fredair.esu says:
I saw many people criticizing the lack of respawn. Can we maybe talk about this fact? How important are respawns nowadays, when the goal is to set the fastest time?

Realspace says:
The first half of this is actually a good point. The rules don't say anything about respawnable checkpoints, but the issues that can create are valid. As to how this relates to a map's goal being to finish it as fast as possible - that is a debate for another time, though one worth having.

I don't know what will come of it, but pjw actually opened a discussion about it in the general forum.

Just to add my own input here, I was the one who explicitly said to the judges that if me not finishing tracks was a problem, then please throw out all my scores.

fredair.esu says:
If you can't finish a map, don't judge.

Oh, I could have finished all of them.

But if I'm frustrated with a track and I'm not having fun, then I'm not going to spend a bunch of time on it. If I'm not having fun, I'm not going to finish your map. In that case, I'm judging your map poorly because I didn't enjoy it.

That being said, since the rules don't address the respawn issue, then this is obviously my problem. (<--Not sarcasm, just honesty.)

In the future, if I don't finish all the tracks, then I'll just not vote. That doesn't really seem ideal, but I don't know what else to do that would be fair.

pjw says:
In the future, if I don't finish all the tracks, then I'll just not vote. That doesn't really seem ideal, but I don't know what else to do that would be fair.

I agree that if you don't finish the map then we should do something to address that. That being said, I find it a little unfair to whoever made the map to not say anything at all, more so to newer mappers that don't have lots of experience. Part of the reason why people when voting on an MTC give an explanation as to why they liked a map is so that the mapper knows what went well - or didn't. In regards to future MTCs, maybe we should have a special category where if you did not finish the map, you can write in why you didn't finish it. Then you have a system that both ignores any possible scores from those who didn't finish a map, but still provides context as to why and what could be done next map. But that's not my choice, as I don't run the MTCs.

Just throwing my 2 cents in, that's exactly what i did. Stated i hadn't tested / finished all maps so didn't vote. I think that's the only fair way to go.

Realspace says:
maybe we should have a special category where if you did not finish the map, you can write in why you didn't finish it

I don't think we need anything special? If you don't finish all the tracks, go ahead and comment (if you wish) but just don't pick a number on any track?

Oh, look, an argument over the internet!

NB: this opening remark is here so that you know that I am not taking my post (nor any of yours above) seriously.

... says:
If you can't finish a map, don't judge.

Sooooooo, in the past, I know there are a couple of MTC tracks that I was not able to finish, and had to look at the GPS to vote. I did not play the maps of the current MTC, but I presume, fredair, that I wouldn't have been able to finish your map either, knowing how challenging your maps are. And I have voted for these maps (based on both my driving experience and the GPS, thanks god the GPS), and given explanations of where I would crash most often and whatnot. And I believe that is important, to give appropriate feedback.

So, I understand that you would be upset when you get a bad score and very few explanations on why. I totally get it, I would be upset if I were in your position (well I wouldn't).

But.

You have to remember that we all have different expectations about the game. Some people like to challenge themselves and hunt for the absolute perfect godly line of heaven (I assume you would fall into that category). Others might like to discover new maps with innovative designs. Others (like me), just want easy maps to enjoy and have fun on, without the pain of restarting over and over and over and over. And others might have other reasons, or a combation of reasons, or whatever. And that's OK to be enjoy the game one way or another, that's totally OK, as long as you are having fun ^^

So people judge based on different expectations. That's fine (remember, it is a game...) Yes, it would be preferable if people would give explanations when judging a MTC map (especially if the score is bad). But no, I don't think that it is reasonable to forbid people from judging because there are some maps they didn't finish (also, we all have different amount of time allocated to TM). Nor do I think that people that were not able to finish a map should prevent themselves from judging, as long as you are fair to the map you have not finished (and probably at least looked at the GPS or a replay). You know, free speech and stuff.

And final comment (for those of you who have read thus far). This is a contest on the internet. It is not important. Don't take it that seriously. Less whining, more having fun



PS: "but Ranig, if you don't take the issue seriously, why do you even bother writing such a long wall of text?" you ask. Well, despite my low participation, I do enjoy the MTC, and I do enjoy the MTC variety, openness and welcomeness (as in: it is open to everybody, regardless the type of map you make/like, your ancienty on the site, or whatever). And I think it would be great to keep it that way and not transform it into an elitist club of "only players that are 'good enough' can judge"

My response would be that it is very hard to make easy fullspeed tracks that aren't incredibly boring / repetitive. There are always exceptions but not many.

Another point is, the only regular audience you're going to get is people who like the game and play regularly. So naturally you would want to cater to the demands of making new stuff they might not of seen before and keeping it moderately challenging so they don't get bored as they will likely play the map more than once. On the other hand you have the more casual player base who will likely never play your map more than once and doesn't have the same expectations when it comes to creativity. I guess it comes down to which of these 2 audiences you want to cater for.

Ranig says:
PS: "but Ranig, if you don't take the issue seriously, why do you even bother writing such a long wall of text?" you ask. Well, despite my low participation, I do enjoy the MTC, and I do enjoy the MTC variety, openness and welcomeness (as in: it is open to everybody, regardless the type of map you make/like, your ancienty on the site, or whatever). And I think it would be great to keep it that way and not transform it into an elitist club of "only players that are 'good enough' can judge"

is a really solid point and something i agree with. I don't think either side of this argument can ever really win and i see the problems both have. However take the MTC as a local get together of all different mappers, hell maybe people who only care for elite trackbuilding will help inspire 'younger' builders to up their game and dedicate time to improving. The cycle continues

If I had to say something quick and easy, it's this: I don't want people to feel like they shouldn't vote simply because of their level of skill, but I also don't want people to feel like they should build easier maps as a result.

If you've put forth effort into learning and playing the map, then (at least regarding my own maps) I don't care if you've managed to finish it. You know what you liked/disliked about the map, and I want to know your opinion of it. Maybe you needed to supplement your knowledge using the GPS or the free cam, that's fine. As long as you have solid reasons to back up your opinion, I want to hear it.

Likewise, I don't think our maps should cater to specific difficulties. Look, both Slither and Monument were probably the two toughest courses this month and both of them landed on the podium. Difficulty often comes around as a result of creative building, as players don't know how to approach the new sections yet. These maps may be exceptionally difficult, but clearly this doesn't make them bad. I don't want builders to be discouraged from making a brutally difficult map if they think they can pull it off well. After all, part of the reason the MTC is so much fun is that it encourages all environments and all styles, so why not all levels of difficulty as well?

I agree with all that you said

Now that their is a bit less drama, I come with the results of this month in video, just like previous month.



And also because I forgot with all of that : Congrats Snake !