I think you'll find I'm one of the few who commented on the map directly, and didn't get involved in any of this until illogical statements were thrown about like evidence.

I think you should check the thread here, gloomp. I'm not the one who started this silly debate, I'm simply applying logic where it's been missing.

That's a bad thing why exactly?

There was no need for your hypocritical post.

Certainly the discussion of this review belongs here, but it is taking attention away from the map, the one superstardomX_ made back in 2008. If I've counted correctly, there are what, three comments on the this page regarding the map directly? This is including mine, because I haven't bothered to even play the thing yet. The idea of a feature is, last I checked, to encourage further attention on a given map in an intelligent manned. Not that all this arguing isn't valid, but it is discouraging further attention, of any sort, to what Diamondeye was trying to bring attention to.

Bottom line, I think Diamondeye has a very valid point and atob is arguing in his usual mildly irritating manner.

It's actually a little depressing.

+1 flag

See, this is the kind of statement I'm talking about.

The /kind/ of attention?

/ANY/ attention is good, and it's GOOD that attention is divided between positive and negative.

Southpaw was in a bad mood when he left that first comment and he's apologized for being rude.

My point in not talking about how to review a map here (which I am only doing because it seems like SSDX_ doesn't mind) was that it's kind of hard on an author who has just gotten a map featured because it kind of ruins the attention that the map should recieve.

But that's just an opinion, really.

I'm not saying this shit to be malicious, nor because I think I'm better than any of you. I'd expect the same treatment from anyone.

I'm just calling it as I see it guys, that's all.

"While I agree that atob is being unnecessarily condescending"

Sorry, but if you're going to use such fail logic and stand adamantly by it while perfect counter arguments are presented you deserve the treatment.

I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if someone uses logic against me in this way, why the hell would you choose not to? We all want to grow and get better at stuff, right?

Honestly...

"So, therefore, as we know the quality of a map is an /entirely/ subjective thing, calling the discussion of a review pointless as the quality of a review is subjective is just a ridiculous double standard."

Exactly.

While I agree that atob is being unnecessarily condescending, he's absolutely right. :/

Feedback of all kinds is essential to the development of authors and the prosperity of the community.

atob is such a tyrannical dick.

"I disagree. Opinions on both map and review are entirely subjective, right? Discussion of the map is impossible to limit, I guess, because this is a site about N maps. But discussion of the--subjective--review is pointless, and when it gets hostile it's unnecessary. "

This is a site about NMAPS. That does not only incorporate what you have rightly interpreted as the content of a map and it's very subjective praise and detractors, but in fact, all aspects related to mapping. One of those things is features. Features are, at present, a very vital and important part of the mapping community. I believe that, while subjective, it is important that people speak up in intelligent and constructive ways about reviews, because that is how we improve our writing. I also believe that, fundamentally, the review has become part of this map. From now on, people who visit this page will see the review and the map, and it does not make sense for them to go elsewhere to see the comments on one and not the other, because they essentially exist together. While I am sure that the author does not necessarily want comments about a review on his map, sadly, in the way NUMA works, this map would likely have never gotten another comment otherwise. This review has attracted attention to this gem (or is it? You decide!) and if he has to put up with some discussion of the review, I hardly believe that will detract from any feedback/plays he would be getting otherwise.

In sum, I believe that the map and review inherently exist as one, so so must the comments for both.

you use illogical statements that completely undo your entire arguments.

These are comment boxes meant for any kind of feedback, not "let's be nice and agree" boxes. They're for putting our opinion of the map, or anything related to the map across.

This is true, no contest.

So, therefore, as we know the quality of a map is an /entirely/ subjective thing, calling the discussion of a review pointless as the quality of a review is subjective is just a ridiculous double standard.

I didn't say I'm the only one who can put a point across flag, Slappy is good at it too. Just you (who always argue yourself into a corner) and that erikcu guy who doesn't get how opinion works both ways.

This is why I shooed you away from my maps, because you honestly have very little sense of how debating works and it's tiring.

"Essentially, by reviewing a map, the map becomes a place of discussion for the map as much as the review."

I disagree. Opinions on both map and review are entirely subjective, right? Discussion of the map is impossible to limit, I guess, because this is a site about N maps. But discussion of the--subjective--review is pointless, and when it gets hostile it's unnecessary.

atob, please stop acting like you're the only one who can make a point well or effectively. You may not realize this, but I disagree with you as fundamentally as you disagree with me, yet I use logical arguments instead of condescension.

Except that decent = subjective.

Honestly, some of you people really don't know how to put a point...

map get lambasted in a feature. It makes me thing that
a few people have very ridged taste in maps. This is difficult, but fun. It looks good in thumbnail, and obviously had some thought and playtesting put into it. Decent map. Nice feature. 4/5

flagmyidol is flatout wrong in that regard. This map would not have been commented on again if t'weren't for this review. Essentially, by reviewing a map, the map becomes a place of discussion for the map as much as the review. Now, the discussion of whether or not discussion of reviews go on the map itself? That doesn't fit here at all.

But you are straight up wrong here. :)

I fear we must disagree once more. :/

There's no rule, one place is as good as any. And, in fact, the map the review takes places on is the obvious choice.

Argue it all you want, you have no leg here mate. :)

That's not true at all; if the discussion/advice/condemnation had been on his maps, Radium never would have found it, for example.

I would take this further to /your/ maps, but you expressly forbade me to do so a few months ago. :)

flag out.

One place is as good as any, you come in complaining about absolutes and make your own.

Silly fish.

Since I love a good argument more than anything on Earth: I think that Diamondeye has a point, and an excuse to be slightly angry. None of you has bothered being at all polite while attacking his review (especially you, southpaw, given that it's a subjective matter :P); furthermore, any discussion should have been on /his/ maps. That would be one way to clear up the daily featured-map contention.

I didn't like it.

I think it's fine.

Hey, I mean, I'm no Atob and Southpaw, but I like the review. It's simple, it's a bit clever, and yeah, a tad unoriginal, but neat.

is that the review isn't particularly inventive or interesting. I guess that's subjective too, though.

One of my earlier maps I do concur. I don't care what people think of it. If Diamondeye thinks its an enjoyable map in his view, then thats perfectly fine. Reviews are subjective, they are not to satisfy everyone's idea of a good map in the community - because we're all different.

Thanks for the review, and nice work.

and asking for hostility to be reigned in in this community is like asking for the sun to not bother tomorrow.

I'm afraid you're just going to have to resolve yourself to take a beating every now and then...

The map is a valid as place as any to make a discussion, I'm sure Star doesn't mind and if he does he can request a mod/admin to delete stuff.

There's no need to get riled up about it.

if someone feels like commenting on how I review, please don't do it here. This is for comments about the map. It's already been vastly overdone. I'm promising to tighten up my reviews and I'm hoping people are going to tighten up their hostile attitudes in return. End of discussion on my part - here, at least.

are good examples of hot to write reviews. Much better than GTM's rip off attempts! :p

But the map isn't bad. I mean, maybe less enemies and more aesthetic-ness in the outer tiles.

Can someone rate this map a 3 for me? thanks.

D: && ??

nice review.. did you use this to get your reviewer position?

Yeah, that is weird. Can we take him out back and shoot him?

The fuck happened here?

I apologize that you interpreted my irony as some form of internet machismo. You know who I hate? People who make assumptions about my life based on some pseudo stereotyping of people that, you guessed it, they only interact with on the internet.

Pay attention to the maps, Caps.

go. to. HELL. I CAN'T STAND EGOMANIACS LIKE YOU WHO FAIL IN REAL LIFE AND HAVE TO ASSERT THEMSELVES VIA E-PENIS.

</rant?>

hope that helps, Diamondeye.

at Guitar_Hero_Matt's old reviews or some of Pawz's reviews to help you get ideas on how to write fantastic reviews. As for what maps to feature, looks for ones that are awesome yet have different concepts and ideas.