The /newstuff Chronicles #361

Shaikoten said [01-27-10 11:40]:
"Greenwar 2 . . . was an open and collaborative process. . . . [r] was involved in this project from the start."
Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team ever playtested any of the Greenwar 2 maps with me. Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team ever went in any Greenwar 2 maps with me to examine the detailing's interference with gameplay. Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team has ever contacted me before, during, or after the making of Greenwar 2. I am not aware of the "collaborative process" of which Shaikoten speaks.

rrr said:

Shaikoten said [01-27-10 11:40]:
"Greenwar 2 . . . was an open and collaborative process. . . . [r] was involved in this project from the start."
Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team ever playtested any of the Greenwar 2 maps with me. Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team ever went in any Greenwar 2 maps with me to examine the detailing's interference with gameplay. Neither Shaikoten nor any of his team has ever contacted me before, during, or after the making of Greenwar 2. I am not aware of the "collaborative process" of which Shaikoten speaks.

Please, for the fucking love of God tell me you're joking.
There's no way you could be serious about this.

Also, lrn2quote.

Well, you were following Hellbent's Greenwar 2 project from the start, and there were nearly 3 years of completely open development in which you or anyone else could have said anything you wanted to say about it. We had public playtesting online, the maps were adjusted based on feedback received. I'm not sure why you expect to have somehow gotten a special invitation for this?

If that's not enough, a quick glance at the Green War 2 thread would have been more then enough to make it clear that it was an open collaborative project. You know, what with the sign up and all that good stuff. It made it pretty clear that anybody was welcome to help so long as they were capable of doing a fairly good job, or showed that they would be able to improve their mapping skills.

Shaikoten said "[r] was involved in this project from the start."
I wasn't.

rrr said:

Shaikoten said "[r] was involved in this project from the start."
I wasn't.

You had playtested all of the maps for consistency and no doubt recommended your own gameplay tweaks and changes on nearly every single layout in the pack before anyone from the detailing team had even glanced at the maps. That is what I call being involved in the project.

Also, the two massive, glaring, open development threads:
http://www.doomworld.com/vb/wads-mods/41761-detailing-greenwar2-still-going-go-claim-some-new-maps/
http://www.doomworld.com/vb/wads-mods/47887-greenwar-2-released/

"The project" can mean the whole thing or the detailing part. You guys could argue long between "you were" and "I wasn't" but end up meaning different things.

By the way, that the project had open development doesn't really say much, as many WADs that get critiqued here are also made that way. If I am not mistaken, the map by Cjwright79 that brought some controversy this week also had a "come and test or critique" thread, yet it got a negative review from a guy that didn't help in that way.

Animasse was fun, pretty decent for someone who is new to mapping. Easy gameplay for the most part. Too bad that the texturing wasn't all that great. Sticking to an certain theme would have helped.

dutch devil said:

Animasse was fun, pretty decent for someone who is new to mapping. Easy gameplay for the most part. Too bad that the texturing wasn't all that great. Sticking to an certain theme would have helped.

New to mapping? Is this some sort of backhanded compliment? That's twice you've suggested it. I was heavily into mapping back in 94-96 and I've published about 15 maps since last spring. I think you are new to courteous speech.

And for Pete's sake, I do not wish to hear any more complaints about 'texturing themes'. DO NOT WANT. I choose my textures with a high degree of deliberation, and if you don't like them, you can change them yourself and release them under your own name.

Cjwright79 said:

New to mapping? Is this some sort of backhanded compliment? That's twice you've suggested it. I was heavily into mapping back in 94-96 and I've published about 15 maps since last spring. I think you are new to courteous speech.

And for fuck's sake, I do not wish to hear any more complaints about 'texturing themes'. DO NOT WANT. I choose my textures deliberately, and if you don't like them, you can change them yourself and release them under your own name.

So don't change anything and you'll wind up with the same feedback each time, with the same people enjoying it each time and just maybe you'll stop whining about it.

Not everyone reads the comments in the archives you know. You really need to learn to deal with critisism. Do you always act like such an dick when people like your map.

Khorus said:

So don't change anything and you'll wind up with the same feedback each time, with the same people enjoying it each time and just maybe you'll stop whining about it.

Quite frankly, I have got a pretty soured impression of about half the population here. Not only do they have different taste in wads to me, but they are extremely graceless in expressing their reservations. So I have little interest in catering to these guys. Now, there's an agreeable group too, so I'm more or less going to just ignore the haters and their complaints. You'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar, but they don't have any honey.

But when a heartless, derisive review gets put up on the front page, expect to hear from me, as you have this week.

Ugh for the love of god just shut the goddamn hell ass up already, a lot of people have tried to be nice and polite to you, like dutch devil, and even then you still reply with aggressiveness. So at this point I think it's pretty safe to say you deserve any vitriolic comments coming your way until you can learn to suck it up and stop being so damn sensitive.

I also want to touch upon rrr's, uhh, novel about greenwar 2, but I don't know if it'll even be worth it. Someone like that is clearly set in his own way of thinking, and no amount of discussion is ever going to change that. I guess I do wanna say this though, your "review" of my detailing job of the map "basphel3" aka map22 is hilarious. I apparently "seriously crippled" the map by adding an exit that's 8 pixels into the wall, and putting a stalagmite near that area. Here's an excerpt:

"If he tries to slide, he slips into the new recessed sector [with a snag on each front corner] or runs into the small thorny tree, stopping or snagging him. In fact, the player in the sunken room must constantly devote attention to the back wall when moving around in order not to get hung up on a snag. The player ends up diverting attention from the entryway, or not moving at all. The balance of power between the inside player and the outside player is changed. The players must adjust their tactics--even their game strategy--and the gameplay is changed."

Really? The balance of power has been changed? Because of two little things in an otherwise huge, empty map? I admit it can be annoying to get snagged, but the thing is you have so much room to maneuver in that area, that if you have a habit of "sliding against the wall", and not being able to remember that there's a little object in the room, that's your own fault. There's definitely a point where you should avoid putting objects like that so players don't trip over it, but really in this case it's making a mountain out of a mole hill. The fact that you say it changes the gameplay completely makes me question your sanity. Exaggeration and madness seems to be the name of the game in the greenwar2 review, you're obviously quite biased and eccentric, and don't realize the sheer absurdity of the things you're claiming.

You might have made maps when Doom first came out but believe it or not, player desires and expectations have changed in the last 16 years. By modern standards you are indeed "new" to mapping.

Either way, you're being a complete tool about this whole thing. Respected people are trying to give you constructive criticism about your maps which YOU put up here for critique, and in return you're being an asshole to everyone who doesn't call your levels perfect.

Surely a 30 yearold man can understand how behaviour like this isn't exactly doing you any favors? You're behaving like someone half your age.

He might do well in chilling and just moving on, but you guys are just adding to the fire, so it's not just him. We have some harsh reviews here, we get retorts from authors. It all adds up. Let's not overrate contemporary or established work, either, as it can also get its bashing, and a lot of it is pretty formulaic or mediocre.

RottKing said:
So at this point I think it's pretty safe to say you deserve any vitriolic comments coming your way until you can learn to suck it up and stop being so damn sensitive.

It's funny that you (among others) say things like that and then go on a rant against a review of a WAD you're related to. This is the irony in much of this week's thread.

Alright I need some time away from you dudes. We're clearly coming from very different points of view. I'll try to recharge my good faith, because right now it's nearly expended.

myk said:

It's funny that you (among others) say things like that and then go on a rant against a review of a WAD you're related to. This is the irony in much of this week's thread.

Well see here's the thing, there's a difference between being overly sensitive, and just being critical of something. However, this is where things get really annoying, because it starts moving into the "matter of perspective" territory. It's obvious to most people here that CJ was overreacting and being too sensitive, and yet there's still people sympathizing with him. I made a reply to rrr's review of Greenwar 2, and I'm also labelled as "sensitive". So this begs the question, who can confidently be called "sensitive" and who can't? What's the criteria? This is why most discussions are pointless, because there's really no way to make an opinion more solid than anyone else's unless you have some sort of absolute concrete evidence that anyone can understand. I've been playing competitive doom multiplayer for as long, if not longer than rrr, but what can I do to convince you that my opinion holds more weight? Exactly, there's nothing because it's some fucking stupid gray area that people love exploiting. So any amount of fuck heads can just fart around with impunity and just claim: "It's a matter of perspective man! I may have come off as being way too sensitive and immature about this review, but then I'm going to make the claim that ANYONE who has a dispute with a review is ALSO going to be labelled as too sensitive!"

So basically whatever, this is why I usually don't talk about things, it's all pointless. Shai summed it up pretty well here: http://www.doomworld.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=849485#post849485

myk said:

"The project" can mean the whole thing or the detailing part. You guys could argue long between "you were" and "I wasn't" but end up meaning different things.

By the way, that the project had open development doesn't really say much, as many WADs that get critiqued here are also made that way. If I am not mistaken, the map by Cjwright79 that brought some controversy this week also had a "come and test or critique" thread, yet it got a negative review from a guy that didn't help in that way.

Paragraph A) He is obviously heavily emotionally invested in each one of these maps which he playtested and put his personal stamp of approval on, and is devastated that they have been altered in one bit. If you don't call that being "involved" in a project, then I don't know what it is. If you read, in this very thread, Hellbent's comment about r "grading" all of these maps with a letter you'll see what I mean. In the old times of the newstuff it was customary, and common courtesy, to leave the reviewing of a map to someone who had no such involvement in it. When deathz0r was even the slightest involved in a project he was reviewing, it would be given to someone else; Alexmax, for example, or Scuba Steve. I have no gripes with his review existing, but I think it's bad form for it to be the headline, frontpage review because of his bias.

Paragraph B) All I'm going to say on this is, a "play and critique my map" thread that's open for, generously speaking, a week is a lot different than a "let's publicly develop the map post wads and screenshots and betas and resources" thread that's open for more than TWO YEARS.

Edit in response to Rott's stealth edit which makes me look mildly hypocritical: What can I say? I'm still having fun with arguing :3

In the end it doesn't matter because GW2 and all the great DM wads we've seen last year (and even one this year) will fall off the face of the planet as morons (yes, I said "morons") will still play OMGMAPS, DWANGO5, AOW2 and GHOULS VERSUS HUMANS: COLD DEMISE.


Yes, I'm angry.

Rottking [re: 01-29-10 09:05], pick a sport you like--football? basketball? Imagine the stadium crew putting a little flower pot on the 50-yard line or under the hoops. What would you say? What would the fans say? What would the players say? Why should Doom and its fans be treated differently?
Rottking, your icy detailing of gw2/22 is fantastic, but it doesn't belong on someone else's playing field. Make a "wad" of your own and let us see what you can do with no restraints.

rrr said:

pick a sport you like--football? basketball? Imagine the stadium crew putting a little flower pot on the 50-yard line or under the hoops. What would you say? What would the fans say? What would the players say?

I dunno about RottKing, but I would say that it adds a lovely feminine touch to otherwise predominantly masculine events.

Also, lol comparing Doom to real life.

rrr: I'm not saying this to flame you, just as a tip: check out the "quote" button on the bottom right hand side of every post. Using that you can quote in blocks like you see everyone else doing. It just makes it easier to read. I'm glad you're in on this discussion.

Now, regarding the detailing of real life sporting fields, take this for example:

A baseball diamond will often have divets and disparities of the playing field, and there will be "detailing" in the form of logos mowed onto the grass, etc. Which can and do differences on how the field is navigated, and are there purely for aesthetic purposes. Furthermore, nearly all sporting fields are covered in advertisements in this day and age, distractions all over the walls. AND they are surrounded by exterior "detail" such as the architecture of the surrounding stadium. Your comparison of Doom and real life sporting isn't exactly valid, because these things you claim do not exist in real life actually do. "Detailing" and sporting have been hand and since Roman times. To think that a competitor is distracted because of what is around them is seriously a put down directed at the competitor. If you're distracted visually by the detail of a Greenwar 2 map, maybe that says more about the player than the map pack itself. I have played tons and tons of Greenwar 2 online and haven't experienced these problems with the detail affecting the readability of the map. It's quite simple. The player looks different than everything else, has a distinct shape, and moves. There is an old adage from baseball, and most sports, that applies.

KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL.

rrr said:

Rottking [re: 01-29-10 09:05], pick a sport you like--football? basketball? Imagine the stadium crew putting a little flower pot on the 50-yard line or under the hoops. What would you say? What would the fans say? What would the players say? Why should Doom and its fans be treated differently?

I'm all for having a clear playing field that doesn't have a bunch of crap on the floor and walls to slip/get stuck on, but there's no way you can tell me with a straight face that a few very small things in an otherwise gigantic, open map ruins the entire map gameplay-wise. It's just so biased and ridiculous I can't even believe I'm replying to it. It's all in your head, any sane person would just write it off as a tiny gripe, if even that, and just move on.

rrr said:

Rottking, your icy detailing of gw2/22 is fantastic, but it doesn't belong on someone else's playing field. Make a "wad" of your own and let us see what you can do with no restraints.

Well, I don't want to engage in a pissing contest, but check out my maps in UDMX if you wanna see my latest work. I have a bunch of other stuff but I don't wanna make this about me.

Shaikoten said:
If you don't call that being "involved" in a project, then I don't know what it is.

Sure. I know you used it to say he was biased, I'm not arguing against that, regardless of my stated reservations about the bias topic itself, just that now that he's saying he's not involved, he's referring to the second part of the project. I just mean you guys were crossing different meanings, which just made a rift between your arguments, which are already opposed by some more concrete things.

RottKing said:
So this begs the question, who can confidently be called "sensitive" and who can't? What's the criteria? This is why most discussions are pointless, because there's really no way to make an opinion more solid than anyone else's unless you have some sort of absolute concrete evidence that anyone can understand.

One partial criteria is I noticed some guys, and this applies to many of us including myself, come from the same angle or place in the community and tend to agree on certain things, part of this has the quality of shared work tied to it, part habits and personal preferences. You're more tied to GW2 and are closer to Mionic than many others here, incidentally, your defenses go in those directions. Coincidence? So it's not just about being better or being right, but also about groups and territories getting along, especially using reciprocity to ensure some space for respect.

I've been playing competitive doom multiplayer for as long, if not longer than rrr, but what can I do to convince you that my opinion holds more weight?

Your opinion on DOOM levels is worth reading or hearing, if you ask me. I've seen your work and your playing and they are generally quite good, and you tend to merge them well, but this is made more obvious by your maps and games or demos than by you browbeating some new-to-the-scene or underdog mapper :p

Rottking--so, we're in agreement about "having a clear playing field that doesn't have a bunch of crap on the floor." Now, my question was about having one single extra item on the game floor. What if there's one flowerpot, or one beer bottle, or one frisbee on the field? The answer in real life is that the ump takes it off. I believe that's how you and everyone else wants it.
Rottking--here's what artists might do. Start with the art, then add the game, rather than the other way around. Make an entire glacier or mountain range or city or building or world first, then add weapons and other game items later if it feels like a good place to have a game.

myk said:

Your opinion on DOOM levels is worth reading or hearing, if you ask me. I've seen your work and your playing and they are generally quite good, and you tend to merge them well, but this is made more obvious by your maps and games or demos than by you browbeating some new-to-the-scene or underdog mapper :p

I dunno, I think I'm usually pretty nice and refrain from insults when it comes to inexperienced, or less than stellar mappers, it's just when they start getting unruly regarding criticism is when I start getting rude and blunt. Typically if you can keep your cool about a bad review of your map, whether it's constructive or insulting, it goes a long way in terms of people treating you nicely and showing respect. Maybe I should've written my response to rrr's review in a way that was calmer, but the whole "review" just reeks of him being 100% on the side of hellbent, even if he did say he enjoyed the detail jobs. It's filled with nothing but praise after praise for hellbent's mapping ability and genius, I don't know if there's even one thing negative said about hellbent or his maps in it. It felt like some kind of thinly-veiled corporate sales pitch, t's pure, undiluted bias, no objectivity whatsoever.

rrr said:

Rottking--here's what artists might do. Start with the art, then add the game, rather than the other way around. Make an entire glacier or mountain range or city or building or world first, then add weapons and other game items later if it feels like a good place to have a game.

Cool, that isn't what actually happens though

rrr said:

Rottking--so, we're in agreement about "having a clear playing field that doesn't have a bunch of crap on the floor." Now, my question was about having one single extra item on the game floor. What if there's one flowerpot, or one beer bottle, or one frisbee on the field? The answer in real life is that the ump takes it off. I believe that's how you and everyone else wants it.

Here's the thing, you can't compare doom to sports in that way, because in a first person shooter, there's no clear "rule" on having objects on the playing field or not. It's a videogame, a first person shooter, you run around a level blowing shit up, the only question is whether the objects are badly placed or not. It's not like I just plopped the stalagmite right in the middle of the map, I placed it in a quiet corner of the map, not a place with heavy traffic. It's really not a big deal. If you think a little stalagmite in a corner of an otherwise huge map completely changes its gameplay, I'm sorry but that's just plain delusional.

rrr said:

Rottking--here's what artists might do. Start with the art, then add the game, rather than the other way around. Make an entire glacier or mountain range or city or building or world first, then add weapons and other game items later if it feels like a good place to have a game.

Uhh except the thing is, hellbent made the layouts first, so the artists only painted the scenery on top of the layouts that were created with "gameplay first" in mind. I do think SOME of the maps had their gameplay impacted slightly, but again, it's really not that big of a deal, they still play great, and now they look great too.

esselfortium--no! You're on a "detailing team," right? You come along after a wad is made and detail it, right? What I have in mind is making an environment first, then making a game inside it [or not, as appropriate]. This is how and why golf courses are the only detailed playing areas in the meat world.

rrr said:

esselfortium--no! You're on a "detailing team," right? You come along after a wad is made and detail it, right? What I have in mind is making an environment first, then making a game inside it [or not, as appropriate]. This is how and why golf courses are the only detailed playing areas in the meat world.

I am? Er, not typically. Actually a lot of the time I just make my own maps. I have no idea what point you're trying to make here, though, as this seems to fly completely in the face of everything you've been arguing for in regard to GW2.

And, again, pretty much everything in the "meat world" (did you seriously just say this?) is inherently more detailed than a Doom level.