Map Spring Cleaning?

[SuperxAndrew]

Some of you may recognize me from the forums/servers. If you do not know me, I am the creator of Zone 85 and Shady Hollow. Today, I wanted to gather opinions about something I think would be beneficial to the servers. Should there be maps removed?

I am not going to take any specific maps into consideration; one because I have maps on the server and don't want to bring bias into this, and two, because I know what it takes to build a map, and if my map showed up on any "remove" lists I wouldn't feel too great about it. So, with that being said:

this is not a thread to talk bad about maps, rather to discuss an idea, so be nice. ​

Anyway, back to the topic... I have always enjoyed how active the map making community is on this MineCraft server. On top of that, the amount of above average builders submitting maps is at a high since I have joined the servers. However, this raises the issue of what constitutes MCGamer quality, and how many maps are too many maps?

Let me explain:
As we see more and more quality map submissions, one would think the standard of map that is accepted would also rise in quality. However, that is not the case. None of the map submissions are bad, but MCGamer often appears to not hold out for the absolute best maps, rather accept the maps that are "good enough". I'll be the first to say that I am at fault for this too. My maps on the servers, while both solid, aren't fantastic.

We always hear things such as "less is more" and "quality over quantity". Well, I don't know of a better application of these two things than seen with MCSG maps.

So this brings me to the whole "Spring Cleaning" debate. I for one think MCGamer could use somewhere between 10-20 maps. At the current moment, MCGamer has 40+ maps, and I think that number is inching its way towards 50.

None of these maps are necessarily bad, and none of these maps are outright hated by the community, but it is the shear number of maps, and the fact that with 40+ maps, there is no outright standard of quality.

Of course there are the maps (SG 1-5, Valleyside, Breeze Island) that have secured their places in time as permanent MCSG maps, no matter what quality guidelines are given. There are maps that are so well built that they may have also secured their spots, such as the Teweran series. I just think that in order for the map acceptance process to avoid getting out of hand, there needs to be a map clean out and stricter acceptance on the staff's part.

Whether it makes some mad that a likable map is gone, or others mad because they have a false idea of good building is, it is important for a server such as this one to remain firm in their process and truly embrace the notion of "quality over quantity"; because, from what I see, things could get out of hand.

I believe strongly in limiting MCGamer maps to the best of the best, no matter how high the quality standard rises, even if it means the demise of my own maps.

Let me know what you guys think. Please remember to not talk bad about anyone else's maps because every builder deserves credit for what they do, but rather discuss this idea, and how MCSG may be able to benefit from it (or not benefit from it?).

Tags: Joel/MadDawg AlpakaWhacker Shelby Ninetailefox92 Tree_TheBigKind Dave MCGamerzism
^Hopefully I covered everyone I know who might be interested in giving insight on this topic.

 

[smashmaster]

Idk about these kinds of threads, I prefer not to post on them just because I don't want to hate on something someone put allot of work into.

 

[SuperxAndrew]

Idk about these kinds of threads, I prefer not to post on them just because I don't want to hate on something someone put allot of work into.

You obviously didn't read the thread.

 

[Ninetailefox92]

Personally I feel like more maps is better than having a limited circuit, and having maps that are exempt from being removed makes this more apparant for me, since there are like 9 ish maps listed that wouldn't be removed that only leaves 11 maps, and with new maps being added all the time it doesn't really give map makers a chance. I personally feel that the reason for the lower quality of maps that you suggested is the community involvement, note I am in no way saying the community makes poor decisions but it is a good fact that MCGamer incorporates the communities opinons! but this also means that lower quality builds can get a ton of attention (maybe they are just over stacked or something) I personally don't see many maps currently that should be removed, everyone has their favourites and least favourites and it would be hard to determine what maps would be removed

 

[SuperxAndrew]

Personally I feel like more maps is better than having a limited circuit, and having maps that are exempt from being removed makes this more apparant for me, since there are like 9 ish maps listed that wouldn't be removed that only leaves 11 maps, and with new maps being added all the time it doesn't really give map makers a chance. I personally feel that the reason for the lower quality of maps that you suggested is the community involvement, note I am in no way saying the community makes poor decisions but it is a good fact that MCGamer incorporates the communities opinons! but this also means that lower quality builds can get a ton of attention (maybe they are just over stacked or something) I personally don't see many maps currently that should be removed, everyone has their favourites and least favourites and it would be hard to determine what maps would be removed

Good points, thanks for leaving your insight.

 

[smashmaster]

You obviously didn't read the thread.

I did...very fast. If its this part your talking about "this is not a thread to talk bad about maps, rather to discuss an idea, so be nice." I just feel like it will cause flame...just my opinion. I love Zone 85 BTW

 

[benji_r]

I personally feel that we have a perfect number of maps on the servers, but IMO there are some maps that have just been around so long that maybe they deserve to be put to rest? The idea that I've been thinking of is that when a map is added it sticks around for a year/ year and a half before being 'retired'. Then they should have a gamemode called like nostalgia games or something like that (bad as name I know xD) and they have on there every map that's lasted the year being on the main servers. The game mode would be exactly the same but as opposed to playing the more recent maps you can go play old maps that have probably done their day on the main servers but are still fun to play on. Remember life isin't eternal and nothing lasts forever.

Just my opinion

 

[Fox]

I don't think any maps need to be removed, nor will be removed. Chad, has said in the past that any map build by Team Vareide will not be removed, and Team Vareide maps constitute certainly a decent number on our maps list. And as for Team Elite's Fallen Empire, it won't be removed either as Chad himself requested that map. For Breeze Island, Holiday Resort, Demons Breeze, Valleyside University, Teweran Survival Games, Teweran Survival Games 2, Teweran Survival Games 3 those won't be removed either.
So we already have 13 static maps from the 40 maps there is on the server.

Now, my point is: Just as these maps I just mentioned became static, the same process is happening with the current maps. Whether by Chad's opinion, or by gaining a name for the versatility the map has, this process continues and continues, and will happen with the current maps MCGamer has —and its currently happening.

Instead, I think every 6 months, MCGamer should change the available maps. For example, the first Semester, MCGamer divides half of the maps and then once the Semester ends, all the 20 maps that were available will be changed by the remaining half of the maps.
My idea is different from yours, but I think its a better alternative, because of what I already stated above.

Also, just as you said: "My maps on the servers, while both solid, aren't fantastic."

There is really no best, or perfection for the matter. It is not like MCGamer gets that many good map submissions anyway. I think its always okay to give some maps a try and see what the public thinks of them. And, this is were the process that I stated above comes in place; eventually those accepted maps that are praised will gain their place.

 

[reven86]

Honestly I don't like the idea of removing any map from Mcgamer.

The way I see it, is that it hurts no one with having a couple maps on the servers that no one likes. First off, they don't get played too often and secondly, if one does get voted, you can just leave in pre game if you don't like it.

I personally like playing something new every once in awhile. Playing maps like fortress pyke occasionally is fun to me. I don't like personally having just the same map played over and over.

I just don't understand why people find it necessary to want maps removed just because they don't like them or they feel they aren't "up to the standards of Mcgamer maps". No one forces you guys to play maps you don't like. Removing maps just sucks when one gets removed that you like that isn't particularly popular. People just seem to act like they never get to play their favorite maps or something.

Myself personally, I strongly dislike SG highway and Alaskan Village. Does this mean that I would want the maps removed? No. I just don't play them and let other people enjoy the map who actually like them.

Really the only exception I give to removing maps are maps that are either poorly built and designed that no one ever votes for which probably shouldn't of been accepted in the first place and maps that are like super laggy for everyone like Japan.

Removing maps that deserve to be removed for certain reason, is fine, but removing maps just for the sake of removing some maps to only keep the super popular maps, I don't like.

Not too long ago, people were complaining about the fact that the same maps were getting voted over and over and over because a lack of maps. Now that we have a great variety, you guys are wanting like half the maps removed? I just don't understand the logic.

 

[MCGamerzism]

Thanks for tagging me Where to start...
I feel like the map community/whoever deals with maps is scared to remove maps. Why? Well, I think there trying to keep the nostalgia feel to some of MCG's map selection, e.g - Fortress Pyke. I agree with benji_r , they should create another sort of gamemode for the old MCG maps, but I doubt they will do that.

I do agree with you when you say "quality over quantity", I believe that MCG is really aiming for that, but there is still some cleaning up to do. That's for 24 player and 48 player. However, I am still seeing weak maps being accepted currently, I don't understand this decision, but it seems to be working.

My Problem
There's like 2ish people involved in accepting maps, I don't think that's enough at all. I'm not asking for the map committee to make a return, but the community should definitely be involved in deciding what maps get accepted. A poll would be perfect!
Another problem is the community produce some of the best maps, not TE, not RF, not Invictus. They have hits, but I find the community based build teams and solo builders tend to make the "hit" maps. Example; Highway, Alaskan, Valleyside, Holiday etc.
I don't know why this is, but I feel like there has been a decrease in good quality community maps. Meaning the official MCG build teams have to step in and produce the maps, sooner or later, I feel like MCG maps will only be produced by MCG. I might be wrong, I hope it doesn't happen!

Things I want changing...

• Like you said, more maps that reach the MCG standard and suit the status "quality over quantity".
• A clean in the maps for certain gamemodes.
• Community to have more of an involvement when accepting maps (Polls).
• More unique, higher quality and overall better maps being submitted all around.

Enjoy my essay .​

 

[Josh_Zhy]

why is the text white

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

I thought I was done writing huge essays about maps but I guess I'll do this once more but I'll try to hold back from writing too much. Only respond to this comment if you actually genuinely read and understood the points presented, otherwise you would be left uninformed and misunderstood.

To begin with the main post by SuperxAndrew , although I understand your intentions, there are many issues that it would raise. The following are a few off the top of my head- community disagreement/uproar, the logistics of going about such a process, and the struggle of cooperation through all levels of management down to the community. Next is the elaboration on these points:

Community disagreement/uproar- This topic is fairly easy to understand. Everyone has their favorite map whether or not the map is wholly enjoyed by all members of the community. Remove even 20% of the maps and you remove about 20% of the popularity of the movement. Think about it from a common player; "Oh, *Insert map here* is my favorite map ever!" Well, if that map is removed, the usual response is "Why would they do that!? This is so dumb!" *Proceeds to spout disapproval of the whole process*. Although the number of maps is increasing drastically as compared to that of a year ago, so is the community which can create touchy situations such as the whole map business. The rest of this topic is pretty self-explanatory.

Logistics- I'm unsure about the way things are run for the map aspects of things now. I know there used to be a map committee but I've been gone for some time (and still am) so I'll explain problems that would arise with and without a map committee (allowing for both angles). If there still is a map committee or something of the sort, personal bias is the first huge issue. Obviously people do not want their own maps removed and some people will fight to the end to keep their maps on the servers. Furthermore, there's the sort of politics that goes on with all of it. While some people do not like to realize it or face it, things just are not as simple as they appear. Obviously I won't give an example because it would either derail on-topic conversation or it would just not be suitable to this conversation to begin with. Also, the haste of decision making is an issue. Adequate time would need to be take to insure that the correct maps are removed to allow the least possible disagreement from the community. Now, if there is not a map committee and everything is decided from one or a few people at the top, distance can present issues. Not to be taken the wrong way, but those at the top are distanced from the community (which is good for certain decisions). However, this decision needs to be made from those with community involvement. As for who those people are, deciding that presents another problem yet again. That's all I'll write for this aspect.

Struggle of cooperation- Time and time again a single map has been removed and an absolute struggle has ensued. SG Japan and Demons Breeze are two prime examples. A decision was made but the process was so difficult to carry out because there could not be a common consensus between all levels of the community. As for voting to choose what maps to remove, that would simply not work. The in-game community is drastically different from the forum community which is drastically different from the clan community which is drastically different from the map building community and so on. You simply will not get cooperation between levels of the community.

Now for the parts I agree on- There should probably be a somewhat limited number of maps, maybe 30-40 is there is a list that simply can not be removed but around 20-30 is that list is nonexistent and every map is up for removal. To expand on the idea of this list of maps that "can't be removed"- no map should be here forever. If there are some maps that "can't" be removed, make a gamemode like benji_r suggested. MCGamer is all about change. If it weren't, it simply wouldn't be around anymore. If we were to sit here and count how many changes have been made, it would be longer than the "Last Reply Wins" thread. So why allow change so much but exempt one thing from change? Holding on to the past is what holds the community back from progression. Other than SG4, none of the Vareide maps are popularly played (or even close to popularly played). As said before, just make the other gamemode if you want to keep them but it is clear that the "Survival Games" gamemode is made for change and progression so don't hold it back from that.

If this idea, or any idea similar to it for that matter, are to be even close to enacted, some serious planning and thought must go into it. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone will be serious enough about it to go to such extensive lengths and plan out every single aspect. This is not a change that you can rush into or even approach carefully. Instead you must carefully plan for quite some time (even months) gathering information and strategies for doing so. Although it would be beneficial to the community, I don't think it would ever happen.

This is all I'll write for now. If you reply to the comment, please do so in genuine interest of the situation and from an unbiased view point if you can do so. If your comment happens to do this, I'll reply.