CTF-Ardiumus -REVIEWED-

[HortonsWho]

HailtheGoat's latest critique. (http://www.unrealplayground.com/review.php?id=318)

[HortonsWho]

FYI-

HailtheGoat has UPdated this review.

:)

[DarkSniper]

Thanks.
Seems all reviewers are not made alike:
http://www.blast-radius.com/CTF-Ardiumus.htm

[Squirrelinabox]

that link didn't work for me sniper.

anyway... be happy with a 42... it is much higher than the map deserves in my opinion.

too cramped, bad lighting, bad use of meshes, bad flow, etc etc.

[HortonsWho]

Yup-- definitely a different opinion. Where would blast radius score Epic maps? Do you know? So we have a point of comparison. Where would you score the map compared to Epics?

[Squirrelinabox]

hort... did the blast radius link work for you?

[HortonsWho]

Yup!

[Squirrelinabox]

doh... hmm... what did they give the map?

[HortonsWho]

Cut & Paste of the review

CTF-Ardiumus

Author: David Brown
Reviewer: Zyklon
When I saw that my second review here at B-R.com was going to be a map made by David ‘DarkSniper’ Brown, I was completely stoked. After all, this was the guy who made DM-Koltoff, which is one of my favorite user-made maps for UT2003. However, I was still completely unprepared for the level of ownage this map brought to the table.



Layout:
Definitely the best CTF layout I’ve ever seen. Tons of Z axis - particularly in the flag rooms, many routes to reach the bases, twisted halls, and plenty of hard to access areas just begging for you to demonstrate your double jumping skills. I can’t think of anything that could be done better here, so I hand out my first 10 ever.

10



Item Placement:
Overall the weakest area of the level. IMO, the flak cannon was a bit too easy to get, and the Lightning gun should have been closer to the flag. It would have been a big improvement to switch the placement of those two weapons. Also, on top of an area that it appeared could only be accessed by shield-jumping, there were 7 health vials. If you’re going to make me shield jump, at least make it worth my while. As it is, you actually lose more health going for the health vials from the shield jump than you gain from getting them. Still, the placement of the rocket launcher and double damage were great, the bio-rifle was at a very strategic spot, there were adrenaline pills in good locations, and the shield packs really required you to go out of your way in jumping to get to them. Overall, a solid, but not perfect, effort.

8


If you’re going to make me shield jump, at least make it worth my while. As it is, you actually lose more health going for the health vials from the shield jump than you gain from getting them.

Texturing:
Wow. The hardware brushes applied to the catwalks were sweet, and the rusted textures everywhere gave it that run-down look he was obviously going for. Textures were properly aligned and scaled, I couldn’t find a single problem with this map. Good job.

10



Lighting:
The lighting was beautiful. The red and blue lights just went so beautifully with the rusted surfaces. Lights had sources, and use of lens flares was good. Another 10 for DarkSniper.

10


Ambiance:
Pretty good overall. A few more emitters would have helped, and the ambient sounds are quiet and too few. Otherwise, it felt just like being in an abandoned factory.

8

Overall:
Wow. Definitely the best CTF map I’ve seen (I prefer it even over Arrakis), it completely blew me away. I’d definitely recommend it for a download. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to play another round or 5 in this arena.

92%

[Squirrelinabox]

hahaha... holy crap...

word of advice dark sniper... think about that score... do you really think any of your map is anywhere near a 10? Granted, i didn't test the bots... maybe they rule.

This is so far one of the worst maps for ut2k3 i have seen so far, and that is saying a lot since most ut2k3 maps suck right now. it is VERY tacky to ask for a review then when your map doesn't get what you wanted to post a link to a site that gave it a ridiculous score. You have no class dark sniper. I disagree with reviews probably more than anybody out there... but unreal playground is usually pretty close to accurate, if anything, a little high on their scores. look at the review schema here, epic maps are considered 75-85 ish. With that being said, your map should be about a 15 in my book. Yeah you heard me... a 15.

Reviews can only give you so much feedback, if you did have a decent understanding of mapping, gameplay, etc. , you would know your map should definately not be worth more than 60... tops.

Your map is way to cluttered with randomly strewn meshes, horrible layout that is too cramped, too narrow, too uninventive, too riddled with dead ends, and on and on.

Blast radius is obviously a joke of a review site, i haven't seen any other reviews there, since i can't connect to the website for some reason, but to give a map that should be a 20 a 92 is just plain funny.

[widowmaker]

Squirrel. Your right on a couple issues but way too rude in your delivery. Lighten up and play the frickin map. A glance in the editor or wandering alone hardly qualifies as reviewing it.

There are some areas that are too narrow a numebr that are still very blocky and need refinement. The map suffers from the limited paths between flags. And since SIAB didn't test the bots I'll add it suffers in the AI pathing too.

Construction waise it isn't bad and would do well to serve as a map for six to ten players. Any more and it is so crowded that you end up with traffic jams in the narrow areas pointed out by SIAB.

The AI pathing suffers as the paths do not lead the bots to several of the weapons. I played on Godlike and the bots still did not go for the flak cannon or goo gun in the flag room / base.

The lighting has very little change or differential in it so it becomes borring quickly. Some different colored lights or fancy shadows would have helped.

In all I think the 42 is accurate. A 15 would be way over critical and the 92 way too generous.

SIAB if this is the worst UT2K3 map you've played so far, the you haven't been playing very many.

[Squirrelinabox]

i said one of the worst maps :) and no, i haven't played many ut2k3 maps because most are either remakes or look very poorly made... such as this one.

yes i was rude, yes i only gave it a quick run through. i was rude because i think it is very weak to ask for a review somewhere, then when unhappy with the result, post a link to another review that gave it a better score. this shows no class from the author, which gets no respect from me, and pushes me to give some attitude.

as for not playing it enough to give it a score, i agree, i can't give it a review score becaues i only did a brief run through ingame. however, i can tell whether or not it will suck, be ok, or be a great map. it falls under the suck category.

[widowmaker]

Hehe. Well sadly I have to agree on the endless remakes and clone maps that are being cranked out for UT2K3.

I'm not sure the point of posting the link to the other review was. Although it does seem to be gone.

Although I was not impressed by the map I thought I would give it a full run through. Hey even the biggest steaming pile can have something of a surprise to it, just not in this case.

Sadly this is not one of the worst UT2K3 maps I've played. Which isn't really a good thing. I played another map that supposedly got the person a job. A map that was clearly not up to par. If reviewed here it would get a score of 30 or less, heavy emphasis on the less part.

Compared to some UT2K3 maps I would think of this as one worthy or a review. It got what it deserved, here.

[DarkSniper]

I didnt post that link here for any other reason than the contrast between the thoughts of reviewers, Squirrel.
Which I found humorous in the utter contrasting opinions.

(I actually found both reviews funny in their lack of anything other than the reviewers own tastes in maps.) I also didnt post my map to get reviewed to hear what someones opinion would be. Every reviewer is going to give thier OWN opinion. I posted the map to be reviewed because I want peeps to download it. Maps that are reviewed generally get more downloads. Why map if no one downloads it?

Which THAT is the only thing I have against Goats review, the fact that he tells peeps not to download it. Otherwise, Goat and I have spoken, He seems to be a good enough guy. I have zero problem with him or his review, other than the aformentioned statement.

You, on the other hand can just lay off me you pompus little prick. Why dont you show me some of your masterpiece maps.

@ Widow, thanks for taking a look at the map. But I am pretty sure the bots will get the bio rifle. After your comment I looked, and you are right they rarely go after the flack cannon. Something I and my beta testers missed. Thanks

[HailtheGoat]

Originally posted by DarkSniper

Which THAT is the only thing I have against Goats review, the fact that he tells peeps not to download it. Otherwise, Goat and I have spoken, He seems to be a good enough guy. I have zero problem with him or his review, other than the aformentioned statement.



Actually in the new review I stated to download it and give it a try and see if you have more fun than I did. I tried to make it a little more friendly, same content just worded a little different. Enjoyment is really for the reviewer. If I had to review an instagib map the enjoyment factor would be waaaaay low.

You have to love SIAB's bluntness, straight and to the point without the sugar on top! That's why I've asked him to look at my maps. I like the way he presents things, easy for me to comprehend without drudging through the pleasantries.

[Zinia]

And a point in reference to UT2K3.

Alot of us are hoping that this is a game we play for several years like we have UT. For that to happen, IMO, maps and mods are going to play a key role in it's future.

With that being said, the review criteria bar must be lowered to provide much room for improvement. And their review is stating that, in their opinion, it only lacks 8% to reach perfection. That is tough to swallow. And this is by no means a slam on DarkSniper. I hope all peeps continue to crank out maps to avoid growth stunting.

And all reviewers will look at things differently. I've been hand slapped :D for being too tough on 2k3 maps but I believe the wave of outstanding maps are still on the drawing board. At least I can hope.

[Squirrelinabox]

heh.. ok darksniper.. you just want people to download your map... fine. but if a reviewer thinks the map should not be downloaded... then accept that. your map should not be downloaded.

why do i have to have a great map to defend my hatred of your map? does this mean players cannot criticize maps unless they make them? hmmm... i don't think so.

and was the map review opinion? obviously. did you expect anything else? all reviews are based on opinion, though unreal playground ones actually have a pretty clear review scheme that they follow pretty well. i do bag on them alot, but only to point out specific areas my own opinion differs.

i stand by my point that posting another review to take away from the one you got here was VERY tasteless, especially when the blast radius on was clearly a joke.

oh and i do map bud. i haven't released a 2k3 map yet because i am actually taking my time on a map, not using all epic meshes, trying to actually have flow in a 2k3 map, etc. I could have published half a dozen average maps but I rather start off on the right foot and make a map that is pretty damn good.

[widowmaker]

Originally posted by Squirrelinabox
oh and i do map bud. i haven't released a 2k3 map yet because i am actually taking my time on a map, not using all epic meshes, trying to actually have flow in a 2k3 map, etc. I could have published half a dozen average maps but I rather start off on the right foot and make a map that is pretty damn good.

And I thought you were just sittig on your hands. /jk

You know the same as I do that in six months time it will be passe to use any DE / Epic meshes. When that times comes our maps will be judged on our own creations not just what we did with what came in the box. Once I have my current map done I'll be going the same slwoer making my own meshes route too.

I went a different route and cranked out a couple maps of less than stellar quality. The next will be better I promiss.:D

[DarkSniper]

You know what Squirrelinabox. Forget everything I have said. I just made a map I wanted to make. I didnt "knock it out" in a day, a week, or even a month. I didnt make any new meshes, because I just wanted to play around with the meshes Epic had and keep the d/l size small.

And I truly apologize for not making a run-of-the-mill map. You know, that map that is leet. The one that is made/has been made several hundred times and just textured differently.
I further apologize for actually trying to do something a little different with layout and scale.
Please excuse my ignorance in the ways of the UT mapping community in that I tried to make a map that runs well on mid-lower end machines. Further, I should have known the beta testers I have were complete idiots when they said that the map was fun to play.

From this point on I will endeavor to recreate that which has already been created. I will also never again use another default mesh/texture (except those that are system integral, like pick-ups, etc). Damn the file size if one is stuck with 56k for whatever reason, oh well. If it doesnt run on certain machines, oops sorry. And out of these creations that do not recieve high accolates with-in the community....no scratch that; ...... out of these creations that do not recieve Ownage at every review site. I will personally announce that they are crap and one should never download them.

Whew! Thanks Squirrelinabox, for setting me straight. And to think I was almost starting out on the wrong path. Now, thank goodness I have been educated on the correct way to map for the UT community.

Oh, one other thing I will do. When you do release your first map. Please send it to my site. This is what I will do.

I WILL:

Play it.

Not judge it against other maps.

Look at it in an unbiased way. Trying my best not to be so over the top with praise (Blast Radius) to make the reader think I do not even believe what I am saying. And trying not to be so averse to it because it just isnt my favorite type of map as to make peeps think it is just a worthless piece of crap, that the author put zero effort into.

Let it stand on its own merits.

And barring any technical errors or glitches, like major BSP errors/ HOMS/ death spots/ very poor FPS, etc. I will invite all that play UT to download it and enjoy. Why would I do this? Because that is what I should do as a reviewer of maps.

[Squirrelinabox]

heh... hmm... no hope... oh well...

first off, original? uh.. not quite buddy. your layout is kind of original, and yes, it does suck. just because it is different doesn't mean it is good. i never said it should be like all other maps. if you know me i have made a few kinda funky original ut maps, a foosball table and a pooltable(squirrelballs). So, no, i don't think you need to conform to anything. Ask anyone here, the last thing I would ever do is conform.

As for reviewers, there job isn't to tell everyone to play a map. Their job is to give the most fair review they can, in doing so let players who read it to either trust the review and play or not play because of the review, or to go with their own testing. The base reason for reviews... in any medium... is to let others know whether the map, the movie, the album, the tv show, the theme park, etc. are worth your time. Granted, people should not rely soley on a review to play or not play a map.

Oh and did I say the epic meshes are bad? no. it is how you seemingly just threw them into the map in a haphazard way which not only impeded flow, but made it look rather awful.

Oh, and you try to give the impression that you just wanted to make a map that you wanted to make? That is great. But if you publish and then ask for a review, don't expect them to be nice, or to not judge it how it should be judged. If you ask for a review, that opens it up for people like me to download it, to see that i personally think the map is horrible.

Keep being sarcastic, continue to use a 12 year old defense of being a victim and not coming up with anythign worth saying. Fact remains, you asked for a review, i personally think the score you got here was higher than your map deserved. Fact also remains that you in turn undermined the review in a tasteless fashion by posting another link to another site implying the review here wasn't accurate and way off base. Somebody with class would perhaps try to defend their map by giving some details on how it still is fun, how it does work well with the theme, not by posting a link to another review that is a fluffy inaccurate piece of dribble.

[DarkSniper]

Look Dude, I have already said I find the other review to be worthless, and why I posted it at all, or did you not read my last posts. And I thought Goat would enjoy the read, I know I like to hear others thoughts, to compare to mine, else we achieve no growth.

And as for defending the map, I havent up till now because I have not been commenting on this for the map or its review, really. I have been commenting on how the review was given, what ends did the means produce.
I am not so thin-skinned or dim-whitted to feel that a review dictates what type of mapper I am. Nor do the comments of a few peeps do that either.
Is the map a 10? Hell no. But it is a half-assed, botched cube that was thrown together by some inexperienced first timer, that put very little effort or thought into it, no again.
Can you use the same playing style on it that you can in 9 out of 10 maps. Probably not. Does that make it bad? I dont think so, but that is for each to decide.

I think it is fun to play.
I enjoy the tightness and made it that way intentionally.
I wanted the main path to be dangerously tight as it leads directly to the opposite flag.
The ability to utilize the pipes to manuver up and down and across the map is something I planned, not something that just happened.
I made it so you can exit the platforms at any given area, and opp to go all the way down to the floor, or onto a pipe.
I intentionally thought about these accesses.
I wanted to make it where you could jump onto the fence and get on top of the machines, and go all the way across the main room by jumping from machine to machine, if you so choose.
I wanted the "deadend area" in the main room to make you back tract. Which you really dont even need to if you double jump to the rockect launcher platform stairs.
I wanted to have the "useless" platforms where the elevated machines are in the flag rooms to be there so one could use them to ambuse if they so desired.
I didnt texture every other thing red or blue because I wanted it to look like very little of the existing structure was manipulated to be used as the arena.
As for the theme, what is there that detracts from the theme of the map?
"Confusing, cramped, easily lost in"? Hell if anything I think the map suffers from being too simplistic when it comes to layout.

"you seemingly just threw the meshes into the map in a haphazard way"??? You know the editor. Open it up and look at the formed complex semi-solid brushes fasioned to match the meshes and tell me I put them there haphazardly. Look at the meshes used in the map and then go look at thier true skins in the mesh browser and tell me I didnt work on them to match the look and feel of the map.

Am I a victim? What? When I first saw the review, which has been slightly reworded, I mailed Goat and told him I thought his review came across harsh in its tone. I dont believe I ever told him I thought it should have scored higher. As for my responses to you on this thread they were for basically the same reasons. I am no victim here, as there can be none. Unless of course you personally go and rip the map from each and every HDD that it has been downloaded to. And as for 12 yr old attitudes and sarcasm, how do you think your attempts to trash the map at every opportunity are being percieved?

[widowmaker]

That is enough you two. Now hug and make up.
Nothing good can come of griping over this any further.

[DarkSniper]

Okay:) But it was fun:D :D :D :rockon: UnrealPlayground

[Squirrelinabox]

heh.. fun fun...

at least you sound somewhat intelligent darksniper... unfortunately your intentions and your actions reveal otherwise. Ok, good, so you defended your map now, that is good, fine, dandy.

now lets see what i have done through all this. I merely pointed out how lame it was to post that link.. i have said it before and i will say it again... that showed no class. You can defend your intentions all you wish, but what you implied with it was obvious.

you also said "I actually found both reviews funny in their lack of anything other than the reviewers own tastes in maps." I defended the review here, pointing out why I personally think your map is pretty awful. Yes i use strong words like horrible, awful, terrible... but that is what your map deserves IMO. You can take this as me attacking you or your map. You can go on believing reviews are supposed to promote maps to download even if the reviewer doesn't think they are worthy.

Oh... and as for the haphazard thrown in meshes, I didn't refer to whether they match, they do match fairly well. However, they do look like they are still just objects thrown into a map, rather than looking like flowing parts of the map itself.

Mappers can continue to defend their maps by saying "i wanted this to be dangerous" or "i wanted this to be different" but if that danger or that difference makes the map fun... well.. the map is still not fun.

So yes, I appreciate your clear intelligent words... a good change of pace around here actually... but, you still come off a little lacking... When you ask for a review, you tastelessly undermine it. When I say your map isn't good, you ask to see what maps I have created, when it matters not if i have ever even seen the editor before. When you felt cornered you fell into the same old tactic of sarcastic comradery and apologies.

So to sum it up... i still think your map is pretty bad. I think the review given here was more than fair... I think how you posted the other review link here was weak... I think you can at least present your opinions well... I think your intentions are misguided.. and I think you map is pretty bad... oh did i say that already? well it really is that bad ;)

[HortonsWho]

Cookies and milk in the pub boys... now go out there and make more maps before you force me to... :eek: :p

[DarkSniper]

Horton, Thanks I am as a matter of fact having a glass of milk as we speak. How odd that you should post that. With that said, to your last post, do what you feel you must.


Now Squirrel, your comment:

"When you felt cornered you fell into the same old tactic of sarcastic comradery and apologies."

Let me perfectly clear in a consice in an unapologetic manner. . .

If at any time you read into my posts any sense of Apology, and or Comradery please now know that neither of the two would have or should have been infered by you in such a way to think that they were intended for you. If you did draw such a conclusion you were sadly mistaken. I feel nor wish to feel no camradery with you. I think you are one who forcebly states your generally useless opinion in places where it was never invited. If anyone at this site should/could have taken offence at my having posted that link, (I could have more clearly stated my intentions with it sure), it would have been Horton, or Goat. Not you. You. Who are you anyway? Did I send you my map? Did I ask your opinion on it? No. You just rammed it down my throat. I have read other posts where you do the same. And laugh it off as "just being you". Well good. By all means go be "you".

Horton, If you feel you need to close this thread, ban my account, whatever. I understand. But know this is my last post on this subject.


Even though I am sure Squirrel will take that as some sort of cornered back down to prove that he was correct all along. Be my guest.

[HortonsWho]

Darksniper... no problems on my account. I understand where you were coming from with your concerns over the original review and I understand why you posted the Blast Radius link. I hope our review criteria made it clear where Goat was coming from.

Like you said, it all comes down to opinion.

SIAB certainly has strong opinions... and lets just say "tact" isn't foremost in the box' lexicon. ;)

Nothing to close, nobody to ban. :)


Now go forth and unleash another map before I release another **cough** attempt at mapping...




:D

[widowmaker]

Originally posted by HortonsWho
Like you said, it all comes down to opinion.

SIAB certainly has strong opinions... and lets just say "tact" isn't foremost in the box' lexicon. ;)


So true SIAB is not good at subtle. I am not even sure he tries or even considers it. He makes valid points he is just very rough in his delivery.

I could just imagine SIAB as a reviewer here. He would be like that one mean teacher everyone was afraid of. Mappers waiting for a review would be sitting around mumbling "Please not SIAB, please not SIAB, please not SIAB...":D

No insult intended SIAB.

[Squirrelinabox]

heh... actually i did a review here... look at ctf-losec. i didn't give it a score i felt it should get, i gave it a score i felt reflected the schema i was given and compared it to other maps that i felt were close in quality and gave it a score accordingly. There actually is a pretty scrict scoring procedure (even more strict now I believe) which does keep maps somewhat fair... though as everyone already said, it still is influence A LOT by reviewers.

Oh... and I am good at being tact... i just choose not to in this format. The one review I did I think I was very fair, very nice, etc etc. Depending on my audience... or what I think of my audience... i will be more/less blunt/harsh in my responses :)

Yes, I am overly blunt at times... I feel in an online forum this is what works the best. Personally, I care less about most of the fluff around here... I come to play, to beta test, to map, etc. I really don't come here to make friends. I may lose the respect of some people with my attitude, but frankly, in that case I probably don't want their respect. I do get a fair amount of private messages from people personally asking me to test their map and such... probably because most responses to betas now adays is "ooh that is the best map yet" or "that is going to get ownage for sure" this doesn't happen so much here, more so in the ina forums.

I probably could give people a little more praise now and again, but since every single other person here is doing that, I figure I better just stick to giving them criticism on how to improve. So for all of you that I have criticized and those I have yet to criticize... even though I pointed out all the bad things, there was most likely something good in what you did as well.. I just didn't mention it...

Now move along... nothing to see here ;)

[Blitz]

I tried the map and liked it (fun to play vs. bots), but I thought the review score was fair.

Originally posted by RichardZinia
With that being said, the review criteria bar must be lowered to provide much room for improvement. And their review is stating that, in their opinion, it only lacks 8% to reach perfection. That is tough to swallow. And this is by no means a slam on DarkSniper. I hope all peeps continue to crank out maps to avoid growth stunting.

I think this is a very important point. I would rather have my map graded consistently (vs. similar maps) on a scale that leaves room for growth and gives me something to work toward, than have my maps graded so high that there is no room to improve. I think the review system in place here encourages better maps, which is the main point.

Nice work DarkSniper...don't be discouraged. And quit arguing with the squirrel...he's just nutty. ;)

[BIG-MICK]

Haven't tried the map yet! But LOVED the thread:D :D

[SkaarjMaster]

interesting industrial setting but I keep getting lost and can't figure it out so I defend and my bots can't CTF; tough map against bots.

http://www.unrealplayground.com/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=982