I'm not going to waste my time giving a full response to you. Art is not objective, and if you think it is you will make a terrible moderator of what is essentially functional art, if you start enforcing arbitrary standards such as those you listed.
Once you get out of the basic standards of a map being playable and functioning (criterion you don't even bother mentioning); All the other factors you mention are by definition subjective.
@Psions I agree, art is in the eyes of the beholder. To a player that has been playing for a while astro/gap is boring and very predictable, but to new players it's very exciting. But do acknowledge that there is a huge issue with gap/astro clones that need to be trimmed away. The entire popular maps section is just filled with the same iterations of like three maps and it does look unappealing from the vault browser's perspective. personally what i'd do is filter every map containing the word "astro" or "gap" and move all of these maps into their own category on the vault browser, that way the entire vault doesn't look like a single textured double cratered mess. My only qualms with what Morax (and maybe biass?) wanted to do was to get rid of the spam by just taking away mapping privileges from everybody except approved mapping authors, which I find to be a gross use of power.
Yes categorisation would be good and its not specific for just those two maps. Many maps are overcloned, especially survivals. There's like 30 different 5th dimension survival maps.
It would certianly be nice to be able to properly filter and sort through the Vault.
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
I'm not going to waste my time giving a full response to you.
You've made over 11 posts in the past 24 hours. I think you have time to talk to little old me.
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
Art is not objective
@Cascade said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
I agree, art is in the eyes of the beholder
Sweet, this was the expected response, luckily for my case there is an objectively, meaning a measurable difference between you and an industry professional. And that difference is not a matter of opinion or feelings. (As per the google definition.)
Lets draw psions sitting behind his computer as a cute anime girl. What can be objectively measured as better between a good and a bad work?
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
Once you get out of the basic standards of a map being playable and functioning (criterion you don't even bother mentioning);
I don't see why I should need to mention those.
@Cascade said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
personally what i'd do is filter every map containing the word "astro" or "gap" and move all of these maps into their own category on the vault browser, that way the entire vault doesn't look like a single textured double cratered mess.
So you're saying that single textures are objectively bad here, or is map quality still completely opinion based?
This suggestion is made every other week. Despite the gimmie of "who is going to develop this?" I don't see what real benefit this gives. I can only see how this system is open to abuse. Either the most recent vault is easier to see and people just don't put astro in the name, or the "gap/astro" vault is easier and people put astro in their title to get into that vault too. This also doesnt solve issues with rights, as someone did infact make astro and making a vault dedicated to holding stolen rips of his work is not a good look.
@Cascade said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
My only qualms with what Morax (and maybe biass?) wanted to do was to get rid of the spam by just taking away mapping privileges from everybody except approved mapping authors, which I find to be a gross use of power.
I'm sorry dude but did you not read my application for the councilor role wherein I explicitly stated that not doing this was the entire point of me applying? I made a Tl;DR so at least read that.
@biass
You've not made an argument. So there's nothing really I can say in response, that presents itself as an argument, rather than statements.
"Some styling is objectively better than others".
How are you measuring that? Where is evidence for this?
Colour that goes outside of the lines is worse than colour that does not. This is not a style choice or a matter of opinion
This is only on the basis of a functional argument if functionally colouring should be within lines. Who chose the lines?
If I'm drawing a picture and then colouring it in, why is going outside of the initial figure lines bad? What if colour bleed is being used to show an energy overflow of a character.
Again your argument has no basis.
**Your adhereance to the human anatomy
Drawing a character with scoliosis because you cannot figure out proportions is worse than a character that is properly proportioned, this is not a matter of opinion. Unless of course the character does actually have scoliosis. Do you have scoliosis?**
Again this is a functional argument. I am trying to draw a human, or am i trying to draw a human with scholiosis? If I'm an artist I will draw anatomy however I like. Also what I draw is entirely dependent on what i want to achieve. For example, I may stretch certain features to accentuate certain aspects.
Anime characters do not follow proper human anatomy, their heads are too large, their eyes are too large. Does this make all anime and manga objectively bad art?
You're not presenting any objective standard here. You're not even making an argument, you are merely making an assumption that a person is trying to draw something in a specific way and has failed to draw it in that way.
In fact all you have done is within your statement made the pre-supposition that the artist is bad and conveying what they want to convey due to incompetence, and therefore the art is bad. That would be the subjective opinion of the artist who drew it, because it didn't come out as they wanted it to be.
**Your ability to convey light
You have the light from the computer and maybe the light from the ceiling. Portraying other light or incorrect reflections of the aformentioned is objectively worse than casting the light properly.**
Am I trying to achieve realistic lighting? Beyond a functional argument, what argument could be made against abstract lighting systems?
You haven't made an argument. Instead you are merely imputing that your view on how something should be drawn is de-facto the way it should be drawn. You are stating that your subjective opinion is objective fact. That is not an argument, it is just a projection of arrogance. Its not more than pretencious critics saying that "metal" is objectively bad music
And before you ask this is my last post on this opinion. Otherwise we would be derailing the thread into a philosophical discussion, that you would never admit you are wrong, even though you are wrong. You are no philosopher king.
You might find the below an interesting read. Or maybe not.
https://public.wsu.edu/~taflinge/mythobj.html
Psions; honest question do you understanding where modern art is “subjective” comes from? I see folks arguing this point and fail to realize why the concept exists.
I’m a shitty 1k Global. Any balance or gameplay suggestions should be understood or taken as such.
Project Head and current Owner/Manager of SCTA Project
I agree, art is not objective and cannot be measured. With that being said can we please add this beautifull artistically created map to the featured map list? Thanks
featured map list is not good enough for this map it needs to be in the tate modern
Vault Admin / Creative Team / Map Guru
I'm say a traditional RTS enthusiast, played RTSs say since my first one. The one thing that reminds me the most of them at a time is the maps. With Supcom, maps can say take a new meaning to the traditional RTS aspect. How the vault is handled in regards to maps should be considered reasonably.
With playing RTSs over the years I've come to realize that rather good at that or not, I typically enjoy to run them against other game types with the same interest to find in them. Over and over again, there seems to be a tried and true say aspect about that that just tends to work than most often otherwise.
And in all this time the one thing to make a good impact to those RTSs are the maps. Maps take the game and define where you can go with it. They give choice in what to or not to do, especially in regards if another map is the next map.
Supcom offered a reasonable highlight of a map capacity with say changing the game of RTSs of it at the sametime. Options of maps as usual to a point, still sustains what kind of choices the game changing still does amount to. A lack of emphasis for maps in Supcom to support Supcom cant be reasonable.
How the Vault goes and what maps amount to makes sense at a time for a time why either can say move forward. Rather maps should be assigning values without an emphasis of assessing the assigned, I don't know. It has say the remarks in doing so but in regards as so is there still say the appropriate remarks?? What is map participation against most thoughts to say(host understood-one count, more played, amount of players, etc) when interests of say CPU, ping, rank, games played, map size, who playing/played and say etc can be a reasonable factor to consider by themselves for what most maps probably amount to in being played?? If not, that's fine, but still if not, that doesn't say it won't at all. Yes, can say is aniche and not everyone is going to be happy, but what about the variable worth of " speed maps " , minimal design maps for quick play?? What determines the difference of such and the reality of the purpose?? And of that, when does it turn into niche from one to say it is still something in general ??
Yea, the vault most likely without being just one folder with files in it at a time probably has some reasonable overhead on various interests. Of the interests to have for the vault, where/when does the various interests within take for a place to have no interest to be gained at all??
I'm a traditional RTS enthusiast, several several of my maps come from there(the vault), if I gain a map I didn't have before from custom matches it's because I hadn't already got it from the vault.
I understand the interests in many things but many things at a time seem to lack an interest, one point or another for the entire discussion so far one way or another. Of such, how the vault gets handled should be done so reasonably.
Thanks
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
@biass
You've not made an argument. So there's nothing really I can say in response, that presents itself as an argument,
Except you say that I do have a functional one except I don't have one except I do except It has no basis except I have none. So you can't say anything in response except you did anyway, except you were not going to waste your time except you did. Whatever, we're all just having fun here. Except for you probably.
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
Again this is a functional argument. I am trying to draw a human, or am i trying to draw a human with scholiosis? If I'm an artist I will draw anatomy however I like. Also what I draw is entirely dependent on what i want to achieve.
Your entire spiel is based on the notion that artists are just creating "whatever" and likely hanging it out at the local bazaar to be sold to anyone passing by. And while this might work if you were in the dark ages or on twitter (they're the same thing) this is not reflective of actual industry which comes with real constraints and requirements. We're drawing "you" as stated and I doubt you have quote "scholiosis". If you were drawn with it, it would fall out of the requirement of "being psions" and be worse in this case.
Else: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
Otherwise we would be derailing the thread into a philosophical discussion
You are both:
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
You might find the below an interesting read. Or maybe not.
Sorry dude but i don't need to read 5000 words on a tiled "back1.gif" image background to re-learn what they teach you in school. Hate to be the one to say it but reading philosophy doesn't make you any more smart or any more cool. Especially if you're not choosing anything relevant and are just linking the first thing that looks good from a loaded google search:
I personally think reading philosophy makes you less cool, because you start speaking down upon people with real-world experience from the feigned notion that you're informed when you're not. but you did read what you linked, right?
@Psions said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
And before you ask this is my last post on this opinion
I didn't ask, see you tonight!
@Mvk_ said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
Something?
based markovposter
@moses_the_red said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:
@Mod_Councillor
You clearly don't know what makes a good map, because you have some kind of elitist bias that prevents you from learning anything from maps that have become wildly popular.
It is blatant unveiled narcissism that allows you to claim that maps that have been enjoyed by thousands, a map which currently occupies the #2 and #4 slots on the "most played" page, is a bad map.
If this belief happens to be held by a large number of ladder players, that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.
I kind of figured this would be an issue. No objective criteria can ever be instituted because any such criteria would have to accept the obvious truth that popular maps... maps that thousands enjoy playing, maps that people pass over carefully crafted very pretty 1v1 style supposedly "good" maps in order to play... are good maps...
This absurd group think mindset runs so deeply that even the most played maps of all time, hell - particularly the most played maps of all time - are somehow considered bad.
At the end of the day, you have this notion that your opinion is superior to that of others, that no amount of "votes" by players means anything at all. You are the one that determines map quality, not the playerbase.
And that is both laughable and sad.
Any map which no one plays unless they're forced to play it by a matchmaking system is a failed map. If you think otherwise its because you are using a broken system for determining map value. Sitting around with a bunch of buddies and picking out maps might be fun for you, but good luck getting people to give a shit about your opinion and play those maps willingly.
If the map making community spent more time learning why some maps are so heavily selected by the playerbase, and applying those lessons to their maps rather than bitching about how those maps aren't any good, maybe people would rotate off of some of these "bad" maps once in a while.
This attitude is wide spread, sadly.
Soon™️
I make maps to express my creativity, in that regard astro/gap does nothing to aid that goal. i personally don't care how many plays any of my maps get, that is not how i would measure it's success, i try to make my maps a believable or realistic world and that is what to me defines a good map over a bad one, I share my work so others can enjoy it if they wish. If people enjoy playing astro/gap then good for them but these are not maps i find enjoyable or rewarding in any way shape or form
Vault Admin / Creative Team / Map Guru
