Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

[Vilham]

If the contest was at a time when I could judge, I would be happy to.

[Puddy]

hypothetically, i would theoretically like a contest which had a shorter deadline and was focused on creating a "neat whitebox" map which perhaps had a stated goal of trying to innovate the map structure (the latter not being necessary ofc)

by "neat whitebox", i mean a whitebox level that is fully playable and tested but also fairly fleshed out in terms of geo and architecture and where artistic considerations have been made to a large degree (architecture, shapes, vistas. placeholder art etc) but a full artpass hasn't been made

so the goal wouldn't be to have a 100% finished level, just a very promising base that has solid gameplay and the potential to look great when completed

[grapen]

Just now, Puddy said:

hypothetically, i would theoretically like a contest which had a shorter deadline and was focused on creating a "neat whitebox" map which perhaps had a stated goal of trying to innovate the map structure (the latter not being necessary ofc)

by "neat whitebox", i mean a whitebox level that is fully playable and tested but also fairly fleshed out in terms of geo and architecture and where artistic considerations have been made to a large degree (architecture, shapes, vistas etc) but a full artpass hasn't been made

so the goal wouldn't be to have a 100% finished level, just a very promising base that has solid gameplay and the potential to look great when completed

I like this idea a lot. Contest length could be even shorter and smaller teams won't be so much of an issue. Then again you have the problem of funding for the contest since I'm sure faceit wants polished end products for their service. This doesn't bother me personally as I wouldn't mind a short contest without a cash prize. I think it's an interesting idea worth spinning.

[Beck]

16 minutes ago, Puddy said:

hypothetically, i would theoretically like a contest which had a shorter deadline and was focused on creating a "neat whitebox" map which perhaps had a stated goal of trying to innovate the map structure (the latter not being necessary ofc)

by "neat whitebox", i mean a whitebox level that is fully playable and tested but also fairly fleshed out in terms of geo and architecture and where artistic considerations have been made to a large degree (architecture, shapes, vistas. placeholder art etc) but a full artpass hasn't been made

so the goal wouldn't be to have a 100% finished level, just a very promising base that has solid gameplay and the potential to look great when completed

I like this. With a whitebox you can iterate as much as you want without art getting in your way and you're not afraid to make the big changes because you might ruin a view. In an ideal world art shouldn't be touching a whitebox until the level is fun and balanced. 

Everyone is on a level playing field too since art isn't being taken into consideration. 

[Puddy]

well, art and design is a collaboration but i think there's a time and place for focusing on the design, because otherwise the main priority will be to make it pretty in time (which is very time-consuming and requires the design to be more or less locked)

the csgo workshop map pool is becoming bigger and bigger and i think it's interesting to encourage the exploration of new ideas and give them time to grow

[Radu]

I think the whitebox idea could be indeed a successful smaller contest of its own. The recent Door Challenge proved that smaller scale events and even on different engines can raise enough interest. Though, I'm more interested in a bigger contest. But I do agree that the deadline should be a lot shorter than last time and with no extensions. People seem to prefer something like 5-6 months.

16 hours ago, The Horse Strangler said:

Contest should be shorter this time around, HARD final deadline, and fresh maps. I think this helps to provide a solid lesson in reigning in scope and ambition. It requires designers do more planning early on on paper or docs, which I think is a healthy workflow we should promote via those rules.

Part of the reason why I would prefer a contest with art included is because, as horse also mentioned, it forces people to plan better, take other aspects into consideration and learn how to adjust in order to meet deadlines. I think that's a healthy thing to learn, especially if you plan to work in the industry.

If you guys want to encourage people to explore new layout ideas, maybe you could put more emphasis on that through the judging criteria. For instance, the layout could comprise half of the score. So let's say, if you go for a purely classic dust2 4leaf layout with absolutely no new twists/gimmicks, but it works, you do score decently - maybe 30/50, but not all the points.

[Sklär]

2 hours ago, Puddy said:

hypothetically, i would theoretically like a contest which had a shorter deadline and was focused on creating a "neat whitebox" map which perhaps had a stated goal of trying to innovate the map structure (the latter not being necessary ofc)

by "neat whitebox", i mean a whitebox level that is fully playable and tested but also fairly fleshed out in terms of geo and architecture and where artistic considerations have been made to a large degree (architecture, shapes, vistas. placeholder art etc) but a full artpass hasn't been made

so the goal wouldn't be to have a 100% finished level, just a very promising base that has solid gameplay and the potential to look great when completed

*Sponsored by Mirror's Edge

[Vilham]

2 hours ago, Radu said:

I think the whitebox idea could be indeed a successful smaller contest of its own. The recent Door Challenge proved that smaller scale events and even on different engines can raise enough interest. Though, I'm more interested in a bigger contest. But I do agree that the deadline should be a lot shorter than last time and with no extensions. People seem to prefer something like 5-6 months.

Part of the reason why I would prefer a contest with art included is because, as horse also mentioned, it forces people to plan better, take other aspects into consideration and learn how to adjust in order to meet deadlines. I think that's a healthy thing to learn, especially if you plan to work in the industry.

If you guys want to encourage people to explore new layout ideas, maybe you could put more emphasis on that through the judging criteria. For instance, the layout could comprise half of the score. So let's say, if you go for a purely classic dust2 4leaf layout with absolutely no new twists/gimmicks, but it works, you do score decently - maybe 30/50, but not all the points.

This is why I would potentially separate the contest out into an art one and a design one. Have a shorter design one that is about the blockout. Do a test later that allows people to collaborate and art the level up, controversial idea but you could actually take the top 3 designed maps and over them out for people to art up which ever one they want. Similar to the artstation contests where people do concepts and then have a second round where people make the things in the concept.

[MikeGon]

20 minutes ago, Vilham said:

This is why I would potentially separate the contest out into an art one and a design one. Have a shorter design one that is about the blockout. Do a test later that allows people to collaborate and art the level up, controversial idea but you could actually take the top 3 designed maps and over them out for people to art up which ever one they want. Similar to the artstation contests where people do concepts and then have a second round where people make the things in the concept.

Neat idea! I agree, personally I would love to design a map and hand it over to others that are much better at level art than me. I feel like this could result in better maps.

Just curious... What's the LD/LA ratio of potential participants, or of Mapcore overall? because we need a lot of artists to do something like this, like twice as many as LDs or something...

[Radu]

Well, that could be a thing. Let's say you have the first month of the contest just for the blocking and testing. At the end of said month the judges pick top 20 or something. Then the second phase starts and everyone that made it in the top has 4 or 5 months to art it up, alone or collaborating. How does that sound? @FMPONE what do you think of this?

[FMPONE]

1 hour ago, Radu said:

Well, that could be a thing. Let's say you have the first month of the contest just for the blocking and testing. At the end of said month the judges pick top 20 or something. Then the second phase starts and everyone that made it in the top has 4 or 5 months to art it up, alone or collaborating. How does that sound? @FMPONE what do you think of this?

Not a fan. Sorry.

Look, the last contest went pretty well. Let’s see if we can increase the prize pool, make adjustments to certain rules if you guys want, and add any judges you guys want that are into the idea. Not looking to complicate things, or add any wrinkles that we don’t absolutely need.

Last time around @JD40 did everything by himself and won. Let’s not forget about that.

However, not against it as a separate contest idea at some other time.

[ElectroSheep]

Hello there !

To be honest there was a contest I wanted to join but couldn't because of operation guys not wanted. I would love to maybe try another one.

For the LD/LA thing, I think Tf2maps did the same a long time ago, they have also some great concept for a contest like the connect 5 . To be honest I always thought that art and design should evolve like a tennis match. Some design choices tend to change when art is coming through and I don't think this kind of contest can propose that.

Or you make like the Artpass contest on TF2 where everyone is working on the same layout. The cons is that at the end there is only one map with different looks and you don't see a lot of them really played and it's kinda sad... (Also I migh won if you propose that contest ) You could still ask Valve to give one of their unfinished layout for the contest, hehe.

If you really want a cool contest, but it's just my opinion, propose something else than just doing the next competitive shit. I remember the day on 1.6 when we had tons of fun and interesting maps and when the hostage gamemode was cool (breaking into a house from every corner was nice) + we also have assassination and escape maps. Aww man...

[FMPONE]

1 hour ago, ElectroSheep said:

If you really want a cool contest, but it's just my opinion, propose something else than just doing the next competitive shit. I remember the day on 1.6 when we had tons of fun and interesting maps and when the hostage gamemode was cool (breaking into a house from every corner was nice) + we also have assassination and escape maps. Aww man...

I'm really frustrated at the way Valve has treated hostage maps. It might some kind of political nervousness, but as a gamemode it's the _only_ alternative to bomb defusal, and Valve has done very little to indicate they even care about alternatives to bomb defusal. I don't think we've seen a major update on that gamemode in maybe 4 years. They should do more there.

[text_fish]

14 hours ago, FMPONE said:

I'm really frustrated at the way Valve has treated hostage maps. It might some kind of political nervousness, but as a gamemode it's the _only_ alternative to bomb defusal, and Valve has done very little to indicate they even care about alternatives to bomb defusal. I don't think we've seen a major update on that gamemode in maybe 4 years. They should do more there.

Agreed. I would love it if Mapcore ran a hostage rescue map comp to try and (re)raise the profile of the game mode.

[Roald]

Might be interesting. Getting out of our bomb defusal comfort zone