***Mapping Contest #8 Vote***
- Thread starter YM
- Start date
Icarus
aa
- Sep 10, 2008
- 2,245
- 1,210
I really feel aesthetics doesn't purely mean how great you can make it look, but you need to give it a sense of purpose and make it feel like what it should be, and draw the players' attention to the important areas.
One of the reasons why I didn't like TDSOYS's entry was that it really felt like it was any random setting with a CP thrown in, and in a awkward position at that.
You'll need more to convince me that it is a Centre Control Point.
One of the reasons why I didn't like TDSOYS's entry was that it really felt like it was any random setting with a CP thrown in, and in a awkward position at that.
You'll need more to convince me that it is a Centre Control Point.
Last edited:
@PP. That's cool. I know that your judgement is fair and thought out, and all the maps were based on the same scale (same monitor).
It will be a 5 point CP, so I was using the bridge as more of a landmark for the center than anything. (Hopefully a small bit of it will be seen from most spots in the map)
5 point CP's are really about taking the enemy base than mid so...
That's actually why I included spawn/path/center/path/spawn as to me the constitues a 5 point center.
I may update the mid (inside warehouse) but I'll probably wait until I get some proper testing and try to update it on gameplay issues for caping/holding mid.
-----------------
gameplay judging:
It's a tough call. I voted for andysss456 because I thought his was the best detailed and I liked the map. But during my run throughs while I was writing stuff up I kept catching myself including comments about fun/not fun gameplay stuff... I tried to leave that out in the end but it does tie in pretty deeply to a map.
But I think if someone felt it was cramped then that can go either way really. Of course it is a big issue for gameplay but also looks of a map. It didn't bother me in his map obviously, maybe if I went back and looked at that specifically it would. hard to say.
But asthetically 'cramped' would be a feeling you DO want in caves, sewers, hallways (maybe) but maybe not so much in outdoor areas.
And I kept catching myself during building phase too... getting caught in between gameplay and details. I leaned pretty hard towards gameplay anyway as I want to make a map out of it.
It will be a 5 point CP, so I was using the bridge as more of a landmark for the center than anything. (Hopefully a small bit of it will be seen from most spots in the map)
5 point CP's are really about taking the enemy base than mid so...
That's actually why I included spawn/path/center/path/spawn as to me the constitues a 5 point center.
I may update the mid (inside warehouse) but I'll probably wait until I get some proper testing and try to update it on gameplay issues for caping/holding mid.
-----------------
gameplay judging:
It's a tough call. I voted for andysss456 because I thought his was the best detailed and I liked the map. But during my run throughs while I was writing stuff up I kept catching myself including comments about fun/not fun gameplay stuff... I tried to leave that out in the end but it does tie in pretty deeply to a map.
But I think if someone felt it was cramped then that can go either way really. Of course it is a big issue for gameplay but also looks of a map. It didn't bother me in his map obviously, maybe if I went back and looked at that specifically it would. hard to say.
But asthetically 'cramped' would be a feeling you DO want in caves, sewers, hallways (maybe) but maybe not so much in outdoor areas.
And I kept catching myself during building phase too... getting caught in between gameplay and details. I leaned pretty hard towards gameplay anyway as I want to make a map out of it.
I just want to chime in and say that these kinds of discussions are really valuable 
Our Payload contest produced disagreements over some of the judging criteria. Because of that, I'm trying to refine the process for our next one, making the rules as clear as possible. So the recent debate of spacing as it relates to aesthetics and/or gameplay is a big help. Also, grats to all the authors
Our Payload contest produced disagreements over some of the judging criteria. Because of that, I'm trying to refine the process for our next one, making the rules as clear as possible. So the recent debate of spacing as it relates to aesthetics and/or gameplay is a big help. Also, grats to all the authors 
I want to first start off by saying thank you to all those entered this contest. No work, no matter how little or unrefined should go without thanks, merely because it's what keeps this community going. Those who enter find they learn things about mapping they would never have known before, and generally that's beneficial to everyone in the long run.
I'm basing my voting criteria on what was said in the rules thread--strictly on detailing and aesthetics. Therefore, maps like BladeMasterPsi, where my frames per second dropped down to a miserable 5-10 in most places (which is a nightmare!) will find their criteria unharmed by things that have no place in voting.
I'll get down to business. Again, I'm a huge stickler for color and the effect it has on mapping, the environment in which a player is attracted to the map, and the overall mood and feel that it gives to the experience of playing. My voting will deal with detailing in the following areas: color and the use of it in detailing, mood and aesthetics; scaling in regards to the player and the rest of the environment (in other words, spacing and harmony of the player/environment relationship); placement and appropriation of props; texturing; lighting; choice of skybox; and last of all my favorite--innovation of detailing, as I applaud and appreciate those who do new things rather than imitate the old.
Scoring:
ABBATTOIR:
One major thing about this entry that I appreciate is the attempt to innovate style, as the overall feeling of this map is unique; in no other map will you find stylistic choices like these, neither in lighting, or choice of texturing and placement of objects. Having said that, the placement of objects and the overall layout detailing choices lends itself to feel a bit out of harmony, as though the amount of thought given to placement was lacking. Nonetheless, the scaling of the environment to player feels great--would be interesting to see how a control point this size would play in a full scale game.
As for color, above the palette is listed. This is determined though screenshots in-game, then picked with the eye dropper as major colors. I pick from everywhere in the map to get the widest range of colors as possible, including the skybox, in order to select a fair and consistent range of colors. While there is no specific arrangement other than warm on top and cool on the bottom, I have placed some similar colors next to each other to make the difference apparent. For this entry, you will notice a very wide range of warm and cool colors, all with moderately low saturation. While these colors are appreciated for not hurting the eye, they can also give a softness to an entry (specific choices whether on purpose or not). Also take note of the abundance of the off-white second color in this entry--as it consumes a great deal of space.
Overall this entry was very good. Only a few nit picky things.
Small detail issues, like the one above, make it difficult to completely appreciate what could have been a really good idea. That whole central area is quite unique--and appreciated. But for this reason, I have to give this entry a 4 of 5.
ANDYSSS456:
While I am disappointed that there is absolutely NO innovation in this map whatsoever (and I can't remove points off for not innovating), it can't be denied that this map is quite excellent in every other aspect. There are plenty of cookie-cutter dustbowl-like maps that do very well but come short of capturing that good detail required to actually feel like a dustbowl map, but this entry seems to capture that dustbowl feel in almost every way. Mostly the strength comes from your careful attention to placement of props, uses of texturing and those 'visual' areas, those places you can see but can't get to. Also, your use of lighting (while generic) is bold enough to capture the eye and set your map apart from the other entries. And as far as scaling goes, it feels quite nice, even though the entire area may feel a little small considering some servers can get 32 players. That aside, it is clear that no opportunity has gone overlooked to put detail where it is due.
As the palette shows above, there are no shortage of warm values, but very few cool ones. This is partly due to the fact that this is a dustbowl-style map. However the difference lies in the saturation of the 2nd warm color and the first cool color--thereby creating such contrast that is pleasing and useful in setting up the environment of this map. Not innovative, but effective.
Again, while this is just a cookie-cutter of other valve maps, it seems to have succeeded in nearly every way. With exceptional knowledge of the material system as this entry shows, it could be astounding to see what could be done should the mapper attempt something outside of the box. I give the entry a 5 of 5.
BMP:
As stated before by myself and others, the first major complaint is the complete loss of frames per second. Even if you're just making a pre-fab for a detailing contest, you can't just ignore the little things like performance. How can you get voters to vote for you if they can't or won't play the map? I consistently had poor fps all over the map. Take a look at this wireframe view of your entry:
Areaportals, even in detail entries are a must for promoting your map.
Now, forget that your map has performance issues. What I care about now is the detailing. The egypt style, while quite bland and boring to the eye in terms of color, has a very unique and specific idea behind it. Here is where I feel you succeeded, with the appropriate uses of the props, textures and concepts provided by cp_egypt. A cookie-cutter example. In terms of scaling, the entry is just too massive. I felt overwhelmed as a player, and that doesn't do well.
The range of colors here is typical of egypt style entries. Due to the 'sand' like nature of the egypt texture set, the map usually not only falls short of cool colors, but of warm ones too--that monotony of brown and yellows lends to being repetitive and worn out very quickly. But the attention to detailing is there, and if anything is at fault, it's the egypt texture set (thanks valve). For this entry, I give a 4 of 5.
MEDD:
First things first: innovative--and I love that. I'll go to the ends of the earth to to find examples that try something new (even if unsuccessful) rather than copy or imitate that which has been done before. And let me say--those glass bridges there and the chrome stairs could led you to a new direction stylistically, which also needs to be refined before you could truly utilize it to the best potential. But what impresses me is the attempt to try something new. The scaling feels quite appropriate--but the eye for detail is less than satisfactory. The detail items, like props and texture choices feel appropriate where they are used, but for me there wasn't enough of it. That, combined with lighting (and that rockwall texture, ugh!), made this entry feel interestingly new, and bland at the same time.
Let's take a look at your color palette. Had your increased the potency of some of your light sources, your color ranges would have doubled. From the palette here, you can see some low saturated colors and some high saturated colors (3rd warm), but all colors here are much too low in value. The introduction of some brighter colors and highlights could really change the pace of lighting in this entry. For your work, I give you a 3 of 5.
I'm basing my voting criteria on what was said in the rules thread--strictly on detailing and aesthetics. Therefore, maps like BladeMasterPsi, where my frames per second dropped down to a miserable 5-10 in most places (which is a nightmare!) will find their criteria unharmed by things that have no place in voting.
I'll get down to business. Again, I'm a huge stickler for color and the effect it has on mapping, the environment in which a player is attracted to the map, and the overall mood and feel that it gives to the experience of playing. My voting will deal with detailing in the following areas: color and the use of it in detailing, mood and aesthetics; scaling in regards to the player and the rest of the environment (in other words, spacing and harmony of the player/environment relationship); placement and appropriation of props; texturing; lighting; choice of skybox; and last of all my favorite--innovation of detailing, as I applaud and appreciate those who do new things rather than imitate the old.
Scoring:
ABBATTOIR:
One major thing about this entry that I appreciate is the attempt to innovate style, as the overall feeling of this map is unique; in no other map will you find stylistic choices like these, neither in lighting, or choice of texturing and placement of objects. Having said that, the placement of objects and the overall layout detailing choices lends itself to feel a bit out of harmony, as though the amount of thought given to placement was lacking. Nonetheless, the scaling of the environment to player feels great--would be interesting to see how a control point this size would play in a full scale game.
As for color, above the palette is listed. This is determined though screenshots in-game, then picked with the eye dropper as major colors. I pick from everywhere in the map to get the widest range of colors as possible, including the skybox, in order to select a fair and consistent range of colors. While there is no specific arrangement other than warm on top and cool on the bottom, I have placed some similar colors next to each other to make the difference apparent. For this entry, you will notice a very wide range of warm and cool colors, all with moderately low saturation. While these colors are appreciated for not hurting the eye, they can also give a softness to an entry (specific choices whether on purpose or not). Also take note of the abundance of the off-white second color in this entry--as it consumes a great deal of space.
Overall this entry was very good. Only a few nit picky things.
Small detail issues, like the one above, make it difficult to completely appreciate what could have been a really good idea. That whole central area is quite unique--and appreciated. But for this reason, I have to give this entry a 4 of 5.
ANDYSSS456:
While I am disappointed that there is absolutely NO innovation in this map whatsoever (and I can't remove points off for not innovating), it can't be denied that this map is quite excellent in every other aspect. There are plenty of cookie-cutter dustbowl-like maps that do very well but come short of capturing that good detail required to actually feel like a dustbowl map, but this entry seems to capture that dustbowl feel in almost every way. Mostly the strength comes from your careful attention to placement of props, uses of texturing and those 'visual' areas, those places you can see but can't get to. Also, your use of lighting (while generic) is bold enough to capture the eye and set your map apart from the other entries. And as far as scaling goes, it feels quite nice, even though the entire area may feel a little small considering some servers can get 32 players. That aside, it is clear that no opportunity has gone overlooked to put detail where it is due.
As the palette shows above, there are no shortage of warm values, but very few cool ones. This is partly due to the fact that this is a dustbowl-style map. However the difference lies in the saturation of the 2nd warm color and the first cool color--thereby creating such contrast that is pleasing and useful in setting up the environment of this map. Not innovative, but effective.
Again, while this is just a cookie-cutter of other valve maps, it seems to have succeeded in nearly every way. With exceptional knowledge of the material system as this entry shows, it could be astounding to see what could be done should the mapper attempt something outside of the box. I give the entry a 5 of 5.
BMP:
As stated before by myself and others, the first major complaint is the complete loss of frames per second. Even if you're just making a pre-fab for a detailing contest, you can't just ignore the little things like performance. How can you get voters to vote for you if they can't or won't play the map? I consistently had poor fps all over the map. Take a look at this wireframe view of your entry:
Areaportals, even in detail entries are a must for promoting your map.
Now, forget that your map has performance issues. What I care about now is the detailing. The egypt style, while quite bland and boring to the eye in terms of color, has a very unique and specific idea behind it. Here is where I feel you succeeded, with the appropriate uses of the props, textures and concepts provided by cp_egypt. A cookie-cutter example. In terms of scaling, the entry is just too massive. I felt overwhelmed as a player, and that doesn't do well.
The range of colors here is typical of egypt style entries. Due to the 'sand' like nature of the egypt texture set, the map usually not only falls short of cool colors, but of warm ones too--that monotony of brown and yellows lends to being repetitive and worn out very quickly. But the attention to detailing is there, and if anything is at fault, it's the egypt texture set (thanks valve). For this entry, I give a 4 of 5.
MEDD:
First things first: innovative--and I love that. I'll go to the ends of the earth to to find examples that try something new (even if unsuccessful) rather than copy or imitate that which has been done before. And let me say--those glass bridges there and the chrome stairs could led you to a new direction stylistically, which also needs to be refined before you could truly utilize it to the best potential. But what impresses me is the attempt to try something new. The scaling feels quite appropriate--but the eye for detail is less than satisfactory. The detail items, like props and texture choices feel appropriate where they are used, but for me there wasn't enough of it. That, combined with lighting (and that rockwall texture, ugh!), made this entry feel interestingly new, and bland at the same time.
Let's take a look at your color palette. Had your increased the potency of some of your light sources, your color ranges would have doubled. From the palette here, you can see some low saturated colors and some high saturated colors (3rd warm), but all colors here are much too low in value. The introduction of some brighter colors and highlights could really change the pace of lighting in this entry. For your work, I give you a 3 of 5.
Last edited:
PINKPANTHER:
The first thing I said when I loaded this entry and walked inside was, "Woah." And I mean I literally said that to myself. The egypt theme normally felt quite miserable and bland to me, but playing this entry made me feel like you truly understood the strength of the texture set, and how to REALLY emphasize the strong points of it. The scale of it was on par with perhaps that central area in granary or cp_labor, and seemed effective. But I'd have to play a full sized map to see what would happen to the scale. Overall I was generally impressed, and I must thank you for the used of the soundscapes--specific detail that not many people pay attention to, or utilize efficiently. Nicely done.
Again here you can see there are not a great range of colors, neither warm or cool, but you can see the contrast in the first warm and cool colors really lends itself to a very dynamic composition--this is the thing that breaks the repetition. The structures were not obstructing the sky whatsoever--meaning that the ground and sky and the colors associated could mingle harmoniously...I was very impressed. Take a look at this for example:
A direct screenshot of the skybox texture. Did you make this yourself? This is AN EXCELLENT example of combining the sky, the ground and the environment lighting all together. I must give you props on this. Most impressive. I give you a 5 of 5.
PYSPHIL:
Again, the egypt theme seems to be quite popular, which is either a good thing or bad thing. One of the major misconceptions I think that cp_egypt brought is the scale. If you look objectively at the size of cp_egypt and the environment, it literally feels too big (while in size comparison it may not even be bigger than pl_badwater) but it's that monumental structure that gives the enormity to it. And I feel like this entry saw that in cp_egypt and took it to the next level. I'm saying this not as a complaint, but as an observation. What's happened here is that the scale of the entry is immense, and I felt like I was swimming around in the entry. That has a major part of how an entry is perceived, and it has not met my standards. However, the detail that was included felt appropriate and well conceived.
Taking a look at the color palette, you may notice that stark highly saturated orange. That's the torch color, and when a great portion of your entry exists inside a space lit by those torches, you tend to notice that color more than others. But when you go outside, that monotony of the egypt texture set begins to take hold once more. I also don't think too much time was taken to think about the environment lighting.
Some nit picky things:
In such a darkly lit space, a player is bound to notice these slight gaps in the floor--and surprisingly enough cp_egypt has them in the spawn rooms (and I CURSE this! Gah, I hate it!). These fixes are a must, especially where detailing is concerned. Overall, thanks for the entry! I give you a 3 of 5.
SGTFRAG:
Innovation is my favorite. And I love this attempt at the bridge. At first I was misled into thinking that the player would be crossing the bridge, but once you get over the idea that it's a detail item only, you get used to the layout. Some initial complaints: your use of fog is much too thick. Coming from a realistic approach, in actuality, fog may be even thicker than what you've used here--but honestly, after all that work you put into the bridge, I'd show it off if I were you! There's no reason to mask it with fog, or attempt to obscure the clarity of what it means as a VISUAL element of your map that would make it remarkable, sort of like "Hey do you remember that map with the big bridge in it?" and the reply would be "Hell yeah I remember it! How could I forget?"
However, as shown in the screenshots above, I realize the fog was an attempt to compensate for the lack of detail in the distance. Partly I think this has to do with the "no 3-D skybox" rule (which seems a little mean, since detail has SO MUCH to do with using the 3-D skybox), and partly because of the idea of being unsure what to put there next. Regardless, had you the time, I'm sure in a full scale map project, no attention to detail like this would go unnoticed.
Another thing I liked as innovation was the moving forklifts as benefits and changes to gameplay. But that whole area in there was a little too dark--if you're going to detail up that area, then show it off with some proper lighting! No sense letting that effort go to waste.
The palette here looks fairly good, and this may be a stylistic choice, but there is a direct lack of very warm colors, very few reds yellows and oranges. This might be just what you wanted, but for my tastes, the red team portion of the map could warm up a little. I give you a 4 of 5.
TDSOYS:
I'd say this: you've got the idea of the wooden structures down pat. In fact, you'd be right up to making some cp_fastlane clones. And while I'd rather see something new, I would complain to playing this as a new map. I probably just be tired of it really quick, unless the gameplay was excellent. The scaling feels right, the textures and details are used adequately, but some areas feel visually awkward, mostly around the bridge. And let me say, that's a terrible place for the control point...you'd focusing gameplay down lower, rather than keeping it in the middle and letting the upper and lower sections be alternate methods of defending the area. For example, you allow all players to access the bridge roof--but people would never go there because the control point is on the bottom--2 floors below. Who cares what's going on there, and what's more, there's so much excellent detail up high! Emphasize that space by bringing the control point to the middle floor, even if it means restructuring the bridge.
The color palette reveals very soft lighting and texturing as in ABBAttoir's entry, but the difference is the MAJOR lack of cool colors. The variety is very low and I'd be tired of this map very quickly. That's just me however, and since there's nothing wrong with this entry, I'll give you a 4 of 5.
The first thing I said when I loaded this entry and walked inside was, "Woah." And I mean I literally said that to myself. The egypt theme normally felt quite miserable and bland to me, but playing this entry made me feel like you truly understood the strength of the texture set, and how to REALLY emphasize the strong points of it. The scale of it was on par with perhaps that central area in granary or cp_labor, and seemed effective. But I'd have to play a full sized map to see what would happen to the scale. Overall I was generally impressed, and I must thank you for the used of the soundscapes--specific detail that not many people pay attention to, or utilize efficiently. Nicely done.
Again here you can see there are not a great range of colors, neither warm or cool, but you can see the contrast in the first warm and cool colors really lends itself to a very dynamic composition--this is the thing that breaks the repetition. The structures were not obstructing the sky whatsoever--meaning that the ground and sky and the colors associated could mingle harmoniously...I was very impressed. Take a look at this for example:
A direct screenshot of the skybox texture. Did you make this yourself? This is AN EXCELLENT example of combining the sky, the ground and the environment lighting all together. I must give you props on this. Most impressive. I give you a 5 of 5.
PYSPHIL:
Again, the egypt theme seems to be quite popular, which is either a good thing or bad thing. One of the major misconceptions I think that cp_egypt brought is the scale. If you look objectively at the size of cp_egypt and the environment, it literally feels too big (while in size comparison it may not even be bigger than pl_badwater) but it's that monumental structure that gives the enormity to it. And I feel like this entry saw that in cp_egypt and took it to the next level. I'm saying this not as a complaint, but as an observation. What's happened here is that the scale of the entry is immense, and I felt like I was swimming around in the entry. That has a major part of how an entry is perceived, and it has not met my standards. However, the detail that was included felt appropriate and well conceived.
Taking a look at the color palette, you may notice that stark highly saturated orange. That's the torch color, and when a great portion of your entry exists inside a space lit by those torches, you tend to notice that color more than others. But when you go outside, that monotony of the egypt texture set begins to take hold once more. I also don't think too much time was taken to think about the environment lighting.
Some nit picky things:
In such a darkly lit space, a player is bound to notice these slight gaps in the floor--and surprisingly enough cp_egypt has them in the spawn rooms (and I CURSE this! Gah, I hate it!). These fixes are a must, especially where detailing is concerned. Overall, thanks for the entry! I give you a 3 of 5.
SGTFRAG:
Innovation is my favorite. And I love this attempt at the bridge. At first I was misled into thinking that the player would be crossing the bridge, but once you get over the idea that it's a detail item only, you get used to the layout. Some initial complaints: your use of fog is much too thick. Coming from a realistic approach, in actuality, fog may be even thicker than what you've used here--but honestly, after all that work you put into the bridge, I'd show it off if I were you! There's no reason to mask it with fog, or attempt to obscure the clarity of what it means as a VISUAL element of your map that would make it remarkable, sort of like "Hey do you remember that map with the big bridge in it?" and the reply would be "Hell yeah I remember it! How could I forget?"
However, as shown in the screenshots above, I realize the fog was an attempt to compensate for the lack of detail in the distance. Partly I think this has to do with the "no 3-D skybox" rule (which seems a little mean, since detail has SO MUCH to do with using the 3-D skybox), and partly because of the idea of being unsure what to put there next. Regardless, had you the time, I'm sure in a full scale map project, no attention to detail like this would go unnoticed.
Another thing I liked as innovation was the moving forklifts as benefits and changes to gameplay. But that whole area in there was a little too dark--if you're going to detail up that area, then show it off with some proper lighting! No sense letting that effort go to waste.
The palette here looks fairly good, and this may be a stylistic choice, but there is a direct lack of very warm colors, very few reds yellows and oranges. This might be just what you wanted, but for my tastes, the red team portion of the map could warm up a little. I give you a 4 of 5.
TDSOYS:
I'd say this: you've got the idea of the wooden structures down pat. In fact, you'd be right up to making some cp_fastlane clones. And while I'd rather see something new, I would complain to playing this as a new map. I probably just be tired of it really quick, unless the gameplay was excellent. The scaling feels right, the textures and details are used adequately, but some areas feel visually awkward, mostly around the bridge. And let me say, that's a terrible place for the control point...you'd focusing gameplay down lower, rather than keeping it in the middle and letting the upper and lower sections be alternate methods of defending the area. For example, you allow all players to access the bridge roof--but people would never go there because the control point is on the bottom--2 floors below. Who cares what's going on there, and what's more, there's so much excellent detail up high! Emphasize that space by bringing the control point to the middle floor, even if it means restructuring the bridge.
The color palette reveals very soft lighting and texturing as in ABBAttoir's entry, but the difference is the MAJOR lack of cool colors. The variety is very low and I'd be tired of this map very quickly. That's just me however, and since there's nothing wrong with this entry, I'll give you a 4 of 5.
uma plata
L6: Sharp Member
- Jan 20, 2009
- 294
- 93
Rexy chimes in with incredibly useful feedback. That kicks ass!
Thx dude
As for everyone else's feedback, I'll just respond generally and say that I can't really disagree with any of the negatives about my entry. I'm admittedly putting out fairly noob efforts, a lot of things I missed, and yes, could use a lot more detail. Actually surprised and grateful that I got a couple voteshmy:
Someone said the central area might be 'over-stylized', which I agree with, but that was exactly what I was going for. I'm enamored with 60's space age (or 'googie') architecture, and I'm working on expanding that style in a full map.
Thanks to TF2maps.net and Youme for the opportunity, had fun, would do it again!
Thx dude
As for everyone else's feedback, I'll just respond generally and say that I can't really disagree with any of the negatives about my entry. I'm admittedly putting out fairly noob efforts, a lot of things I missed, and yes, could use a lot more detail. Actually surprised and grateful that I got a couple votes
hmy:Someone said the central area might be 'over-stylized', which I agree with, but that was exactly what I was going for. I'm enamored with 60's space age (or 'googie') architecture, and I'm working on expanding that style in a full map.
Thanks to TF2maps.net and Youme for the opportunity, had fun, would do it again!
I didn't think it was over stylized, but you really could be on to something with those specific choices in theme. I'll be really interested to see what your research and effort comes up with.
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see a closing date on voting.
I was trying to encourage some members from other forums to come over and vote.
It says 'poll closed' but I wasn't sure if that was just because I voted already.
I was trying to encourage some members from other forums to come over and vote.
It says 'poll closed' but I wasn't sure if that was just because I voted already.
TheDarkerSideofYourShadow
L10: Glamorous Member
- Apr 12, 2008
- 792
- 286
It had listed a time when the polls closed, which was Monday at 6:09 AM or so for me. Basically 1 week from when it started.
Well alright then
Congrats Darker,
You came on strong at the end and left everyone in the dust :thumbup:
Congrates to andy too for 2nd place.
My myriad of fans let me down
LOLOLOLO
I'm stoked just to get in top 3 though. Was fun, now I gotta get around to making a map out of it.
Thanks for everyones votes and everyones write-ups!
Congrats Darker,
You came on strong at the end and left everyone in the dust :thumbup:
Congrates to andy too for 2nd place.
My myriad of fans let me down
LOLOLOLO
I'm stoked just to get in top 3 though. Was fun, now I gotta get around to making a map out of it.
Thanks for everyones votes and everyones write-ups!
Yeah, I think we're waiting on some votes from higher-ups?
TheDarkerSideofYourShadow
L10: Glamorous Member
- Apr 12, 2008
- 792
- 286
I do believe thats the case, which would mean, if everyone who participated in this round voted again, thats another 16 votes, equal to the current highest. Makes things fun
de-stickied, vote for a finalist here - http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=6492