An Experiment
Hover over the thumbnail for a full-size version.
| Author | Nexx |
|---|---|
| Tags | action author:nexx e-tiles experimental playable rated test |
| Created | 2008-11-06 |
| Last Modified | 2008-11-07 |
| Rating |
3 by 16 people.
|
| Map Data | |
| Description | Please participate in this experiment!
What would you rate this map? (after playing it, obviously) Please answer honestly. Pretend I'm a noob mapper, if it helps. No, I'm not attempting to dupe anyone or make anyone look foolish. |
Other maps by this author
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| 1284 | Like Clockwork | EverBeam 0 - An Introduction | Beneath the Ruins | Lumo Arena | Just the Right Angle |
Comments
2009-02-12
heres a real experiment
make a second account
submit THE SAME map on your account and the second one, but at different dimes to avoid suspicions
see the difference in ratings
submit THE SAME map on your account and the second one, but at different dimes to avoid suspicions
see the difference in ratings
2008-12-31
I wouldn't rate it.
I don't rate maps very often now. I would instead give advice on how to improve it and maybe provide links to some map-making guides.
2008-12-27
4/5 and faved
The placement of stuff that intends to blow you up is superior.
2008-11-26
...
...oh yea im still active and killin people in AGD wars lol thats about it though...you makin new maps excites me lol...guaranteed ill play/rate/comment on them all...dude i was thinking about N reality and how it add a bunch of new shit and i was thinkin that it was be amazing to have two N's running around beating levels cooperatively...i have a shit load of ideas to go with it already but i dont think its possible to add something like that to the game...thats where you come in lol...
2008-11-26
...
...what do you mean "new map?" i havent been able to come up with any good ideas lately...have you?
2008-11-23
nah you're already in
:D
2008-11-23
btw
here are the etilecontest standings:
http://forum.therealn.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=40&p=19501#p19501 [forum.therealn.com]
http://forum.therealn.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=40&p=19501#p19501 [forum.therealn.com]
2008-11-23
OMG
5/5
2008-11-20
Well, I stick by what I said
That part was the only good part. And no, this is no fun for highscoring IMHO. I prefer almost linear maps that still have loads of innovation opportunities. The rocket didn't seem deliberately placed.
2008-11-20
@notkitt
I think you misunderstood me. You say my way of rating is inherently flawed, and then you go on to describe rating based solely on fun, which is how I rate. I think you may have gotten confused in the section where I describe how I've seen other people rate. (ex: based on the author's intentions for the map, if its the author's first or second map, etc.)
2008-11-20
Btw
I made my decision on this awhile back. Basically my solution is that when I ask myself "did I have fun playing this map?" and try to come up with a rating based on that, it doesn't always seem like a good way to rate. The trick is that I have to add a follow-up question: "Was my fun (or lack of fun) the map's doing?" Another way to think of it is "So I had fun/didn't have fun. Is this a reflection of the goodness of the map?" So a random smattering of things that you happen to have fun on trying to come up with speedrun routes is fun because N is fun, not necessarily because the map is good.
Furthermore, randomness on its own can only get so far. I think I would have rated this map 3/5, and I stand by that, but even so, I did the most important object placement non-randomly. Randomness is very, very likely to result in rough and/or awkward combinations, while knowledge and ability can hone the map towards actual goodness.
Furthermore, randomness on its own can only get so far. I think I would have rated this map 3/5, and I stand by that, but even so, I did the most important object placement non-randomly. Randomness is very, very likely to result in rough and/or awkward combinations, while knowledge and ability can hone the map towards actual goodness.
2008-11-16
I hope you read this nexx
Anyway, I think your system of rating maps is inherently flawed. A map is not a preciser scientific instument that must be put together precisely to allow maximum enjoyment. A map is a work of art. For art to be perfect, it does not have to be perfect. the same is true for a map. the choice of enemies has nothing to do with the quality of the map, neither does the apperance or author.
the quality of the map is in how much fun is to be had playing it, because that is what a map is made for. to play.
the reason this map was given a 2 by me, is not because you created areas of interest or good enemy choices. i gave it a 2 because i played it, and it was pretty fun to play. but a lot of parts of it were annoying, and the fun factor shrunk when i tried to overcome these annoyances but they persitsed, and eventually i didnt want to play anymore. but as with art, a map's quality is often decided after only a glance
the quality of the map is in how much fun is to be had playing it, because that is what a map is made for. to play.
the reason this map was given a 2 by me, is not because you created areas of interest or good enemy choices. i gave it a 2 because i played it, and it was pretty fun to play. but a lot of parts of it were annoying, and the fun factor shrunk when i tried to overcome these annoyances but they persitsed, and eventually i didnt want to play anymore. but as with art, a map's quality is often decided after only a glance
2008-11-09
having read the thing,
i stand by my high rating. the map offers a lot of freedom to innovate. it has an atmosphere of unhindered grace; the ninja tumbles through the map making its own decisions. the placement is superb; each object is efficient and adds fun and variety to the gameplay. this map is superior to many others that i've seen. the structure is very well planned (i mean, it seems that way), and adds depth to the already packed gameplay. overall, it is a very fun map, with placement that makes the player think, a refreshing atmosphere of freedom, and a level of professional polish that is not often seen on numa. also, the tileset didn't really look *that* bad.
2008-11-08
Oh, interesting.
I guess I enjoyed it so little because I wasn't looking to make a good route or compete, I just wanted something interesting to play around in, with nooks and crannies and unusual objects. To put it another way, I didn't want French Fries, I wanted edible paper.
If I'd been itching to highscore or something, my reaction might've been different.
If I'd been itching to highscore or something, my reaction might've been different.
2008-11-07
...
...i think that you will find that my way of rating maps either makes people as happy as possible or gives them what i thought they deserve...and yea i read the geocities page...and i feel for you its a weird situation...
2008-11-07
...
...well id have to say that i rated it a 2 because it didnt really have anything that stood out to me(gameplay wise)...although i did have a little fun...as for looks its obviously not so great...so in conclusion when i rate maps its almost always a 5 or a 2...just easier for me i hate getting all technical about ratings...
2008-11-07
Long explanation
First of all, it's not really a big deal. (Just thought I'd prepare those people who are going to say "Well that was anticlimactic".)
Anyway, you may have thought that perhaps I tried to make a map that played well but looked completely noobish, just to see if people would take the bait and call it worthless or find the playable goodness and call it okay. That would be kind of interesting, but no.
In fact, this was a 2 minute map. But that's not what's important per se, it's the background. I'm trying to iron out my own ideas of ratings, but I came across a bit of a conundrum.
Please click here [geocities.com] to continue reading. (It's just my old geocities site. NUMA won't let me submit a post with over 2500 characters (LoL), and I don't want to take this to the forums)
In closing, after a few days of thinking about it, I still haven't reached a conclusion. I am sticking by my 2/5 for the well-constructed but not-my-style map, but I don't know what to rate the other one, or maps like it. For those of you that rated this map of mine highly, would you really say that this is better than a lot of other maps? For those of you that rated low, is that because it seems random or looks ugly? Are you penalizing based largely on its construction rather than whether it's enjoyable to play? And if so, are you fine with that?
Commence discussion.
Anyway, you may have thought that perhaps I tried to make a map that played well but looked completely noobish, just to see if people would take the bait and call it worthless or find the playable goodness and call it okay. That would be kind of interesting, but no.
In fact, this was a 2 minute map. But that's not what's important per se, it's the background. I'm trying to iron out my own ideas of ratings, but I came across a bit of a conundrum.
Please click here [geocities.com] to continue reading. (It's just my old geocities site. NUMA won't let me submit a post with over 2500 characters (LoL), and I don't want to take this to the forums)
In closing, after a few days of thinking about it, I still haven't reached a conclusion. I am sticking by my 2/5 for the well-constructed but not-my-style map, but I don't know what to rate the other one, or maps like it. For those of you that rated this map of mine highly, would you really say that this is better than a lot of other maps? For those of you that rated low, is that because it seems random or looks ugly? Are you penalizing based largely on its construction rather than whether it's enjoyable to play? And if so, are you fine with that?
Commence discussion.
2008-11-07
interesting
If I saw this thumbnail without your name attached I wouldn't have bothered playing it.. because honestly, it looks like crap. but, having played it, the gameplay is actually pretty good - and I really like the openness of the level which gives a lot of opportunity for innovative high-scoring runs. So, for gameplay alone i would give a 4. I typically dont rate maps based on ascetics, but this is so random that it is just ugly and lazy looking so I would drop the score down to a 3.5
| Demo Data |
|---|
2008-11-07
i can't beat this thing
:/
2008-11-07
2.5 up
I believe that mr. n00b needs to use more tiles than just E tiles.
2008-11-07
sadly,
i really liked it, things like this have really been my style of mapping until very recently (random tiles everywhere), everything was also considerably hard for me, and for me 3.5 down
and after 15 minutes. here's my best demo...
and after 15 minutes. here's my best demo...
| Demo Data |
|---|
2008-11-07
after playing i give your map 2
:P :P
2008-11-07
A few things
This wasn't made by my little brother or something, I made it. And purposefully, at that.
Also, gloomp, why does so little of this map appeal to you? And mammaletto, as a highscorer, you see nothing redeeming about the speedrunning options here? What about the rocket and the two switches near it? The gauss? The multipath setup? None of those?
Conti has the fastest demo on NReality right now:
Also, gloomp, why does so little of this map appeal to you? And mammaletto, as a highscorer, you see nothing redeeming about the speedrunning options here? What about the rocket and the two switches near it? The gauss? The multipath setup? None of those?
Conti has the fastest demo on NReality right now:
| Demo Data |
|---|
2008-11-07
mammaletto knows whats good about this map
although I highly doubt this was even created with that part in mind.
2008-11-07
I quite liked this.
It just felt too empty. The tileset didn't appeal to me either. Try to find a nice shape or building and go from there. Keep up the work ^^
2008-11-07
I quite liked this.
It just felt too empty. The tileset didn't appeal to me either. Try to find a nice shape or building and go from there. Keep up the work ^^
2008-11-07
btw,
the high rating is *only* concerned with the map and its attributes. just wanted to make sure there's no doubt about that.
2008-11-07
i'm faving this, as well, actually.
it demonstrates superior knowledge of gameplay, and i want to emulate it. i'm not sure why the others thought so lowly of it. i guess because it looked bad to them.
i looked at and played the map. i decided i'd give it a 4.45. it's very open-ended, fun to play, looks good, well thought out, requires thought to complete, and is satisfying. a very good map. 4.45/5 still.
2008-11-07
I would give it around a 2.
It doesn't look really bad, or play really bad, but it's not very good either. It was very random.
2008-11-07
Not that bad, actually
I agree, this actually has basic understanding of gameplay. I kinda liked it, actually. 2.5v, but not horrible in the least.
Well, I pretended alright. ^^
Well, I pretended alright. ^^
Nexx
Testing