appease the judges and have them polish your map for you. If that is a misunderstanding, then it would behoove you to clarify. But as of now, you're coming across as incredibly self defeating and obnoxiously obtrusive as though everyone else feels this way.
There are also a couple testing lobbies run every week that you can submit a map to: Thursday 13 Testing Lobby Forged Friday