A 6-stars map? Director's cut.

[Rex.]

Well, I am curious about what it takes to make a spelendid 5 stars and DC maps. So let's get straight to the point. What is the main factors that you or mods feel that a map deserve a 5/5 str or Director's cut? And also what it takes to make one?

 

[Shar Dundred]

There's no single concept behind that, that makes you to get a 5/5 automatically.

There's no other factors but the usual ones like story, gameplay, terrain, uniquess etc or whatever is important for that particular type of map. To get a 5/5 your map must be splendid, very well done and just good. Nothing else to say. It also relies on what the reviewer or mod thinks about the map, so absolutely individual.

 

[SA Dashie]

It also needs not to lack content and value to back it up.

Something that is not simple for anyone to do.

 

[Shadow Fury]

For me, a director's cut map is over the perfection. I never gave a full 5/5 as a vote to anybody for a map (always about 4.5 or even 4.75). This is what I expect from a DC map:

1- Very exciting gameplay which makes me like addicted to the map and makes me want to replay the map even after 1000 games
2- Extremely marvellous terrain which impresses me. Every single tile and doodad must be used wisely
3- Completely leakless triggers
4- All tooltips must be written in flawless English. This means no spelling, grammar and puncuation mistakes.
5- Not a single small bug or error in the whole map
6- The theme of the map must be attractive and the heroes exciting to play

This is why I think it's impossible to get DC. If you want my opinion, not even the maps that actually got DC would deserve it. No doubt they'd get something like 4.9/5 or even a full 5/5 but NOT 6/5

 

[sonofjay]

Just take a look on our DC maps, they usually have one common factor that made them standout beside the rest of its kind and that is them being very polished. You just know that the creators put too much effort and care to their maps.

 

[Malhorne]

To The Bitter End is just awesome.

 

[nhs325]

Uniqueness. That's what you need for Director's Cut.
Examples:
Sunken City: Dungeon Crawler with Hack,n Slash elements, plus RPG-IS makes it great. And constant developing.
SWAT Aftermath: one of the first survival maps that STANDS OUT FORM EVERY OTHER ONES. Traits, Skills, Classes, Items..... even secret classes and rank makes replaybility.
Against the Darkness (my new favourite); Fast-paced combat, with AtD points system and crazy amount of customization...
So, uniqueness stands all, with lots of the other combies........ 6/5 GURANTEED.

 

[Chaosy]

Hard to say. Basically 5/5 in the normal sections (terrain, story, gameplay, uniqueness) + the map being very polished.

What does it take? patience and tons of time. Not to mention skill and knowledge in every aspect. (unless you work in a team)

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Also do note that the quality of maps increased over time. 2005-2007 DC maps may even be approved with 4/5s if they were uploaded today for the first time.

 

[PurgeandFire]

^As SCN pointed out, the DC standards are pretty much at a peak. With each new addition to the DC, the bar is raised a little bit. A DC map pretty much has to have great execution and very good aesthetics. Lacking either of those could get you a 4/5 or 5/5, but if you have both then it will greatly benefit your chances.

The more recent DC's (past 5 years) tend to shine in particular areas. For example, TKoK and Gaia's both have an incredible amount of depth, and they are very popular online. Execution wise, they are both fantastic, and I'm pretty sure anyone who played those maps can testify to how polished the maps are (Gaia's even more so). The content is quite immense.

Then you can take a look at something like Iceborn, which is probably the most aesthetically advanced map of all time. You can clearly tell how much effort he put into sound, placement, and choosing the appropriate assets. It really is a masterpiece--the screenshots alone are enough for someone to try it out.

And then you have hosted projects that have been refined over many, many years. Those maps are often hailed for their "polished" feel--they appear to be complete games. e.g. AtD and Sunken City.

But DC's aren't meant to discourage people--they are meant to inspire people to put in 100% effort. But since it is moderators' judgment, it is subjective. If we don't think a map is DC material, you shouldn't feel disheartened. Maps are always able to be edited, so there is a chance you can get a DC in due time. But keep in mind that a lot of it is determined by marketing (a.k.a. "showing off" your map)--not only does your map have to be good, but the layout has to be good enough to attract members to download it. There are a lot of factors that go into it, but ultimately it has to be something that impresses us all.

 

[Jaina Proudless]

The 5 star rating, in my opinion, depends wholly on what is possible and what is out there. The best map will get 5/5 directors cut and thus maps with this rating must comparable to such a map.

I disagree with Shadow Fury with holding maps to a seamless impossible standard. Both 5/5 and directors cut must be achievable ratings as opposed to some divine goal that is unreachable, otherwise they are redundant.

 

[Chaosy]

If a game/movie that costs millions of dollars to develop get a general rating of 8, it's considered a good game.

Meanwhile you're saying that a lot of people who do a project in their free time should get 5/5 (10/10) seems legit.

 

[Jaina Proudless]

If a game/movie that costs millions of dollars to develop get a general rating of 8, it's considered a good game.

Meanwhile you're saying that a lot of people who do a project in their free time should get 5/5 (10/10) seems legit.

The highest rating, 5/5 director's cut, is relative to the best that is possible and has been achieved of a map and has little to nothing to do with the rating systems of movies and games. If you try to hold maps up to rating standards of games you aren't really using the rating system properly. For example if you rate an apple out of 10 an apple that scores a 10/10 is not comparable to a pizza that scores an 8/10 for its own independent rating scale.

Movies =/= War3 Maps
Games =/= War3 Maps

 

[Chaosy]

Of course you can compare it. What taste best? Pizza or Apple.

From my point of view, you're making a game, not a wc3 map specifically. And a game can be compared to other games. And a cinematic is comparable to a movie, even if just a short one.

 

[Jaina Proudless]

Of course you can compare it. What taste best? Pizza or Apple.

From my point of view, you're making a game, not a wc3 map specifically. And a game can be compared to other games.

You are missing the point. An apple cannot taste the same as pizza so if you judge by 'what is the tastiest apple?' the pizza ratings for 'what is the tastiest pizza?' is irrelevant. The same goes for warcraft 3 maps. The rating determines what is the best map, which mind you is based on what is the best map out there, it has nothing to do with other independent games or movies.

You are not doing justice to the maps by rating them on par with games as maps can only achieve so much. Dreaming about impossible-to-reach heights and judging everything based on that does not make for a useful rating system.

 

[Chaosy]

@statement 1
Wont change the way I view things. Let's end the argumentation about this here since I doubt any of us will change their opinion regarding statement #1.

@statement 2
Bullshit. Check this out and tell me again how about where the limits are. http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/map-development-202/requiem-192294/
That map got better graphics than many official games, since it's not out I can't judge the gameplay though. But there are other maps that provide wonderful gameplay that I could compare to many decent games.

 

[Jaina Proudless]

@statement 1
Wont change the way I view things. Let's end the argumentation about this here since I doubt any of us will change their opinion regarding statement #1

So you see that it is a correct way of looking at things but refuse to acknowledge it? I am not so sure why you are so stubborn in your view on on warcraft map ratings.

@statement 2
Bullshit. Check this out and tell me again how about where the limits are. http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/map-development-202/requiem-192294/
That map got better graphics than many official games, since it's not out I can't judge the gameplay though. But there are other maps that provide wonderful gameplay that I could compare to many decent games.

Pointing at a map and saying 'this proves there are no limits' isn't going to expand the power of the world editor. I am repeating myself here so this is the last time I will say it, the map ratings depend on what is the best map out there. It is redundant to have a rating out of 5 if there isn't a single map that reaches that rating. The possibility of having that map can be defined by its existence; until there is a map that shows what is possible we can only guess and to say that there can be a map potentially that is completely flawless and perfect and judging all the maps by this non-existent dream map is not a best way to rate maps, not by a long shot.

I can't believe you are seriously arguing for such a demonstrably false point. Warcraft 3 mapping is infinitely limited in comparison making a new game from scratch and by comparing the two and rating them on the same scale you are not doing anyone any favours. Your initial statement demonstrates to an extent why exactly the two should not be using the same ranking system as one has millions of dollars poured into and the other doesn't, not to mention the massive array of all the other differences between the two.

 

[edo494]

dont forget that you can have movies and games that wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and are shit. You should never rate things on how much they cost. E.g diablo 3 and countless expensive movies

 

[Cherrymage]

dont forget that you can have movies and games that wasted hundreds of millions of dollars and are shit. You should never rate things on how much they cost. E.g diablo 3 and countless expensive movies

Agreed.

 

[Kino]

I disagree with Shadow Fury with holding maps to a seamless impossible standard. Both 5/5 and directors cut must be achievable ratings as opposed to some divine goal that is unreachable, otherwise they are redundant.

Basically this.
If maps that are rated 1-2 are "unapprovable" and maps that are 5-DC are "impossible" to achieve, why do you even bother with a rating system of 1- DC?

A rating system has to be useful in describing the general and somewhat subjective quality of a map.
The idea of untouchable ratings (be it in the positive or negative extremes) is inherently pointless.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

What is the main factors that you or mods feel that a map deserve a 5/5 str or Director's cut?

There are many maps that are extremely popular but won't earn a DC on Hive unless the standards are changed. Castle Fight, Azeroth Wars, Risk Devo, and DotA are a few to name. So why aren't these maps DC worthy although they are popular?

It's because those maps don't live up to our DC standards. It's that simple. The main factors are uniqueness, creativity, and visuals. As most may already take note of, the DC maps on Hive are very popular, but aren't the most popular.

Why is that? Well, since Hive's user-base is very "artist-centric", it was inevitable for our rating scale to be like this. Think about it this way, Transformers movies are rated much lower by critics than by the general populace. They aren't seen as proper, or artistic for the matters we're talking 'bout here. But it is fun to watch by many non-critics. Let's try a Warcraft map example. DotA is the most popular map and is hated unfavorable upon much more users in this community as opposed to other Warcraft communities. Its terrain is below average. Its gameplay is gimmicky. The map would not receive a 6/5 rating because of those reasons.

So my point is, DC maps are usually very proper and appeal to critics but not exactly to the masses. People who blabber around saying maps that are popular get biased ratings from moderators because of their popularity, are usually wrong. All in all though, DCs are determined by the consul of map moderators along with some say with the other staff.

@Shadow Fury
I wasn't going to go n' jump on the bandwagon and shriek at the sight of your standards for a 6/5 map at first, (which are indeed ridiculous ^^) but I couldn't resist and comment on it.

The majority of people I know would not care for many, or if not all of those points for a DC map. A director's cut is bound to Hive's definition of director's cut. You state that the DC maps don't deserve it, yet they do as they are in the boundaries.

At least you didn't expect maps to reach those levels. I mean, things that personally impress you and other pieces of unnecessary perfections such as perfect English are what make a DC map? Come on now.

 

[Shadow Fury]

Whatever you say, I'll remain inflexible. Even if the whole hive disagrees, the standards for DC are the ones I listed. You underestimate a 6/5. You got 1 mark more than the available score, hell, it must have very high standards (no matter how impossible or ridiculous). Not gonna change my mind...

 

[Kazeon]

Whatever you say, I'll remain inflexible. Even if the whole hive disagrees, the standards for DC are the ones I listed. You underestimate a 6/5. You got 1 mark more than the available score, hell, it must have very high standards (no matter how impossible or ridiculous). Not gonna change my mind...

Why you make a standard which yourself can't even get close to it? That's silly. Just saying.

 

[Shadow Fury]

Why you make a standard which yourself can't even get close to it? That's silly. Just saying.

I'm not even pointing to such standards as I know they are far beyond my capabilities but that shall not stop me from setting some very high standards for giving DC. If I am not close to something and I speak about how hard it is achieving it, it doesn't mean I'm doing something silly. Just saying...

 

[Celaquil]

They way I see it, DC isn't really an official rating.

And as thus, isn't really something anyone should aspire to,
5/5 is the best "official" rating you can get, and that's a pretty
good rating. Anyone should be content with a 5/5.

DC is more in the genre of... Well, as Purg put it: Subjective
opinions from the moderators. It's more of a "feel" based rating
than a rational based rating. As thus, it's hard to aspire to it,
because there are so many factors involved in how to acquire
it. It's there, though, more as an apple in front of a horse:

Meant to inspire hard work, and in the end, it's the rider's
decision whether the horse gets the apple or not.

 

[GhostThruster]

mod ratings shouldn't exist. they should only approve or reject.

 

[Jaina Proudless]

mod ratings shouldn't exist. they should only approve or reject.

This seems like a topic of its own >.<

 

[Pinzu]

mod ratings shouldn't exist. they should only approve or reject.

Even funnier when you see a map rated 3/5 "useful" - what map is useful?

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Even funnier when you see a map rated 3/5 "useful" - what map is useful?

Maps are tools, it can be useful in many ways. Whether they're just useful to entertain, to learn from, to practice, and among other things, they're useful but not necessarily recommended to the whole.

 

[Deleted member 242951]

Well.. Rex. After a long line of posts here you have your answer..... Everything... Jjust everything the guys posted above me makes a map directors cut.

In case of To The Bitter End, if it was realeased today it would hardly get a 3.75 rating as for its difficulty and terrain faults.

The best DC maps are sunken city, Ice born and The emerald of power.

Can anyone tell me why the chosen ones did not get a DC?

 

[Malhorne]

Maybe the terrain faults would would not make it achive the DC but I don't get your point on the difficulty.
Actually the gameplay, the storyline and the skins are so awesome alone.

 

[Remixer]

Basically I think that any map that proves people something, brings people together in a certain way or makes them feel something unique deserves a director's cut.

For me a map is above any other, it's Gaias Retaliation ORPG that caught my eyes a long time ago. I hadn't been in any Warcraft III forum before nor had I made any maps public ever.

That map got me and my friends playing Warcraft for a while even though we had pretty much forgotten the entire game for year(s). After we played the map with a group of 4 people I decided to make an account on Hive and contact the creators and ask if they were still continuing with the map.

This map proved me that playing with friends is always fun and that there is dimensions and possibilities in Warcraft I had never imagined. (The atmosphere and gameplay of the map was completely unique to me and my friends.) It also presented some really cool community resources that I was keen to track down. I was also determined to find out as much as as possible, music, textures, creators...

Gaias Retaliation also brought me closer to my friends, especially one friend, who had started to play more and more single player games. It also brought me to the Hive Workshop, and since the moment I joined I have made some really cool, amazing friends, learned indescribable much, used and commented other people's amazing work and the things they have created, whether it was a terrain screenshot, huge project, map, model, skin icon... what ever. And also returned the favour by making maps to the other people around there in hope that some one might value them as much as I valued Gaias. Thinking that one of them might prove something and make them come to Hive Workshop.

That ORPG map also felt unique and later on proved to be pretty unique to me and couple of other people as well. It had amazing atmosphere and me with my friend enjoyed it a lot. We had to figure out really well what to do and so on. That map has prolonged my time with Warcraft for at least 4 years now.

That map was also one key thing that got me in contact with -Kobas- (you might know him). And that contact (actually made thanks to the models and textures used in Gaias) got me into conversation with him. Later I found out that he was working on his own progress Shadows of the Past. Even though cancelled after years of progress that progress taught me a lot. Not only me. But for a lot of people. That single project got me many new friends in Hive, opened a whole new world of terraining, modelling, 2D art, writing, planning, progressing, leading a project, interacting with people, learning new things, scripting, triggering, creating a fantasy world and story lines and so on.

So after all this writing I can tell you. In my honest opinion if a map can bring people to each other, create feelings and teach and prove things as Gaias Retaliation ORPG did to me, that map surely earns a Director's Cut 6/5. In my opinion Director's Cut is not about having fancy correct english or some super complicated systems and such or spending years in front of your desk. Director's Cut is about being important to community in many ways and it should be given as reward for your great work, as a thank you.

As a last word, I wish to thank the creators of Gaias Retaliation ORPG from my pure heart. I wish the best for you guys.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

Basically I think that any map that proves people something, brings people together in a certain way or makes them feel something unique deserves a director's cut.

For me a map is above any other, it's Gaias Retaliation ORPG that caught my eyes a long time ago. I hadn't been in any Warcraft III forum before nor had I made any maps public ever.

That map got me and my friends playing Warcraft for a while even though we had pretty much forgotten the entire game for year(s). After we played the map with a group of 4 people I decided to make an account on Hive and contact the creators and ask if they were still continuing with the map.

This map proved me that playing with friends is always fun and that there is dimensions and possibilities in Warcraft I had never imagined. (The atmosphere and gameplay of the map was completely unique to me and my friends.) It also presented some really cool community resources that I was keen to track down. I was also determined to find out as much as as possible, music, textures, creators...

Gaias Retaliation also brought me closer to my friends, especially one friend, who had started to play more and more single player games. It also brought me to the Hive Workshop, and since the moment I joined I have made some really cool, amazing friends, learned indescribable much, used and commented other people's amazing work and the things they have created, whether it was a terrain screenshot, huge project, map, model, skin icon... what ever. And also returned the favour by making maps to the other people around there in hope that some one might value them as much as I valued Gaias. Thinking that one of them might prove something and make them come to Hive Workshop.

That ORPG map also felt unique and later on proved to be pretty unique to me and couple of other people as well. It had amazing atmosphere and me with my friend enjoyed it a lot. We had to figure out really well what to do and so on. That map has prolonged my time with Warcraft for at least 4 years now.

That map was also one key thing that got me in contact with -Kobas- (you might know him). And that contact (actually made thanks to the models and textures used in Gaias) got me into conversation with him. Later I found out that he was working on his own progress Shadows of the Past. Even though cancelled after years of progress that progress taught me a lot. Not only me. But for a lot of people. That single project got me many new friends in Hive, opened a whole new world of terraining, modelling, 2D art, writing, planning, progressing, leading a project, interacting with people, learning new things, scripting, triggering, creating a fantasy world and story lines and so on.

So after all this writing I can tell you. In my honest opinion if a map can bring people to each other, create feelings and teach and prove things as Gaias Retaliation ORPG did to me, that map surely earns a Director's Cut 6/5. In my opinion Director's Cut is not about having fancy correct english or some super complicated systems and such or spending years in front of your desk. Director's Cut is about being important to community in many ways and it should be given as reward for your great work, as a thank you.

As a last word, I wish to thank the creators of Gaias Retaliation ORPG from my pure heart. I wish the best for you guys.

I was just lurking this thread, but I felt like I had to comment on this and thank you for your warm and kind words. It's always great to see a project inspire someone.


And I couldn't agree more. I think Director's Cut shouldn't just be the sum of features of the quality of execution. It should more or less be a reward for years of dedication and hard work put into the project.
If we are totally honest here, then we all played maps that we felt were great, but in the end totally forgot about them.
And then we played maps that not only we felt were great, but looked and felt like the maker suffered many deaths for it. Maps where the creators are obsessed with all the small little details that most players won't ever see. When it's not just about creating a map, but sharing an experience.
Projects like Iceborn. Everything on this project just screams the pain that APproject had to go through to make this a reality. All the stuff that nobody will ever see... the countless months sitting in front of the code, the months sitting on customizing and converting all the models, the countless months shouting at the screen for the 3 minutes it takes to place each single doodad due to progressing size of the map; and all that for literally a handful of people that still play this awesome over a decade old RTS.

A Director's Cut rating on maps is imho not awarding a goal or final product. It's awarding the long and painful road going there.

 

[Ash]

Back when I was reviewing maps, I don't believe 6/5 was a thing. I can fit it into my framework that I used for reviewing maps, though.

Generally speaking, then, my rating system worked like this:

1/5 = Rejected, a really bad map.
2/5 = Needs improving before being accepted.
3/5 = The map's good enough to be accepted.
4/5 = The map's pretty good, better than most.
5/5 = The map's perfect. I didn't give many 5's.

The way I feel a director's cut should work is similar to the monthly round up of news: every month, a handful of 5's should be selected and showcased.

 

[InfernalTater]

You are missing the point. An apple cannot taste the same as pizza so if you judge by 'what is the tastiest apple?' the pizza ratings for 'what is the tastiest pizza?' is irrelevant. The same goes for warcraft 3 maps. The rating determines what is the best map, which mind you is based on what is the best map out there, it has nothing to do with other independent games or movies.

You are not doing justice to the maps by rating them on par with games as maps can only achieve so much. Dreaming about impossible-to-reach heights and judging everything based on that does not make for a useful rating system.

Exactly.

You're comparing something made by one person, or a few people, in a map editor, to an entire game made by a team with dozens, or even hundreds of people. Any Warcraft III map that could even earn a 3/5 when judged as though it were an entire videogame is easily a 5/5 map in my book. However, 6/5 is a whole new level that has to be innovative.

I must admit, people have come a long way in mapping, and I think THW had a large part to do with that. Judging maps, and other resources for that matter, is getting tricky, because today, thanks to each other, we're all producing work that would have been considered incredible when this game was first released.

 

[Ardenian]

I must admit, people have come a long way in mapping, and I think THW had a large part to do with that. Judging maps, and other resources for that matter, is getting tricky, because today, thanks to each other, we're all producing work that would have been considered incredible when this game was first released.

Not to mention that 'everything' has been done already, it is hard to create something new, unseen and unique.
As a map reviewer, I hardly face maps that are even near a 6/5. I don't think it is possible to get this rating at map submission, neither after working on it much time.

I think they are some maps with a 6/5 that do not deserve the rating at all, as the current standard or rating strongly differs from the rating years ago.

Maps with a legendary status, like Sunken City or IceBorn reached that rating because there is no other map of their genre that reaches their quality standard.

A 6/5 should only be given if the game is so... unique within itself that 'everyone' notices it is something special.

 

[Shadow Fury]

Not to mention that 'everything' has been done already, it is hard to create something new, unseen and unique.
As a map reviewer, I hardly face maps that are even near a 6/5. I don't think it is possible to get this rating at map submission, neither after working on it much time.

I think they are some maps with a 6/5 that do not deserve the rating at all, as the current standard or rating strongly differs from the rating years ago.

Maps with a legendary status, like Sunken City or IceBorn reached that rating because there is no other map of their genre that reaches their quality standard.

A 6/5 should only be given if the game is so... unique within itself that 'everyone' notices it is something special.

Finally someone who thinks it exactly like me!

 

[Shar Dundred]

As a map reviewer, I hardly face maps that are even near a 6/5. I don't think it is possible to get this rating at map submission, neither after working on it much time.

How long are you reviewing maps again? Curious since I only noticed that you joined the group at some point.

I think they are some maps with a 6/5 that do not deserve the rating at all, as the current standard or rating strongly differs from the rating years ago.

I *really* hope you're not suggesting that the rating of all the old maps should be changed to "make them fit today's standards" and that you're just using this as argument why you disagree with 6/5 ratings.
That'd mean that we had to remove old, but wonderful maps from inactive creators just because they lack proper description.

 

[Ardenian]

How long are you reviewing maps again? Curious since I only noticed that you joined the group at some point.

Oh, excuse me, I did not know that only high-reputated, old members have the right to make statements and that lower reputated users should better avoid posting in hot threads that could be decisive about Hive's future.
Excuse the rude tone, but you are simply attacking me for no reason.

I might not make official reviews or reviews at all for a long time, but I am an intelligent being with the capabilities to judge and rate any map I ever played. It doesn't matter that I am only for a short time an official map reviewer, as the reviewing is influenced by other experiences like playing games and favourite some for certain reasons.

I *really* hope you're not suggesting that the rating of all the old maps should be changed to "make them fit today's standards" and that you're just using this as argument why you disagree with 6/5 ratings.
That'd mean that we had to remove old, but wonderful maps from inactive creators just because they lack proper description.

Honestly, I thought about suggesting it, as some users tend to ask 'Why has this map a 6/5, it is around average, mine is better'.

Well, Hive has a big archiving mentality, I doubt Ralle/Moderators/Staff would touch old maps for this particular reason.
I don't want to start a discussion whether they should , how did you say, 'make them fit today's standards'.
I simply say it is a mistake, in my personal opinion, that maps with, after today's standard, average features are still in the Director's Cut section.
I do not want to remove or change them, I simply think there could be some kind of notification that their rating is out-dated and/or not rated after the same standard of today.

 

[Remixer]

This thing works pretty much like special effects Oscars.

If we go back 20 years, pick a movie that won the Oscar for best special effects and make a movie using the same effects now, it won't win another Oscar. For a few reasons:
1. The quality has improved overtime, meaning that the effects used 20 years ago are dated.
2. Something very similar has done before, it does not feel unique anymore.
3. People that selected Oscar winners were not as big specialists in that area as they are now, meaning, even if you get nominated your chances of winning the Oscars are slight as the judges demand ultimately high quality nowadays.

 

[Shar Dundred]

Oh, excuse me, I did not know that only high-reputated, old members have the right to make statements and that lower reputated users should better avoid posting in hot threads that could be decisive about Hive's future.
Excuse the rude tone, but you are simply attacking me for no reason.

I might not make official reviews or reviews at all for a long time, but I am an intelligent being with the capabilities to judge and rate any map I ever played. It doesn't matter that I am only for a short time an official map reviewer, as the reviewing is influenced by other experiences like playing games and favourite some for certain reasons.

Wow. Since you haven't noticed yourself: I asked you a question that wasn't meant to be offensive.
There's no need to overreact like that.
Don't tell others to stop attacking if there has been no attack.

Honestly, I thought about suggesting it, as some users tend to ask 'Why has this map a 6/5, it is around average, mine is better'.

Well, Hive has a big archiving mentality, I doubt Ralle/Moderators/Staff would touch old maps for this particular reason.
I don't want to start a discussion whether they should , how did you say, 'make them fit today's standards'.
I simply say it is a mistake, in my personal opinion, that maps with, after today's standard, average features are still in the Director's Cut section.
I do not want to remove or change them, I simply think there could be some kind of notification that their rating is out-dated and/or not rated after the same standard of today.

Statements like "My map is better!" aren't really worth being replied to anyway, in my opinion.
People are supposed to look at the date and to understand that in the old days. If they don't, others can tell them.

 

[IcemanBo]

DC quality is probably rising by time, but that does not necessarily mean
that older maps with DC deserve it less and less with upcoming new standards to be a DC.

That does only mean mods in that time thought it deserves a DC, not more and not less.

And to topic here, I think people should not focus too much on getting a DC.
To get a DC might be a bit lucky because it's more subjective by all mods.
A moderator's limit is normaly 5/5. Maybe the 6/5 is a bit misleading, and maybe should
be changed by a "recommended by staff" icon/whatever, because 5/5 is (for me) the best rating.

 

[Boris_Spider]

The rating system doesn't really state anything more than the opinions of the current mods. If it's not rejected - it's functional.

If mods enjoy your game, it gets a higher rating. If not, the mod gets a lower rating. Appeasing the mods shouldn't be the goal of modding - they come and go. If you enjoy your mod & can play it with friends, then you're good.

//\\oo//\\

Edit:
It should be noted though that the mods can help you debug your mod [repair functional & support aesthetic corrections]

 

[Ardenian]

@Remixer

Wow, that is a very interesting comparison. I think it makes any further discussion completely unnecessary.

Wow. Since you haven't noticed yourself: I asked you a question that wasn't meant to be offensive.
There's no need to overreact like that.
Don't tell others to stop attacking if there has been no attack.

So, now I am overreacting, interesting...
I do not tell you to stop attacking, by the way.

'How long are you reviewing maps again? Curious since I only noticed that you joined the group at some point.'

-> I consider this an 'attack', as you express I could not rate a map due to my short period of being active reviewer and therefore lacking experience and therefore I could not take my map reviewing as a fundament for making statements.
In my culture this is considered an attack ( attack is somewhat the wrong word, but anyways).

Well, anyways, let's forget about it.

Statements like "My map is better!" aren't really worth being replied to anyway, in my opinion.

Yeah, I agree with that. But, it is sometimes true.

 

[Shar Dundred]

If mods enjoy your game, it gets a higher rating. If not, the mod gets a lower rating. Appeasing the mods shouldn't be the goal of modding - they come and go. If you enjoy your mod & can play it with friends, then you're good.

I agree that appeasing the mods shouldn't be the goal, but too many people look at ratings.

'How long are you reviewing maps again? Curious since I only noticed that you joined the group at some point.'

-> I consider this an 'attack', as you express I could not rate a map due to my short period of being active reviewer and therefore lacking experience and THEREFORE I could not take my map reviewing as a fundament for making statements.
In my culture this is considered an attack ( attack is somewhat the wrong word, but anyways).

Well, anyways, let's forget about it.

I think you're being too sensitive and reading things I haven't written or meant, but this has no place in this thread, so I won't continue discussing this matter here.

Yeah, I agree with that. But, it is sometimes true.

Perhaps, but it's still not showing people's "humbleness", does it?
Seriously, I'm not able to take such an argument seriously if the creator of a map claims that in comparison to another map.

 

[Kazeon]

DC is a mystery. No one, even the mods, really knows exactly how to achieve it.
And it will remains a mystery as long as outstanding maps like EotA and IID do not achieve DC (personal opinion).

And I don't blame you to think some ancient DC resources do not actually worth their awards if today's standard is applied upon them, because basically you are right. But anyway, you can't really complain about what happened in the past. Just place yourself as one who achieve DC years ago and suddenly mods decided to remove DC award from your resource, how do you feel? Good?

 

[Arad MNK]

The Biggest DC Mistake was TCO, I Dunno why isn't it a DC? That Game is awesome to everybody! (more or less)

 

[Malhorne]

This thread starts to be ruined :s

 

[InfernalTater]

Oh, excuse me, I did not know that only high-reputated, old members have the right to make statements and that lower reputated users should better avoid posting in hot threads that could be decisive about Hive's future.
Excuse the rude tone, but you are simply attacking me for no reason.

I might not make official reviews or reviews at all for a long time, but I am an intelligent being with the capabilities to judge and rate any map I ever played. It doesn't matter that I am only for a short time an official map reviewer, as the reviewing is influenced by other experiences like playing games and favourite some for certain reasons.

You're right, he hit you below the belt there. You don't need to go to college for 8 years taking Warcraft 3 Map Criticism classes and earn a degree to know how to review maps accurately and helpfully. If you're intelligent, you can do it with no experience besides the time you spent playing it.

Honestly, I thought about suggesting it, as some users tend to ask 'Why has this map a 6/5, it is around average, mine is better'.

Well, Hive has a big archiving mentality, I doubt Ralle/Moderators/Staff would touch old maps for this particular reason.
I don't want to start a discussion whether they should , how did you say, 'make them fit today's standards'.
I simply say it is a mistake, in my personal opinion, that maps with, after today's standard, average features are still in the Director's Cut section.
I do not want to remove or change them, I simply think there could be some kind of notification that their rating is out-dated and/or not rated after the same standard of today.

The maps are still worthy of a Director's Cut because they were far better than others of their time. Would you suggest that everyone before us lacked any talent or skill whatsoever, just because we've reached a higher point today by building over the bricks laid out by them? Was the guy who invented steam ships an idiot just because we've got nuclear-powered carriers today?

These maps are worthy of their DC because they went above and beyond what other maps of their time achieved, setting the standard for future developers to follow. Then, years later, new developers are setting new standards. Your same logic could be applied 5 years from now to claim that nothing before then deserves a DC.

We are constantly progressing in every way. Whether or not someone has done something noteworthy is not based on the quality of what they've done compared to the quality of everything in existence, but rather based on the quality of what they've done compared to the quality of what other people in their time were doing.

This thread starts to be ruined :s

How so? What in this thread is affecting you so strongly to decide that it is ruined? That's a very strong word in this context.

 

[Ardenian]

The maps are still worthy of a Director's Cut because they were far better than others of their time.

Yes, I agree, Remixer's example of the Oscars matches totally here.