 |
 |
 |
 |
12-14-2008
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Good man yourself!
 
|
Map Rating Criteria
Map Rating Criteria Welcome to the Review Hub Rating Criteria. Both aspiring and current members are strongly encouraged to make use of these guidelines when composing your final review of a map. They are designed to make it faster and easier to put together a cohesive and thorough review, ensuring you address all the relevant points with the correct weighting regardless of the style of the map in question. You can research previous reviews here. Use the links below to drill down to the appropriate category for the map you are in the process of reviewing. Competitive Maps MLG Maps Casual Maps Race Maps Mini-Game Maps Aesthetic Maps Rating Criteria for Competitive Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following five criteria: Enjoyment: The key aim of a competitive map is, obviously, to be competitive, but it doesn't end there. A map can play perfectly in technical terms but have no flare to it, and you want to keep the players coming back don't you? A high scoring map in this area will have that added pizzaz which makes players want to load it up again and again, play it on all gametypes, and keep it on their hard drive for a good while. Balance: Balance applies to map geometry as much as it does to weapons, spawns and equipment. Are the routes around the map balanced and fair? Are any paths over/underused in games? Do any areas lend themselves well to camping? Weapon and equipment placement/choices are a big factor in complimenting a maps geometry - do the power weapons seem well placed and fair? Do they counteract area dominance, or further it? Does the weapon set as a whole give either team any clear advantage? And does it fit the map in general? Do any particular spawns provide one team with an advantage, and could you see it affecting the outcome of the match? Bear in mind your overall impression of the map in terms of balance. Are there any areas/weapons/choices that you feel stick out from the rest of the map and don't work well? Durability: Escapability is a big issue when it comes to competitive play, especially if routes out of the map are easy and frequent. Whilst it's true that few maps are utterly inescapable, a high scoring map will take a lot of effort to break out of. Is getting out of the playspace a reasonable proposition in a gameplay situation? Is it possible with standard jumps, or are grenades/rockets/buddies needed? How possible/easy would escaping be in key gametypes such as Oddball? How easy is it to break/abuse the spawn system, if possible at all? Aesthetics: We all know that smooth interlocks and merges do not make a great map, but they can go a long way in helping. Aesthetic touches and attention to detail can give players a more immersive gameplay experience, and careful choice of object placement can aid area recognition and team tactics no end. Smooth structural work helps player movement a lot as well, are there any jumps/transitions that are awkward/difficult in the heat of battle due to a poor interlock or merge? Originality: Competitive maps do not necessarily need to break the mould when it comes to original design. There are certain constraints that need to be adhered to that allow competitive play to be encouraged and successful. However, there is still much scope for variation and a map that stands strong as its own unique experience will score well. Maps that look and feel no different from others will score low, and the rest pass with average marks.
Rating Criteria for MLG Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following five criteria: Enjoyment: MLG maps are designed to be hyper competitive, and should not be compared with maps that fall under the Competitive category. It's fundamentally important to play such maps with a group of competent players of roughly matching skill. MLG maps should play very quickly, rarely slowing players down unecessarily and allowing them to fluidly move to their destination. Teams that manage to hold the high ground or otherwise strong positions throughout the map should be rewarded. Likewise, players who try to go it alone should be punished. MLG maps strive to provide quick, fluid, team oriented gameplay that tests individual skill and team communication to its limit. Balance: Balance applies to map geometry as much as it does to weapons, spawns and equipment. Are the routes around the map balanced and fair? Are any paths over/underused in games? Do any areas lend themselves well to camping? Weapon and equipment placement/choices are a big factor in complimenting a maps geometry - do the power weapons seem well placed and fair? Do they counteract area dominance, or further it? Does the weapon set as a whole give either team any clear advantage? And does it fit the map in general? Do any particular spawns provide one team with an advantage, and could you see it affecting the outcome of the match? Bear in mind your overall impression of the map in terms of balance. Are there any areas/weapons/choices that you feel stick out from the rest of the map and don't work well? Durability: In MLG tournaments there are out of map locations that automatically disqualify players. MLG maps created custom games are a different story. Any overpowering advantage gained by breaking out of a map can lead to non-competitive gameplay, effectively killing the map as being feasible for use. Can the map be broken? Can players grenade jump to an area that gives them an overwhelming advantage? Are there any minor exploits that unbalance the gameplay? These are important questions to answer when assessing the suitability of an MLG map for play. Aesthetics: We all know that smooth interlocks and merges do not make a great map, but they can go a long way in helping. Aesthetic touches and attention to detail can give players a more immersive gameplay experience, and careful choice of object placement can aid area recognition and team tactics no end. Smooth structural work helps player movement a lot as well - are there any jumps/transitions that are awkward/difficult in the heat of battle due to a poor interlock or merge? Originality: MLG maps do not necessarily need to break the mould when it comes to original design, as there are certain constraints that need to be adhered to in order to sucessfully foster and encourage a competitive MLG playstyle. However, there is still much scope for variation and a map that stands strong in promoting its own unique experience will score highly. Maps that look and feel no different from others may only score low marks, and the remainder pass as average. The pinnacle of original design within an MLG map stays true to the gameplay required, but also introduces fresh situations and new tactical possibilities for teams to consider in order to suceed.
Rating Criteria for Casual Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following five criteria: Enjoyment: When judging enjoyment think of how much fun you are having. Try to not think about the smaller flaws you may see - focus on the fun factor. Ask yourself questions like "Am I honestly enjoying this?", "Would I save this?" and "Do I want to play this again?" Balance: This is where you consider whether the game is fair for all players. You may be having a laugh destroying a horde of Zombies from an easily accessible rooftop all game, but the infected players probably aren't having such a great time. A map that achieves a high score will be challenging for all players involved, and victory will be taken by those who fought hardest rather than by taking advantage of the map design. Durability: Casual maps aren't as reliant on the playspace being strictly defined than a more competitive variant, but breakability is still an important factor that has the potential to ruin gameplay. Not all exploits are a bad thing however, and the rare powerful location or spawn prediction can in the right setting be seen in a positive light. Ultimately however, good casual maps thrive by providing an enjoyable experience that a player can be sure of experiencing each and every time they play. If overpowered tactics become a common component, or even a requirement, of success then the longevity and pleasure derived from a casual map will be greatly reduced. Is getting out of the playspace a reasonable proposition in a gameplay situation? Is it possible with standard jumps, or are grenades/rockets/buddies needed? Would breaking out of the map allow you to disrupt the game, and the fun? How easy is it to break/abuse the spawn system, if possible at all? Aesthetics: The appearance of the map. If you find yourself staring at certain structures as you walk around, then the map should be getting a higher score. Also, keep in mind how tidy everything is - if the map has jagged interlocks and uneven merges, chances are it won't be excelling in this area. Having said that, a map doesn't have to be technically brilliant to be good looking. Maintaining a visual theme is very important, and another measure of aesthetic success is when you aren't distracted by your surroundings because they are natural, smooth and structurally realistic. "What's holding up that floating platform?" Originality: This is one of the most important things in order for a casual map to be sucessful. A map that's unoriginal is normally passed. If the map puts something out there that no one has before, or revives a long-forgotten gameplay quirk with a fresh take, then chances are it will be getting a higher score. Attempting something new but not fully pulling it off still gains extra credit.
Rating Criteria for Race Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following five criteria: Enjoyment: When judging enjoyment think of how much fun you are having. Try to not think about the smaller flaws you may see - focus on the fun factor. Ask yourself questions like "Am I honestly enjoying this?", "Would I save this?" and "Do I want to play this again?" Race maps need to be especially replayable, because you're driving through the same course multiple times in one game. There should be opportunity for overtaking, minimal frustration and ample reward for driving a good racing line. Balance: Balance is an important issue, even in race maps. Does each racer have a fair chance to reach the finish line? If there are multiple paths, is each one balanced in difficulty and speed? If the map is meant for competitive race gametypes such as 'Battle Tracks', can one part of the map overpower another? Does the map demand the completion of overly difficult turns, or have an overly simplistic layout? Is it possible to drive a racing line, or is there any other aspect of the design that rewards skillful players? Durability: A race map you can easily break is a race map people will break. Durability is all important - players have to be kept focused on the track ahead, not wondering how best to sabotage the game.Is it possible for racers to cheat by moving ahead to bypass sections of the track?Can players escape and roam freely outside of the track itself? Is spawn camping an issue?Are honour rules required, and if so, is it unreasonable to expect new or experienced players to follow them?Does the scoring system work efficiently, or can it be exploited? Aesthetics: Race maps have ample opportunity to be visually stunning, and as such a certain degree of flair is expected. Is the track smooth and bump free? How good does the map look from the various angles a racer experiences during a lap? Has budget been wasted on aesthetics without obvious gain? Can aspects of the map distract, confuse or disorient the racers? Some tracks may go that one step further and subtly lead players through the course with sophisticated visual cues. Originality: Originality is important in order to keep players racing on the particular track, rather than quickly moving on to the next. Does the map feel fresh and exciting the first time you play, or does it feel boring and redundant? What about after the tenth time you play, or the twentieth? Are design elements overused throughout the track? What separates the map from others of its kind? Is there a gimmick or unique selling point that makes the map unique, without sacrificing the core gameplay?
Rating Criteria for Mini-Game Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following five criteria: Enjoyment: This is a major factor for Mini-Game maps. The maps must be enjoyable to keep players’ attention. Does the map have the fun factor that games contain? Does the map focus on a fun or is it more focused on other types of gameplay? In general, is the map considered fun? How do players respond to playing the map multiple times in one session? A Mini Game can’t rely on Halo’s standard gameplay to pass off a gimmick. Players should be presented with a unique experience that everyone is able to enjoy, even if there is an imbalance of skill. Balance: Balance is important for a Mini-Game map to be fun all of the time. Does each player or team have a fair chance reaching the goal or objective? If the teams have different duties, are they balanced or is one easier or harder? Are their any areas of the map that overpower the rest of the map? Are there any areas that are overpowered by the rest of the map? Are there any weapons, vehicles, or equipment that over power the rest of the map? Durability: Durability is significant in order to maintain the idea of Mini-Game maps. Can the map be escaped? Does escaping the map deteriorate the fun or give a significant advantage? Are their any locations that can be reached by players or teams that are not allowed? Can the scoring system be exploited? Can the spawn system be exploited? If so, is it a problem? Is there a specific set of honor rules? Aesthetics: What is the overall appearance of the map? Does it look good? Is everything smooth allowing the game to play smoothly? Are the landmarks that help players? Is there a great deal of care in the aesthetics of the map including small touches? Does the map's theme have a consistent flow throughout the map or is it random? Originality: This is one of the most important things in order for a Mini-Game map to be successful. A Mini-Game map must feel different than other maps for it to shine. Is the map based on something? Does the map closely resemble another map’s idea? Is the map’s idea fun and fresh or redundant? Does the map separate itself from other maps with a similar idea? Does the map separate itself from other maps in general?
Rating Criteria for Aesthetic Maps Maps will be judged and reviewed on the following two criteria: Aesthetics: This is the main focus in this style of map. What was your first impression of the map? Does it look good? Are surfaces smooth and clean, or are objects sloppily placed? Does each part focus on and maintain the visual theme of the map? How well is the theme captured? Does the design feel competent and coherent, or simply a little too random? Are there any small touches that enhance the overall scene? Were some techniques overused for the sake of it, at the expense of the final result? How easy is it to draw comparisons between the forged map and the subject matter itself? Does the work feel unfinished and yet there is some budget remaining? Originality: Aesthetic maps can be inherently unoriginal as they are often based on pre-existent work. Has the concept been done before? If the idea is similar to other maps, what sets it apart from them? Is the overall idea fresh and interesting, or boring and overdone? Is the work overly simplistic, and could easily be remade? Making clever use of the available objects, especially if attempting a difficult design, recieves additional credit. Incorporating switch mechanisms or other unique, technically difficult functions that serve to further engage the player's interest is also worthy of praise.
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:17 AM.
 |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2 Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 |
 |