KeltA
zhady
sKiCg
7D
Future of mapchecking - raise your voice*
Hey guys,
as announced in an earlier newspost the old mapcheck team got released from their duty and the old mapcheck system as we knew it stopped existing.
In the meantime we had an internal discussion about possible solutions to this - and right now I'd like to present our possible soltions for this huge problem to you, giving you guys a chance to raise your voice and contribute to solve this. Mapreleases have been an important part of this community ever since it started to exist, therfore everyone of you should feel responsible for this. There is also going to be a public vote, to evaluate the different opinions in the community - at the same time we're going to have an internal vote; and after all votes were evaluated we're going to announce what is going to happen to the mapcheck system.
Please make sure you read all of the detailed explanations before you do your vote, because you obviously got to know what you are voting for.
Note: The vote is going to start tomorrow, in the meantime we would kike to give you guys the chance to suggest different ideas (which might be added to the poll as well).
1. Free kz_ tag (XJ adding good maps to the so called "mapcycle")
This would mean that everyone has the right to release his map with the kz_ tag right away in a forum called "mapreleases". XJ would be browsing this forum every 14 days and pick the most popular (most downloaded and most played) maps out of the forum and adds them to the record section.
+ More freedom for the community/mappers
+ No more mapcheck team needed, adding the maps due to their popularity within the community
- More chaos regarding mapfixes and different versions: Maps might get released with bugs, then get fixed afterwards with the same name, causing different versions of the map with the same mapname.
- Acting against Kreedz's original idea he had for the community/mapcheck system
- Decreasing quality, kz_ wont be a "grade" for quality anymore.
- No way back
2. Going back to the old Kreedz system
Going back to the old Kreedz.com system would mean putting one or two persons (the most experienced persons available - but who are they?) in charge of the maps. Submitted maps get checked by them without having to coordinate a whole team and without having to justify their votes. Good maps get released at a time of their choice, bad maps don't get released. When needed, they talk to the mappers in private - however you can't expect detailed feedback or huge help at all, regarding the high numbers of mapsubmissions and their recent quality.
+ Easier to arrange and faster results
+ Easier contact between the admins and the mappers, admins can speak out without having to sum up the opinions of the other admins and justify their votes
- Huge power and huge responsibility for a single person or persons, therfore a huge pressure
- More "fragile" when it comes to recriminations about "being friends with the mappers" and "being unfair"
- If the few persons leave into inactivity without looking out for other admins replacing them, the whole system might die
3. Public open-beta mapchecking
This is NOT the same as the "public mapchecking" we tryed before. In this idea mappers would be able (not forced!) to post their maps into a forum called "public mapchecks". Every player of the whole community (no applications needed) could download and test the maps, and later give some feedback about it (report bugs, shortcuts, problems). The map would have to be called bkz_faker_b01, for example, during that time (if some bugs get fixed b02 and so on). Once the mapchecking is done, the mapper has to submit the map to XJ as usual, but they do very quick votes on the maps (after checking the popularity of the map during the test) and release the map (or deny it)... The XJ "mapadmins" would be picked from those testers who contribute the most. If a mapper doesn't want to use the public open-beta he can do that, but if he submits the map with bugs and it gets denied because of them, it is his problem and he has to live with it (no chance to re-submit maps that weren't posted in the open-beta system). So if you don't want to use the system, it's your responsibility to get some friends to test the maps for bugs in a closed beta and submit it once it is finished.
+ No more detailed feedbacks to sum up, no more explanations, just a simple and pure process of adding the maps according to their quality and popularity after the public beta.
+ No more (or at least less) checking of "fixed versions"
+ Chance to get an admin position by contributing to the tests for every user
- Less surprise because most mappers will use the public beta forum
- Dependent on how motivated the people (you, the community) are - may depend up on map quality and season (in the summer less people play etc.). People could be rude to mappers who submit bad quality maps or just ignore them, because they are boring.
4. Custom-mapreleases
Pretty much another version of the free kz_ tag. All maps have to be released as custom maps (called bkz_goldbhop for example), and XJ gives out the kz_ tag after a while if the maps are popular.
+ One internal "vote" (regarding the popularity of the map) about a map that has been released already
+ No more detailed feedbacks to sum up, no more explanations, just a simple process of adding the map if it is good
- No surprise effect anymore, not even for great maps
- All good maps would have to be renamed (custom -> kz_*). Demos that were recorded with the old name would be not legit?
5. Old system with mappers and record holders involved as mapcheck admins
Pretty much obvious, the old mapcheck system with current mappers and record holders as admins. Nobody is forced to vote, the majority of those who voted wins.
+ A way of "public" mapchecking, everyone who wants to contribute can do it.
+ Opinions from experienced people. People gotta earn their right to vote by making an effort
- People could make biased votes for their friends
- Maps could get leaked very easily, therfore no big surprises.
/Update: Poll is up.
as announced in an earlier newspost the old mapcheck team got released from their duty and the old mapcheck system as we knew it stopped existing.
In the meantime we had an internal discussion about possible solutions to this - and right now I'd like to present our possible soltions for this huge problem to you, giving you guys a chance to raise your voice and contribute to solve this. Mapreleases have been an important part of this community ever since it started to exist, therfore everyone of you should feel responsible for this. There is also going to be a public vote, to evaluate the different opinions in the community - at the same time we're going to have an internal vote; and after all votes were evaluated we're going to announce what is going to happen to the mapcheck system.
Please make sure you read all of the detailed explanations before you do your vote, because you obviously got to know what you are voting for.
Note: The vote is going to start tomorrow, in the meantime we would kike to give you guys the chance to suggest different ideas (which might be added to the poll as well).
1. Free kz_ tag (XJ adding good maps to the so called "mapcycle")
This would mean that everyone has the right to release his map with the kz_ tag right away in a forum called "mapreleases". XJ would be browsing this forum every 14 days and pick the most popular (most downloaded and most played) maps out of the forum and adds them to the record section.
+ More freedom for the community/mappers
+ No more mapcheck team needed, adding the maps due to their popularity within the community
- More chaos regarding mapfixes and different versions: Maps might get released with bugs, then get fixed afterwards with the same name, causing different versions of the map with the same mapname.
- Acting against Kreedz's original idea he had for the community/mapcheck system
- Decreasing quality, kz_ wont be a "grade" for quality anymore.
- No way back
2. Going back to the old Kreedz system
Going back to the old Kreedz.com system would mean putting one or two persons (the most experienced persons available - but who are they?) in charge of the maps. Submitted maps get checked by them without having to coordinate a whole team and without having to justify their votes. Good maps get released at a time of their choice, bad maps don't get released. When needed, they talk to the mappers in private - however you can't expect detailed feedback or huge help at all, regarding the high numbers of mapsubmissions and their recent quality.
+ Easier to arrange and faster results
+ Easier contact between the admins and the mappers, admins can speak out without having to sum up the opinions of the other admins and justify their votes
- Huge power and huge responsibility for a single person or persons, therfore a huge pressure
- More "fragile" when it comes to recriminations about "being friends with the mappers" and "being unfair"
- If the few persons leave into inactivity without looking out for other admins replacing them, the whole system might die
3. Public open-beta mapchecking
This is NOT the same as the "public mapchecking" we tryed before. In this idea mappers would be able (not forced!) to post their maps into a forum called "public mapchecks". Every player of the whole community (no applications needed) could download and test the maps, and later give some feedback about it (report bugs, shortcuts, problems). The map would have to be called bkz_faker_b01, for example, during that time (if some bugs get fixed b02 and so on). Once the mapchecking is done, the mapper has to submit the map to XJ as usual, but they do very quick votes on the maps (after checking the popularity of the map during the test) and release the map (or deny it)... The XJ "mapadmins" would be picked from those testers who contribute the most. If a mapper doesn't want to use the public open-beta he can do that, but if he submits the map with bugs and it gets denied because of them, it is his problem and he has to live with it (no chance to re-submit maps that weren't posted in the open-beta system). So if you don't want to use the system, it's your responsibility to get some friends to test the maps for bugs in a closed beta and submit it once it is finished.
+ No more detailed feedbacks to sum up, no more explanations, just a simple and pure process of adding the maps according to their quality and popularity after the public beta.
+ No more (or at least less) checking of "fixed versions"
+ Chance to get an admin position by contributing to the tests for every user
- Less surprise because most mappers will use the public beta forum
- Dependent on how motivated the people (you, the community) are - may depend up on map quality and season (in the summer less people play etc.). People could be rude to mappers who submit bad quality maps or just ignore them, because they are boring.
4. Custom-mapreleases
Pretty much another version of the free kz_ tag. All maps have to be released as custom maps (called bkz_goldbhop for example), and XJ gives out the kz_ tag after a while if the maps are popular.
+ One internal "vote" (regarding the popularity of the map) about a map that has been released already
+ No more detailed feedbacks to sum up, no more explanations, just a simple process of adding the map if it is good
- No surprise effect anymore, not even for great maps
- All good maps would have to be renamed (custom -> kz_*). Demos that were recorded with the old name would be not legit?
5. Old system with mappers and record holders involved as mapcheck admins
Pretty much obvious, the old mapcheck system with current mappers and record holders as admins. Nobody is forced to vote, the majority of those who voted wins.
+ A way of "public" mapchecking, everyone who wants to contribute can do it.
+ Opinions from experienced people. People gotta earn their right to vote by making an effort
- People could make biased votes for their friends
- Maps could get leaked very easily, therfore no big surprises.
/Update: Poll is up.
| opa |02/05 - 21:34 | |
 Location:  New York | sweet, gonna read now |
qewi 
|02/05 - 21:34 | |
| Comments: 83 | I can't decide really, everything but 1 sounds good. |
| blackies |02/05 - 21:35 | |
| Comments: 10 | 3nd imo |
| blackies |02/05 - 21:36 | |
| Comments: 10 | sorry doubleposst but i ment 3rd |
| kREWAN |02/05 - 21:38 | |
| Comments: 81 Location: Cheatahtown | I agree with qewi on this one =) |
| opa |02/05 - 21:39 | |
Location: New York | @faker: there's a mistake, instead of "map maps" you were supposed to write "good maps" |
zhady 
|02/05 - 21:39 | |
| Comments: 529 | 1 |
| faker |02/05 - 21:42 | |
 Location:  DE | Yeah, quite a few mistakes were left. I edited the newspost again and all of them should be gone now |
| MuscLe |02/05 - 21:44 | |
 Location:  | 2nd or 4th imo |
| ripz |02/05 - 21:49 | |
| Comments: 33 | Then read again  "Solitions, biased" |
| cC|Nikolaa |02/05 - 21:51 | |
 Location:  Bulgaria Team: Cosy-Climbing | 4 - renaming all the maps, fucking up the demos? there are over 500 (509 to be exact) maps on the demo record list and all their demos are gonna be lost. 1 - even Kreedz did it in that way - diving good from bad ones and releasing the good ones - making a random 5sec-1texture map into a kz tagged map will be a fucked up situation imo 3 - i'm not a fan of the public testing or so so imo, either 2 or 5, but if I have to choose between both it'll be 5 |
| opa |02/05 - 21:52 | |
Location: New York | I pick the 2nd version, but I suggest to make some changes there: 1.Make mapchecking admins (or groups of admins) each responsible for checking their category, e.g.: 1st admin(group) checks lightning/bugs, 2nd admin(group) checks architecture/bugs, 3rd admin(group) checks textures, 4th admin(group) checks jumps; 2.Accept a bit more map admins (like 10-15); 3.Change mapadmins constantly (when some admin becomes inactive, he is removed, so there's a place for another ACTIVE mapchecker). Please reply what do you think of this. |
omilo 
|02/05 - 22:04 | |
 Location:  Sweden | opa your additions sounds like a lot of work and something that would be hard to administrate. Since the problem in the first place was inactivity, I don't think your suggestions would help. |
| spr1n
|02/05 - 22:04 | |
 Location: Estonia | 3rd is good! by the way 1 and 4 fails in my opinion. but I suggest to to implement 2, 3 and 5 at the same time if possible. ether mapper chooses himself what king mapcheck he preferes, or it decided by some criteriums (kz/custom for example). and if map failed to pass its better to force it for public check. also if some system fail - maps can be passed to another system. |
w1zz 
|02/05 - 22:04 | |
| Comments: 192 Location:  Romania | opa the first thing you want changed is nonsense. When you check a map .. you accidentely get to see any kind of bugs. This means that if an admin from the first group notices an architecture bug he shouldn't tell anyone about it ? Other than that you have a point. I don't really know what to choose, but I'll go with 5 .. |
| kyser |02/05 - 22:08 | |
 Location:  Argentina | uber hard to decide.. 1 or 5 imo. |
| strndlr |02/05 - 22:23 | |
 Location: [se] SCHWEDENBASE | I find it very hard to choose since they are all more or less alike to me. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what kind of checking you guys do right now but I think one solution would be to (and I understand this will probably cost some money) have a Map-testing server, which will only be available to XJ members via some sort of authentication system (possibly SteamID). It would somehow be registrated which maps a certain person would have played and after that he would be able to vote on these particular maps on the website. This whole authentication thing to prevent people to just randomly press Yes/No. After the opentesting, XJ-admins would go over the maps which made it through the opentesting phase and then decide whether it is good enough for the kz_ tag. In this way we would save XJ-admins from testing maps with typical "dust"-textures and therefore a lot of unnecessary work. So I can't really decide on either of the choices listed above since what I'm suggesting is a implementation of several of them. Geez, it feels like i just wrote an essay, hope there were some valid points in there  |
| xPaw |02/05 - 22:30 | |
 Location:  Estonia | +1 spr1n |
| opa |02/05 - 22:32 | |
Location: New York | omilo, my 3rd change is directly related to innactivity  and w1zz, you are right, bugs can be actually be assigned to all of admins, but other categories like textures and jump hardness etc. can be grouped hope you get what i mean |
| ラヴイナ |02/05 - 22:34 | |
 | 2 or 5 is win |
| Dacca |02/05 - 22:36 | |
 | I would vote for the 3rd option. The 5th is okay too. |
| Flibo
|02/05 - 22:44 | |
 Location: Winland  | I'd choose 2. It's a great system. You aren't slowed down by lazy mapcheckers so it would be pretty fast. The feedback system XJ used earlier had it advantages, but it's pretty much work for "not a lot". Mappers would just have to get their own betatesters. |
| cH[A]Os |02/05 - 22:46 | |
| Comments: 66 Location: Romania | 1.. |
cC|PsYxOpAt 
|02/05 - 23:03 | |
 Location: Bulgaria | 1 Suggestion is totaly unacceptable DELETE IT the KZ_ tag is NOT a free tag no metter the quality of the maps.Now you said its good but after some time many ppl will say that this was mistake and probably with said smth like "XJ is responsable for this" but the true will be that the whole community will be responable for this mistake - No way back -More bad maps bad textures/architecture etc 2 can`t decide :/// 3 and 5 They are good with some changes only the official mappers and jumpers can check/test maps + Maps wont leak so easy imo + Better feedbkacks for bugs and suggestions +/- Less or more chaos then now only the time can show + Mappers can submit their map with normal name (cosy_blablabla NOT cosy_blablabal_b01 then b02 etc) - The mappers have to wait more time before the map to get accepted 4 Suggestion is totaly unacceptable like Nikola said you have to delete all demos and to rename all maps are you crazy? |
ωзмзяа♠ 
|02/05 - 23:17 | |
| Comments: 54 Location:  Åland | 3. Public open-beta mapchecking Best! |
| TlofT |02/05 - 23:18 | |
 Location: killadelphia | i think 1 with additions. i'm pretty new so i don't know the ins and outs of kz's starting points, but to me, it seems the "kz tag" is blown out of proportion. for me at least, many of my favorite maps are not "kz" maps, just customs, so i don't see the big draw in having an official kz map. as many people have said recently, the looks of the map are being considered too much, taking away from a map with good jumps. imo, a good way to do it would be a sort of combination of 1 and 5. if you were to take all the maps sent in, get some average player feedback from open testing, then take the top 25% or so, and move that along to the mappers/top people (is someone with 1 record really better for advice than some of the top people with none?) to then narrow the maps down to a smaller number for a release. i think this way, the mappers will be able to get responses from all sides, being admins, friends, and the community, no one is given too much power (which seems like a problem with #2), less spam, and pointing out the same things wrong (what i see happening in #3), and less work of updating maps with #4 (same problem stated in #1), while still only letting the top maps in. top as in, what will be played, recorded, and improved the most, because isn't that the idea here? |
| nucLeaR |02/05 - 23:30 | |
 Location: Bucharest, Romania | 3. Public open-beta mapc-checking means: Every guy that wants to make a map posts their beta map to forum. We all , players , admins , check it and post bugs? After the map is done he submits the map. That's great idea |
| koukouz
|02/05 - 23:33 | |
 Location:  Au pays des moules frites | 3rd |
| ndR
|02/05 - 23:40 | |
 Location:  Paris | I suggest an "advanced old Kreedz system" It works the same as described in the newspost (2nd system) but not with only one person: with a small team (4-5 people). In this case it wouldn't take so much time to check a single map, those admins wouldn't have to writte down a 10-page essay everytime a map is sent "just" to explain their choice. This way the work would be very light for admins, who wouldn't loose their motivation, imo. "quick and efficient" - This is how I would define this system. |
| FoF
|02/06 - 00:13 | |
 Location: Vilnius, Lithuania, Europe | damn, hard to decide. All of them have advantages/disadvantages :/ I somehow think 'surprise' factor is important in kz scene, but it closes the opportunity to test map deeply (esp find shortcuts). I just thought about crazy idea. Making open-beta or semi-open-beta(mappers/wr holders) and when u need to test your map for shortcuts, give them white textured maps ;D or smth like that xD without graphic details/models/simple architecture and etc.. haha xD then u reduce leaking your map. |
| tracey blast |02/06 - 00:44 | |
 | this is some dope shit right here. as a different variation: the whole map release should be devided into 2 parts. 1st - old kreedz system does checking the map and then, based on overall conclusion, map gets released(with all the bugfixes that mapper has been reported) or denied. 2nd - the map is officially public with custom tag and theres no way back. the thing is that there wull be given one week try-out period, people will be able to play it but not record, and after seven days of reading the comments in newspost, mapper decides whether he should improve on his map once again or leave it as it is. afterwards - map appears in record section with or without kz_ tag. i think i messed up little bit, but yeah.. |
| NaRCoTiQ |02/06 - 01:19 | |
 Location: | +1 ndr! |
| JON' |02/06 - 01:32 | |
 | ye the 2nd is the best imo. |
| Trolis |02/06 - 01:42 | |
 Location:  | I'm for the thrid. |
| akM
|02/06 - 01:53 | |
 Location: The Netherlands | agree with ndr |
| Gamster |02/06 - 01:58 | |
 Location: Argentina | I go for option 3 |
| Chrizzy
|02/06 - 05:19 | |
 Location:  Norway | 1. Free kz_ tag (XJ adding good maps to the so called "mapcycle") - Acting against Kreedz's original idea he had for the community/mapcheck system - No way back No way, never! 2. Going back to the old Kreedz system Better, but with only 1 or 2 people it wouldn't be enough to make a fair decision. 3. Public open-beta mapchecking Hmm, no... 4. Custom-mapreleases Would this mean renaming the existing custom maps? That's not what I read but people said that in the comments. I think this could work with both adding maps thats good as both kz_ and custom and not just name all maps with the kz tag. 5. Old system with mappers and record holders involved as mapcheck admins Best one, but the map will get leaked by someone, thats for sure which sucks. It sucks that we have to find a new system because I think the way it was now worked so well in the past.. with the right persons behind it. How many people were there in the mapcheck team the last months? 5-7? Maybe try to pick out 15-20 people you trust and has experience to do the map checking as that wouldn't require everyone to post their votes on every map. Some of these options is just a small variation from the old system. |
| VoDkA`BoY
|02/06 - 06:46 | |
| Comments: 381 Location: Bulgaria | bkz_faker_b01 ftw ontopic : I wont vote because every map system could be ruuined easily |
| NumB |02/06 - 07:22 | |
 Location: Europe (EU) Country: Lithuania HomeTown: Vilnius Class: AMXX Scripter | I would suggest to use something like 3, only but: 6. Public check with votes and with _b## system Allow people to check maps. Vote for jumps / architecture / fps / ... / other from 0 to 10. After a week combine votes and if average result is higher or equal 7 - accept (unless mapper sais it's not the final version). When mapper releases a newever version he has access to close his old thread and start a new one. Minimal votes needed is 10 for every section. What are pluses and what are minuses - you choose. =P In my option - this is the best possible way (however needs some work for web developers). |
| Oddi^ |02/06 - 08:48 | |
| Comments: 20 | 2 or 3 would be the best. |
| Oddi^ |02/06 - 08:49 | |
| Comments: 20 | Oh and NumB, with that system the mappers could just gather up their friends to vote a 10 for their map and i would be accepted.. |
| tronix |02/06 - 09:03 | |
 Location: Lithuania | i prefer 5. Old system with mappers and record holders involved as mapcheck admins |
| DarKFury^_x |02/06 - 09:45 | |
| Comments: 22 Location: V A R N A, Bulgaria | who cares about surprises...for now it's way better to let the majority of people vote for the map to be accepted or not and i agree with NumB...it's the best damn possible way for now..there will be much more maps to be released [with avg/high quality] which means more people will be active in recording..i think it's worth to try |
| rOot1k |02/06 - 10:41 | |
 Location: Ukraine | 2rd will be best~ |
| NeMiQ22 |02/06 - 11:04 | |
 Location: Slovakia Community: KZSK | Lol guys who cares now what is best for you? Your vote will be relevant in the pole. This is place for posting ideas and suggestions. Not only: "X is best!" |
| AverageFreak |02/06 - 11:05 | |
 Location: dassified | Yes, id say for now 5 would work best. Sure, it isnt perfect, but if the maps are given only to XJ staff members, leaking will no longer be a problem, or will at least be reduced. 3 isnt a bad choice either, and would be best, if there were more than 2-3 people behind it :> about numbs 6th option: a good way indeed. But im all against giving the map itself to the WHOLE public. dunno, seems like a bad idea to me. Maps could easily fall into the hands of immature kids or website admins who may then do a ton of different things to it, like releasing it before xj, renaming it, and so on... Not only that, voters could easily use or register multiple accounts and influence the votes.. but these are just the thoughts if a map of mine was pre-released like that. Imo, maps should only be given for reviewing to the public when the mapper wants to. overall, support that the maptesting power and the decisions for its release should only had by xj. also wall of text fail it probably doesnt make sense, my writing skills suck |
| padnaliQ |02/06 - 11:11 | |
 Location: Bulgaria | 3 |
| MepH
|02/06 - 11:19 | |
| Comments: 16 Location: France | 3. and 5. !! |
| Supa
|02/06 - 11:22 | |
 Location: Los Angeles, Ca. USA | 3. If only ONE or TWO people check a map.. sure it may LOOK nice.. but it may also have BUGS/EXPLOITS that won't become noticable till after loads of people have played it. |
remake 
|02/06 - 11:29 | |
 Location: Estonia | Public mapchecking for custom maps and old kreedz.com system for kz_ tagged maps. |
| Lazze!
|02/06 - 11:30 | |
 Location:  Denmark | 3rd one is best fo sho |
| eeK- |02/06 - 11:32 | |
 Location: Vilnius, Lithuania | NumB's idea is good lol :o |
| Hitlooser
|02/06 - 11:41 | |
 Location:  Prague | best is 2nd imo |
| ndR
|02/06 - 12:10 | |
Location: Paris | Supa wrote ... If only ONE or TWO people check a map.. sure it may LOOK nice.. but it may also have BUGS/EXPLOITS that won't become noticable till after loads of people have played it. That would be mapper's job with his friends It worked this way before! The idea is to lighten admin's job so as they don't lose motivation. |
| Perdo
|02/06 - 13:32 | |
| Comments: 132 Location: Slovakia | Best choice would be 2nd. But yes, right question, who are these two players? It would be hard work and it would need lot of free time from these two people. We will see the result of the poll, even though none opinion is perfect, but what we can do. Also I only hope, that 3rd opinion will NOT win. Even though I think every nub (that is visiting this site for second time in his life and don't know what is kz, wuh?) will vote for this, 'cause they want to play maps and they really don't care about quality of maps. It would be nice to make the poll only for active people and for people, that are making / that made something for this community, not for people, that came just to download maps, 'cause they have heard, that here's something like kreedz and cs jumping. Don't kill me nubs, it's reality. |
| Pieshels
|02/06 - 13:45 | |
 Location:  Latvia | 1 - NO 2 - Honestly, I do not think that those 1-3 admins will take that pressure after some time. At the time there was this "old KreedZ system" there were less submissions. I cannot even imagine how hard it would be nowadays. Plus "good/bad friend" part kicks in. 3 - At first I was like "now this is nice, let's do this". But this system is already on. Just look at mappreview forums, there already is this "public open-beta mapchecking" going on. The only thing is that if this system is implemented, then mappers would be forced to submit maps at this kind of checking. There won't be any surprises. And I like when community is more or less happily surprised. 4 - Too much mess with tags. NO. 5 - The best so far. At least checkers might be somehow competent. I suggest mixing 2 and 5. Have mappers/jumpers test it and vote on them and those main admins say the final word. Something like jury and judges. |
| Flibo
|02/06 - 14:27 | |
Location: Winland | +1 ndR Mapcheckers are not betatesters which is exactly the situation now. In the old kreedz.com system a few guys play a map through, and if they enjoy it, it will be accepted. If a huge shortcut is found after the release then the mapper can blame himself/herself for not fixing it. |
| Winkuz
|02/06 - 15:35 | |
| Comments: 28 Location: Lithuania | I liked Pieshels idea about mixing 2 and 5.. it would be the best imo.. cuz less work and pressure for those 2 main admins and they wont lose their motivation after few months.. |
| Fanas |02/06 - 15:50 | |
 Location: Lithuania | Hmm, I would say the 3rd way, because people need to know your map and decide whenever it's good or not. |
| kexas |02/06 - 15:56 | |
 | Giving the last word to one-three people is absolute crap. Xtreme-jumps needs maps that would be enjoyed by the whole community, not by a few people. |
| akl |02/06 - 16:19 | |
| Comments: 28 | 1 If after 14 days you picked the most popular and talked to the mapper about bug fixes, sc's etc instead of releasing them right away and the version released is final no matter what. kz_ tag is kreedz's level of quality since he was the only one responsible for all map releases at some point? (correct me if im wrong). 2 & 4 Killing the system or losing current wr's is crazy. 5 The one i liked the most. |
| paulemannsen |02/06 - 16:34 | |
| Comments: 5 | 1 or numbs |
| Syler |02/06 - 16:39 | |
 | the 3rd one is the best i like the mixture of it. either you make your map public, or you can send it to xj in your own responsibility. that's nice. |
| Pieshels
|02/06 - 16:44 | |
Location: Latvia | 3rd one is already happening, isn't it? Everyone can post theirs .bsp files to map preview forum where everyone can check them. |
| chrizZo
|02/06 - 16:51 | |
 Location: Lustgrotte | But it is not used very often Pieshels. Maybe sometimes, but it is not usual. In my eyes kreedz maps are the basis for everything going on at all kreedz communities. Without kreedz maps we would not have a community. That is why I think the responsibility can not be carried by a few admins or chosen people. Every member of this community should have the right to influence the mapcheck process. Especially people who moaned about the bad new maps and why other maps got denied, you all should vote for three now. So do I, system number 3 is the best. |
| hm^
|02/06 - 19:42 | |
| Comments: 178 Location: | For me 2 and 3 sounds very good... For 2. radon Moxx solid demolite For 3. A kind of communityvote or something that all users can vote. And when the map tops a percentline, it will be accepted. |
| righnt0w |02/06 - 20:03 | |
 Location: Russia, SPb | I think, that old system was ok, but had too much fat. When system loses their weight, then it would be really ok. Maybe, add public mapcheck area to sum up peoples opinions and admin ones? Or give to the players betamap server with unlocked hook/godmode/noclip features, but of course with no wr recording ability. This way people wouldn't see boring text walls first. But they will be able to play, openly discuss maps, and only then put their own notes in the forum. Suprises? I don't care about them, sorry. We are not playing some online detective story. When the map is good, it is good, no matter how it will be presented. With betamap server guys, who actively recording wr's, would be trying to change the map in a good way, if they like it. Yeah, they could note some bad advices, but we are big community — bad advices can be disputed. To summarize: I think, if people can avoid «bureaucracy», then they will play more. |
| cC|PsYxOpAt
|02/06 - 20:11 | |
Location: Bulgaria | hm^ radon is inactivee already 3 or 4 months solid is making maps for kzmod |
| Cobrex |02/06 - 22:37 | |
| Comments: 29 | where is the "forum maprelease" ? I want to post some maps,lol GJ FOR THIS |
| ndR
|02/07 - 01:31 | |
Location: Paris | Funny to see how much the members are involved in whining about the bad quality of maps and how much they're involved when it's about fixing this problem... |
| Gargoyle |02/07 - 03:07 | |
 Location: Finland | I'd rate the surprise value to last on the priority list. I only want to see maps being created and maps being accepted, what I don't care about is if someone geeked an uber time to it month before it got "officially" released. Mapchecking is a serious and vital organ of the engine of XJ and I'd hate to see XJ suffer to keep maps a surprise. => 5. I'm not saying that 5th is the only one supporting my solution but I thinks it's the safest bet we can go with. Love the newspost btw, gj XJ  |
| m0ver |02/07 - 12:28 | |
 Location: In front of PC | Combination of 3 and 5. After all, it is surprise once someone puts it in forum. |
| TheCracker |02/07 - 14:36 | |
| Comments: 10 Location: Vienna | 1 - complete bullshit, would destroy KZ-community within days 2 - too less democracy, how can 2 people decide whats good and whats bad? 3 - the way to go in my opinion (ill vote for it) 4 - also possible, but I like 3 more 5 - would be dead within another year |
| prad |02/07 - 18:45 | |
 Location:  India | First of all, extols fly out to the admins for giving the system a chance to edit/modify as well as maintaining the productivity of the place and for writing such a wonderful newspost optn 1: perhaps the most faulty of the options that we have in hand. don't ever do it! optn 2: Looks good, but the only flaw is that not poss for two guys, you need to appoint more people, and unless the demotivational-factor creeps in after a prolonged time, it should be fine. So just choose your guys wisely, and that should sort the problem. Ya, prolly it looks like "oligarchy" to me , but i think its the best option.optn 3: The reason, why I won't vote for this is that, by this choice, the quality of the accepted maps would be at stake, you really don't wanna take a toll on your map quality, do you? I guess not. optn 4: This would mess up the whole system, so no. optn 5: Looks kinda ok, this is more like going through a "safer" option, but as long as its effective, it should be ok. Prolly therefore, to recapitulate, maybe a mix of 2 & 5. |
| antu.s |04/15 - 10:09 | |
 | |
You must be logged in to make comments on this site - please log in, or if you are not registered click here to signup
#1 Xtreme-Jumps.eu - Public
Talk #1
VOOD
