My thoughts on some of the frustrations mapmakers experience with review cycles (as an ex-mapcrew and ex-mapmaker) |
Reshman « Consul » 1654689720000
| 1000 | ||
This was initially going to be just a reply on the Official Mapcrew server discord but since it's so lengthy it didn't feel appropriate to post there, and I felt it was better to post here since it's an interesting topic, does have discussion value and I would like to hear what other people think. These are my own personal thoughts and opinions and observations and do not reflect the opinions of the rest of mapcrews (current nor prior), and I honestly would be surprised if some didn't disagree but I figured it's worth communicating to try and address and inform mapmakers so that they'll hopefully be less frustrated having understood one view from an ex-mapcrew member and ex-mapmaker. I may later add in some of the other comments posted on the discord to give a better context for people that haven't seen the original comments about this topic from the discord server and format it better to be more readable. Link to message for those that want to see the discord messages about this topic (though I believe you have to first join to be able to go to this link idk): https://discord.com/channels/751846502795575367/751847504491970600/983487211934732318 Anonymous a dit : I don't know which specific review(s) you have in mind when you say this, whether there was quite literally a review that requested an edit to remove a flower since that does sound a bit extreme but at the same time not totally unreasonable, for example if its requested because its a quick little change that they'd like to see before chucking it into discussion (generally mapcrew tend to stay away from getting this nitpicky about appearance but if it clashes quite badly e.g random flower on a map that's suppose to look like a 2010 map, then I think its a fair request). Either way, it sounds like something that I've sometimes observed myself too in the past, its definitely not something thats new and not something thats done purposefully to waste anyone's time. One part has been briefly mentioned by Zetdey already, even reviewing 20 maps takes atleast 2 hours and thats when comments are just one-liners so in the past whenever I've done reviews if there was a single major flaw to a map that will get it rejected in discussion/requested edits then I felt theres no reason to continue adding on a whole list of further flaws about the map and would just mention that one flaw and move on. This obviously doesnt mean that if the flaw gets addressed and fixed that its ready for discussion, it just means it has one fewer flaw out of who knows how many, so the next time it appears in a review, naturally ill just point out the next major flaw the map has etc and this can potentially go on for a while. Also, other than it being very impractical in terms of mapcrew time to sit there and list every flaw about every map during a review, its quite impractical doing so because often times peoples idea of fixing a map is creating new flaws to a map. I've done this myself back when I used to make maps for discussion and theres one time that really stuck with me. Back in like 2013 I had a map get into P4 discussion, it was a map where the left side had a mice spawn on a dynamic ground that slowly falls and if shaman b-nail or stops it falling it off the map it will block hole. I was VMC at the time so I had the luxury of seeing every single thing mentioned by the members of the time and a majority of them mentioned how they liked the concept but felt the right-side/rest of the map was fairly bland/generic and should be improved and how the map has potential. Seeing this I went and tried to address the issue and came out with what has to be the worst edits I've ever done on a map. I added a bunch of death tokens so that its no longer "bland/generic" and naturally the map didn't make it back into discussion. I don't remember what the reviewer said at the time, but looking back I know I made the map cramped for the shaman to build through the death tokens, unfun/frustrating to make a stable build through the tokens especially if they don't have access to b-nails, a buildathon etc etc. Over the years I've seen myself and other mapcrews try to address this by mentioning whether a map has potential or not to prevent people bringing back the same map with edits and "wasting mapmakers time". But the problem with that is, what exactly does it mean when a map has potential? From my personal experience only a small number of maps typically made by inexperienced mapmakers can be dismissed off as not having potential to be a perm, and also only a small number of maps that could do with very minor changes but I really enjoyed can I confidentially say I believe has potential. Everything else technically has potential with the right changes, and what are those right changes? no one knows till they've been made and played on. In some cases over the years I've had people literally ask, if they change x, y, and z which is basically half the map, does it have potential? Though I've always responded professionally by insisting I cannot know how a map will be if major changes like that are made, sometimes its so tempting to just say, if they remove everything from the map, it has potential (since every perm starts off as a blank map). So in the long run, I learnt to only mention to people whether a map has potential in the small minority of cases where I want to communicate that they've made a good map but it needs very slight modifications. Also there's the chance of getting everyones hopes up when you tell them a map has potential and after a couple of edits it becomes clear the map is not suitable for rotation and then you're in a position where you now have to tell them it no longer has potential (this is assuming they understand and properly try and address the issues, there's also instances where mapmakers and mapcrew have different changes in mind when trying to communicate and it goes wrong). On the whole, best advice/solution I can give about this for mapmakers is to not focus so much on meeting the demands of mapcrew when they see reviews with comments mentioning flaws and edit suggestions and instead first decide if you agree with what's been said and also if you want to change the map. If you don't agree then don't change it and accept that you believe the map is better in its current state and if mapcrew don't like it in its current state when you believe it is better than then the map no longer has "potential" since supposedly it in its best state isn't good enough and this way your not wasting your own time. And if you're happy with making the changes and do believe they're right about the edits improving the map, then realize that they've just helped you improve your map, and I think that should matter more than whether or not it eventually gets permed or not. Unfortunately it seems that among the mapmakers community, most only take pride over their maps if it becomes a perm even if it means they have to make edits that they don't agree with, and not whether the map is the best version of itself or fun for the creator + friends or the way they envisioned it to be. |
Wiannix « Citoyen » 1654706520000
| 2 | ||
Great topic Resh :D The way that is showing his point of view and experience not only as a former member of mapcrew but also as a cartographer and I sincerely agree with some points and disagree with others, but that doesn't mean I'm going to criticize harshly because of something I don't agree with, at least on the contrary, I've wanted to see a topic like this for a long time, but I didn't think it would get to this point, some in my opinion would think that I'm taking advantage of this to get permanent maps. However, I liked the way you put yourself in this very uncomfortable situation for both sides having to write something like this. |
Unknown « Censeur » 1654711080000
| 10 | ||
Reshman a dit : Hi Resh! Well, let's go.. First I would like to thank you for kindly trying to come here and calm the situation and make everything clearer for both. I honestly didn't expect anyone to leave the team (and of course nothing prevents them from simply being a secret mc now but it doesn't matter), so much so that I never asked for it, I just wish there was an answer to so many ridiculous allegations that were given in the last few reviews, want an example about this? see the latest reviews of P9 for example, or if you prefer you can search in other categories, see how long there is no map that you want under discussion, and what would be the reason for that? Could it be that after so many evaluations, so many maps sent, none had the least possible potential to win discussion? none? Could it be that if people took these maps from these reviews that didn't have any results and went to look in utility, wouldn't they see potential for at least discussion about any of them? this is quite curious... The reason for this? I don't think I know exactly. It could be a lack of commitment to the role, I know this may sound rude but you can't deny that there's a chance it could be because of this reason, it could be a lack of good tips on how to improve the maps (like the ones you gave in your Mapcrew time, when I obtained many of my highperms maps and I always thanked you a lot for that, because it was thanks to his good tips and the vision of a good mapper you are that made my maps improve to the point of becoming perms) . I know that "perms" is not synonymous with a good map for some but for most the real reason they make maps is to see their maps running inside the game, something simple, but that's what motivates most. Let's comment on this: "because if you put even one flower in a pixel that he doesn't like the map is not ok" I used this as a form of irony for some requests made by some Mapcrews, isn't that exactly what was said ok? Just to clarify in case anyone has trouble understanding. I also know that Mapcrew will not give the best tip of all just in the evaluation that it is doing that it has more than 20 maps together. But believe me, it was not the first time I had asked about such a map, it was far from it and apart from the matter of me having reminded him the next day to review the map again according to what he had told me he would post in the review, so i asked him to just look at the edits and test the map again and he had said he would do it but actually completely ignored it. And you know what happens after that, you spend hours having to run after some Mapcrew that pays you attention, who review such a category for you to try to show the map again and then you end up with the opinion of someone else who might prefer the map as it was before and everything becomes a mess and you lose the map because of a mistake that was not your fault. Or of course, if you prefer, just wait 2, 3 months for the next review... And also no, it was not the first time I contacted this same Mapcrew about a map that had a lot of potential and even though I had several modifications that he had asked for, he finally ordered me to give up on the map. I'm sorry if you think I'm wrong to act rude as it's not the first time something frustrating like this has happened, and I repeat, it wasn't just me, many ingame players report the same situation but for some reason when the time comes of public speaking they are afraid, well, I'm not afraid nor do I think anyone should because certainly in that case I would say that you would be right. It's my personal opinion. I'm not a newbie to the game, Resh. I was just gone for a while, but I know how everything works and I've never seen this kind of thing happen before, that was the reason for my "frustration". Dernière modification le 1654746540000 |
Thekingwys « Citoyen » 1654718100000
| 5 | ||
Resh you know I admire you a lot and I asked for a lot of feedbacks for you but I'll have to agree with the unknown is not only that he commented many times many maps that catch discussion are rejected for silly reasons ''a is vanilla map'' ''a more one part of the map and faster than the other'' among other comments of this type, often these details do not matter anyone note so much that has several maps so in rotation in my opinion is do not care about it so much that I have fun playing they's enough for me to give perm clear that if it's silly reasons it's not absurd as an obstacle of acid impossible to pass in racing srry en i use google |
Reshman « Consul » 1654820340000
| 3 | ||
I'll reply later addressing each issue properly, I haven't forgotten about this thread. Thanks for taking the time to read and also I think it's best we avoid mentioning anyone's name if it's a critique as it's unnecessary fortunately no one has thus far. Theres no reason to be afraid to talk about some of the things that frustrate mapmakers, it benefits both mapmakers and mapcrew when they better understand one another. |
Mousechris « Censeur » 1654873680000
| 1 | ||
It is as I said myself. You just gotta keep trying, keep going until they can't complain anymore, I know the good in people always prevails and eventually people will come over their biases. It took me 2 years to get @3912610 added to P5, and barely anything in the map changed, all that really happened is the public kept telling the mapcrew they wanted it added, eventually I edited the map so that even the grounds were art and at that point the mapcrew finally gave in to public pressure. To do good to the people of this world, is a far more powerful feeling than anything bias can make you feel. So so long as you keep trying, keep making the map better. You'll go far. |
Unknown « Censeur » 1654885620000
| 2 | ||
Reshman a dit : Some people are simply afraid because they think that this will have a negative impact when some Mapcrew decides something about their map (and I personally think it will, they might even say no because Mapcrews are impartial, etc. But don't rely 100% on that. Mousechris a dit : I agree with you, Mousechris, I agree that we really can't give up. But, did you think it was fair to have wasted 2 years around a map? 2 years! Being that there were barely any significant changes made at the end as you said yourself. Do you think that's fair? I find this extremely ridiculous and disgusting, apart from that you still needed the support of other people putting pressure on Mapcrew to make the map perm. Mapcrews need to understand that this is a game and there is no need to make so many demands with tiny things on a map, if the map works, if people understand the map, if they think it's fun enough, it doesn't need more than that. No one has to spend so much time trying to satisfy the millimeter requirements that a Mapcrew made when the person has already spent a lot of time working on the map, inventing something, being creative to make something good come out of your mind and turn into a map. |
Anythin « Consul » 1654986780000
| 2 | ||
Reshman a dit : Quoting this, because people seem to be overlooking this outstanding piece of advice (or they simply do not want to accept it). Looking at the responses so far, the community still thinks they are entitled to endless reviews of their mediocre maps, and think the Mapcrew are purposely frustrating their attempts to get their map into rotation. Good attempt Resh, but I think you are wasting your time here. |
Reshman « Consul » 1655013120000
| 3 | ||
Okay, so from some of the comments it’s clear to me that there is some frustration around the inconsistent number of maps that go into discussion, the feedback people receive from different mapcrew members and as mentioned -how the very same map can be rejected at one point in time and accepted another point in time- so I’ll explain why these things occur. Mapcrew’s main goal is to curate a collection of high quality maps for public room players. Variety of maps is a critical factor when creating a collection of high quality maps. Adding too many maps of one kind makes the collection of maps overall less interesting and feel more repetitive. Having a good mix of maps also appeals to a larger audience of players as everyone has different tastes. So when mapcrew members review maps they’re not just considering the map on its own, but also the sort of maps they’ve recently seen added, recently seen in public rooms and any signs of maybe players (players from public rooms, not mapmakers) getting sick of seeing too many of a particular kind of maps. It’s mandatory for mapcrew members to test maps that are in discussion, so anytime they make decisions about perming or deperming maps, they witness how it plays at that point in time. Sometimes tests may be unreliable, but it’s up to them to make their own individual decision with that information and then share their thoughts and observations with the team during map discussions. I would say it’s roughly equally likely for discussion maps to have a unanimous decision as it is for them to have a split of votes during those discussions. Fortunately, when dealing with submission thread maps, mapcrew members will probably have a similar opinion for about 90% of the maps. Mapcrew members change over time, and even the same individual's views can slowly fluctuate over time. If you feel like another mapcrew member might have a different view of your map, you can ask a different member for a second opinion (or ask the mapcrew account). Sometimes mapcrew members will make mistakes- they might overlook and miss something in a map. In my personal opinion, I think it’s fair if a mapmaker, after reading my review of their map, tells me that they think my feedback is inaccurate because they suspect I missed something. However, mapmakers must realise that it is often pointless to disagree about feedback that is for the most part, subjective. I do believe the mapmaker truly thinks their map is good enough to be permed, but they’ll feel that way because they’re going to be unintentionally biased since they made the map. After all, it is the mapmaker themself that is familiar with the vision they had for the map, about every little reason why they made things the way they are, and has spent the time and the effort- and therefore is personally invested in whether it gets accepted or not, and will believe the minor flaws it has can be overlooked because of how great it is. For the same reasons, mapcrew members can’t discuss or vote on their own maps- not that they can’t be trusted to do the right thing, but because that mapmaker-bias just cannot be helped and will unintentionally affect their judgement as well. I can only really speak for my past self, but there's a general urge to give some feedback with tips to improve the map to avoid disappointing mapmakers and leaving them with no guidance. There can also be the feeling that if we can’t figure out what it is about a map that makes us feel it isn’t suitable for rotation then we aren’t doing our duties well. But this can then negatively influence our decisions such as providing poor edit suggestions or sending mediocre maps into discussion. This is made worse during reviews when you’re trying to get through a list of maps or when people whisper you maps and expect you to review it for them on the spot. However it gets a lot easier to review a map well the more time you spend playing and testing it. What worked best for me was to have people send maps through forum messages so I can take as much time as I needed to play and test the map and unravel why it makes me feel a certain way. This meant sometimes if I reviewed submission threads, I’ll skip commenting on the map if I didn’t have a solid reasoning for why I don’t think it’s good enough and ask mapmakers to message me through the forum if they wanted to hear feedback- giving me a chance to play and test it more thoroughly and form a stronger opinion. In some cases even after doing this, I might not have much feedback other than purely subjective feedback, but at the very least I can confidently say so, knowing that if a map doesn’t convince me despite playing it and testing it numerous times then it just isn’t going to be a map I have any reason to believe others would like either. On the whole it is up to each and every mapcrew member to figure out what works best for them and how they want to do it, but I think it needs to be more generally accepted (among both mapmaker and mapcrew) that it’s okay to sometimes not provide any feedback in submission thread reviews. Also, I don’t think that it’s fair to question the impartiality of mapcrew members, considering that they have nothing to gain or lose by accepting or rejecting your maps. It’d actually also be quicker for the reviewer to just create a discussion thread about a map (roughly takes 3-4 mins) than playing a map numerous times and finding some reason to reject it. |
Unknown « Censeur » 1655013360000
| 4 | ||
Anythin a dit : Nobody is ignoring anything, I'm friends with Resh and I've talked about it with him directly so I don't see any reason to come waste time talking about it more here. No one is asking for "endless revisions" just better revisions (which in this case should be the reason someone becomes Mapcrew, unless they just wanted to have their beautiful blue nickname.), more people come to support me every day. in ingame saying they "agree with what I said and that Mapcrew just doesn't respond because it's all true". And mediocre map? What morals do you think you have to speak ill of someone's map? You are not a reference even for those who are starting to make maps. Where are your maps? Try to understand something that actually happens, try to help someone like Resh does. The only purpose for complaints is for something to improve. And this will only happen if those who do the wrong things decide to accept the criticism and understand that they need to improve, I'm not saying that 100% of what was said is correct, but the vast majority are yes, and if you don't think so, prove otherwise, good luck. [ Sentinel ] Edited to remove insults and flamebaiting. Please keep the discussion civil and refrain from insulting others. Thank you. Dernière modification le 1668719580000 |
Unknown « Censeur » 1655014680000
| 4 | ||
Reshman a dit : I fully agree with your view, both sides made mistakes, but it is very important to recognize that many of the things said are actually true, and that this should try to be improved. The suggestions I could make for Mapcrew I already made and I believe your suggestions are light years better than mine, because you were an excellent Maprew and everyone loved the way you did your reviews. I particularly support this type of evaluation via PM, and the very few Mapcrews that do this today are the great positive highlights of the team. There is unanimous appreciation for these Mapcrews who really dedicate a little time to trying to understand the map, evaluate its real potential and if you think it needs changes, have some idea of what can be useful for the creator to make it. I don't know why Mapcrew doesn't give perms directly anymore, without the need for discussion, but it would avoid a lot of these problems. (It's just a tip, for this type of review to have ended there must have been some reason obviously, and I don't know anything about it because I've been away for a long time, so just to be clear I'm just suggesting something). Dernière modification le 1655015040000 |
Anythin « Consul » 1655022660000
| 1 | ||
Unknown a dit : Your choice of words is proving my point exactly. Thank you for that. Have a nice day. :) [ Sentinel ] Removed insults and flamebaiting from quoted post. Dernière modification le 1668720240000 |
Unknown « Censeur » 1655026380000
| 2 | ||
Anythin a dit : Oh really? wow you are amazing *---*, i will have a great day yes, thank you very much! :) Your choice of words was also amazing, congratulations! Who says what they want, hears what they don't want [ Sentinel ] Removed insults and flamebaiting from quoted post. Dernière modification le 1668720300000 |
Pamdecp « Censeur » 1655046540000
| 2 | ||
Unknown a dit : I'm going to try to address this part only, since almost everything has pretty much been well summed up by Resh (and also because it is obviously aimed at me). So about that particular map (the one you mention at the beginning of your message), it was the first time I saw it, the previous review was done by another member and so I gave my own insight regardless of what had been said at that time, you're right, as Resh said, totally allowed to disagree. Regarding the second part of the message I'm going to add some more information since I believe there's been a huge misunderstanding going on. So what happened is, I tested your maps during a public review then proceeded to write my comment about them. You then arrived and asked me if I could tell you what I wrote about them because you weren't here when I tested them, to which I agreed (and to be frank I quite regret it given how it blow out of proportion). Then, you told me you would edit them so I could test them again, to which I answered I would "once the review is over". That is, I think, where misunderstandings happened. This meant I would review them again only once the review is posted, in other words, I wouldn't change my comment between the moment I told you what I wrote and the moment I post the review, which is, in my opinion, a matter of fairness regarding the other mapmakers. I logged in the next day to see if you were online so we could test the maps in public together, but then I saw messages from other members of the team mentioning how they were receiving dissatisfaction messages about the review (I personally didn't receive any), that's the moment I decided to leave. I thought this was clear enough but it apparently became quite an issue, hence why I decided to comment. I hope it helps people ponder the situation. I, for one, regret none of the things I've said or done so far in my reviews. When I see a map with potential, I really try to make it work as a whole, therefore suggesting edits here and there that can be considered futile or useless but might make things go better in public. I take time on my own to reply to most of the private messages I get about maps, often asking mapmakers to go online so we can figure out what's good and what's to be changed. If ultimately the map doesn't work in public, I personally don't consider it a failure because I hope it gave the mapmaker an idea on how to make things work out so their next map goes well in normal rooms. I still want to thank people who valued my opinion as a mapcrew and as a mapmaker, and would even sometimes get their map eventually permed in the process (joy). To those of you, please keep trying to make maps focusing on how interesting it can be to play them, not on how "enough" they are to be part of the rotation as a filler. My greatest pleasure as a mapcrew was to witness mapmakers getting out of their comfort zone trying innovative concepts or layouts. Sometimes the map was a complete disaster in public but who cares? You gave it a shot and should be praised for that. |
Unknown « Censeur » 1655082000000
| 5 | ||
Pamdecp a dit : What bothered me about the map (that you said you didn't rate it) was what Resh also mentioned about each Mapcrew saying something different about the same map. Because I had done all the edits on that map. (He had said this at the time: "@code Though obstacles are interesting, due to small spaces it can become very cramped and it turns out being frustrating as you barely have control over the map.") How apparently he liked the obstacles of the map but he only found the map tight, I edited the map, increased its size, the space between obstacles, I put some more mechanisms for interaction, thus leaving a better space for gameplay. Well, I resent the map for the review. 4 Months later there was a new review of P9 (your review), 4 months. And then you say this about the map: "@- While the overall visual is nice, the map's gameplay is sorely lacking diversity. It feels like the dynamic grounds aren't moving fast enough to affect the gameplay in a significant way, maybe try to use them in a horizontal map instead of a vertical one." You already started the description saying that the map "lacks divergence" being that it is a collision map, there is not much diversity that you can put in a collision map because it will be cramped, and if I happened to redo the map horizontally instead of leaving it vertical, as you yourself suggested in the evaluation. But then they would say as they said before that the "map is similar there are many of the P9 in rotation, even many of them belong to you." I don't remember exactly which Mapcrew said that, but it's for this exact reason that the map is vertical and honestly I think it works very well that way due to the various tests I've already done with it, after all, it's been months since the first one review. And then about the speed you found slow of the moving objects, I increased it and it really seems to have improved, that was a good tip, thanks. Pamdecp a dit : Well, about that, I also believe that there was a big misunderstanding. Because while you were doing the review I arrived late in the room and asked you if you could please tell me what you wrote about my maps, so you did. So after that I told you that I would edit the points mentioned and that if you could, review the maps again to see if it improved the negative points that existed before posting the review. and you said yes. If you thought this was unfair to others, you should have told me, I would understand, it would be better than saying you would do something and in the end not doing it. But I believe that everyone should have that right to have a chance to edit their maps as soon as the review is out instead of no one having that right. Because taking as an example the time it took between the last review and your review, it was 4 months. And between these 4 months edits were made according to what was mentioned in the first review and when it arrived in the new review there were completely different claims about the same map. and in both reviews there was no maps under discussion. Pamdecp a dit : Regarding complaints that other members of Mapcrew received, mine were about my maps, if other people besides me appeared complaining about something, I have nothing to do with it and I don't even know the reason for these other complaints. I in no way wanted you or the Xor to leave the team, at any time my intention was that, it was just a revolt due to a sequence of events and to see that after I made my complaint on the discord channel, it started to people from all sides saying the same thing as me (among them, excellent mappers, mappers who already have years and years in the game and know very well how everything works) and that made me believe that I was right. I also don't think you should regret anything as this is past I was just hoping that some changes (not as drastic as a departure from the team) would happen. And these changes have already been said by me and by others including Resh himself, so I won't talk about it anymore... Dernière modification le 1655116320000 |