Looking for Foundry opinions

[Evil DIMwit]

Perhaps the solution would come with a better "browse maps" page. Early maps which do not meet current standards could be moved to a less prominent location, where they would not detract from the overall quality of the site as much. They would still be available, if you were willing to look.

Perhaps just the option to sort maps alphabetically, by date, by popularity, by size, and just maybe by gameplay tag.

[cairnswk]

...
There are about a dozen or so maps that should be looked at. They should be caned if they can not be brought up to the current standards.

I'd like to see this list....
And porkenbeans, if you continue to refer to these maps as being in the shit-can, then you are not doing yourself any favours with mapmakers past or present. I think it is very direspectful of you in relation to other people's creative efforts especially after the tirade you just came through recently.

[porkenbeans]

...
There are about a dozen or so maps that should be looked at. They should be caned if they can not be brought up to the current standards.

I'd like to see this list....
And porkenbeans, if you continue to refer to these maps as being in the shit-can, then you are not doing yourself any favours with mapmakers past or present. I think it is very direspectful of you in relation to other people's creative efforts especially after the tirade you just came through recently.

You are not understanding what I am trying to get across. When CC started, the quality of maps were nowhere near what they are today. The maps rolling out of the Foundry are getting better and better. This can be attributed to the Foundry, and how it has improved over time.

You are the MAN when it comes to the number of maps quenched. I really like some of your maps. Last time I checked, I held the record for most points on Prob. Chicago. What is wrong with going back and trying to improve some of the maps that were quenched long ago when graphic standards were not as high as they are today. I am sure that you would agree that you have a map or two that could use a face lift. There is no disrespect meant, As a matter of fact, you have more of my respect than just about any other mapmaker at CC.

What is wrong with taking a map like Tamreil, and giving it a face lift. It's not that it is terrible in the graphic dept. and it is good enough for any of the other sites on the web. But, CC in my opinion is better than all of those other sites. So why not make sure that it stays ahead of all the other second rate sites ?
We do not need to shit can, just spruce up some of our less played maps. There is a reason why they are "less" played.

Also, this is only my opinion that was requested. I am not by any means trying to go on some crusade or something.

[MrBenn]

...
There are about a dozen or so maps that should be looked at. They should be caned if they can not be brought up to the current standards.

I'd like to see this list....

1. Tamriel

And the others?


Oh, the moderator in me would suggest that further conversation in this regard should take place in the old official revamp/touch-up suggestion thread: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=41593

[natty dread]

Yes, I kinda agree with MrBenn. The thread has been derailed a bit... the intention was to ask for opinions on how to improve the atmosphere of the Foundry, the discussion of what should be done to existing maps is a bit off-topic IMO.

[cairnswk]

Yes, I kinda agree with MrBenn. The thread has been derailed a bit... the intention was to ask for opinions on how to improve the atmosphere of the Foundry, the discussion of what should be done to existing maps is a bit off-topic IMO.

I also agree, however, my point above was to make people aware that they should be respectful of those who have gone through the process of getting a map quenched, without wanting to toss other mapmakers maps in the "shit-can".

[natty dread]

So, cairnswk, do you happen to have any opinions on the initial questions I asked in the first post of this thread? (trying to get this thread back on track here...)

[porkenbeans]

...
There are about a dozen or so maps that should be looked at. They should be caned if they can not be brought up to the current standards.

I'd like to see this list....

1. Tamriel

And the others?


Oh, the moderator in me would suggest that further conversation in this regard should take place in the old official revamp/touch-up suggestion thread: viewtopic.php?f=127&t=41593

It should be easy enough to do a search to see what the least played maps are. I am not going to give my opinion about which one I think they might be. I used Tamriel as an example because I noticed that it is a very old map, and I don't think that mapmaker is around here anymore. In any case, I believe that the mapmaker would admit that things around here have evolved to a much higher level of quality than it was, when he made this map.

[MarshalNey]

It should be easy enough to do a search to see what the least played maps are. I am not going to give my opinion about which one I think they might be. I used Tamriel as an example because I noticed that it is a very old map, and I don't think that mapmaker is around here anymore.

Please, porkenbeans, move it to the revamp thread.

Your revamp proposals are, I admit, something that I think might affect the atmosphere in the Foundry... but not for the better.

In any case, I believe that the mapmaker would admit that things around here have evolved to a much higher level of quality than it was, when he made this map.

And yes, I think everyone understands this point... repeatedly. Whether they agree or not is a matter of opinion

[porkenbeans]

It should be easy enough to do a search to see what the least played maps are. I am not going to give my opinion about which one I think they might be. I used Tamriel as an example because I noticed that it is a very old map, and I don't think that mapmaker is around here anymore.

Please, porkenbeans, move it to the revamp thread.

Your revamp proposals are, I admit, something that I think might affect the atmosphere in the Foundry... but not for the better.

In any case, I believe that the mapmaker would admit that things around here have evolved to a much higher level of quality than it was, when he made this map.

And yes, I think everyone understands this point... repeatedly. Whether they agree or not is a matter of opinion

It is NOT a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact, that the quality of maps are better than they were.
But now I am finding myself drawn in to argue my opinion, when all I wanted to do was answer nattys pm. He wanted opinions, I gave mine, so that that.

[cairnswk]

So, cairnswk, do you happen to have any opinions on the initial questions I asked in the first post of this thread? (trying to get this thread back on track here...)

Question for the mapmakers: what kind of feedback would you most appreciate from the visitors of the Foundry?

1.Positive/suggestive feedback is essential to keep maps and mapmakers moving forward with their projects.
Be suggestive rather than negative. For example, if you don't like a font or can't read it, look for options and suggest them to the mapmaker.

2. Don't drag people's work into the gutter, you only end up putting yourself there also.

3. Try to be diplomatic about how you approach questions and answers, Remember, mapmakers have feelings and it is easy to offend when typing because different people read different things into what you say on the keyboard. Forum communication doesn't have tonal or emotional face to face value.

4. Remember that everyone has different skill levels and some use different software. Just because someone's map doesn't come up to your standards, don't bag it; rather provide suggestive feedback that might help the mapmaker lift their skill level.
Because this is a volunteer place (as I have often been reminded) where people are supposed to have some fun in the creative process, don't have too high expectations that everyone and especially mapmakers will agree with you. In most cases, they are still learning their craft.

What kind of comments irritates you the most?

The comments that most irritate me, are those who judge others work as not being up to a certain standard and want to destroy or throw away someone creative efforts. If a map has been quenched and the mapmaker has gone through the process, then they have gained the right to have there map in this place regardless of how popular or how nuch it is played. Some people put a lot of effort into their creative work, and if is it seen as being satisfactory at the time it was quenched, then it holds a place in the CC Library of history.

[porkenbeans]

The comments that most irritate me, are those who judge others work as not being up to a certain standard and want to destroy or throw away someone creative efforts. If a map has been quenched and the mapmaker has gone through the process, then they have gained the right to have there map in this place regardless of how popular or how nuch it is played. Some people put a lot of effort into their creative work, and if is it seen as being satisfactory at the time it was quenched, then it holds a place in the CC Library of history.

I would tend to agree with you on a certain level cairn. But on a different level, how is it fair to mapmakers that they are held to a different standard of quality than their predecessors ?
If there is to be a certain level of quality, then it should be implemented equally. If the standard is raised, then ALL maps should be required to conform.

[MarshalNey]

I would tend to agree with you on a certain level cairn. But on a different level, how is it fair to mapmakers that they are held to a different standard of quality than their predecessors ?

It amazes me how many people fail to argue to the question, but rather just restate their opinion over and over. I suppose, either they think that the other side doesn't understand their point (otherwise they'd agree with me, right?), or because they just hope that stubborn repetition will cause all dissenters to give up... and then they'd "win".

I'm sorry if this seems harsh, porkenbeans. But there have been some salient points raised that you fail to acknowledge or adequately rebutt, and then you get on with the business of restating your position. This isn't debating, nor is it productive.

Let me illustrate:

Remember that everyone has different skill levels and some use different software. Just because someone's map doesn't come up to your standards, don't bag it...
Because this is a volunteer place (as I have often been reminded) where people are supposed to have some fun in the creative process, don't have too high expectations that everyone and especially mapmakers will agree with you.

In other words, mapmaking is a highly subjective process, practiced by volunteers, often for the purpose of enjoyment.

When you propose, porkenbeans, to give mapmakers an ultimatim of allowing their work to be changed or have it trashed, one must face the very real possibility that one will trivialize mapmakers' past efforts in a very disrespectful and businesslike manner.

Furthmore, Cairnswk writes:

If a map has been quenched and the mapmaker has gone through the process, then they have gained the right to have there map in this place regardless of how popular or how nuch it is played. Some people put a lot of effort into their creative work, and if is it seen as being satisfactory at the time it was quenched, then it holds a place in the CC Library of history.

Cairns is saying that these maps provide a legacy for CC. The time that the mapmakers donated, and the hoops that they jumped through, have earned a place in the CC gallery. Certainly, they didn't do it for the medal. The real prize is a place in the gallery, and that should be invioable. Period.

Otherwise, who's to say that the current efforts won't be "trashed" in the future when the standards "raise" (change, really)? Nobody's map would be safe. The precedent would open up a great deal of unhappiness in the Foundry... at least that's what I argued many posts ago.

Yet here's your response:

But on a different level, how is it fair to mapmakers that they are held to a different standard of quality than their predecessors ?
If there is to be a certain level of quality, then it should be implemented equally. If the standard is raised, then ALL maps should be required to conform.

Do you see how this doesn't really answer the concerns raised, but just restates the feelings that we all know you already have?

I understand that you're a heck of a graphical artist, with lots of creative ideas on the graphics end, but very little to say on the gameplay end. I understand that some of these old maps are visually offensive to you. I understand that CC map standards have changed. I understand that you think all maps should conform to your concept of minimal graphical aesthetics.

But this a debate of policy, not value. And your policy proposal could have seriously negative consequences that you fail to give any credence.

All I'm asking is that you entertain the negatives to your own position as well as the benefits.


Marshal Ney