Player Fault vs. Mapper Fault

[Razgriz]

15 minutes ago, roadworx said:

???????

 

if you're disregarding player criticism because they're saving or they're trying to do a 100% run, then you may not be a bad mapper but you're certainly an asshole lol

Because you need a refresher already: 

 

"Full completes should not be easy, but a basic complete of the map with ignored monsters and secrets should take time and be risky, but how am I supposed to really know how it can be played if I see you save scumming through all the maps once you get over a potentially difficult hurdle, I can't take your criticism at all _especially_ for difficulty"

 

For maps, if you have to make saves in the middle of the map while trying to full complete it, you aren't playing the map properly for me to understand how difficult it really is. Since probably the dawn of SP mapping, maps were usually no doubt designed to be done without saves or checkpoints, you deciding to play it with saves and critique it outside of it's intended design does render your feedback mostly null.

 

If you want to think about it some more, if you get lucky and make it to the middle of the map and save, but die to a cyber at the end, but respawn again at the middle of the map at a fixed location and die some more, it's not known whether you would reach the middle with the same ammo, amor, or health, because you got lucky. From that it's not fully understood whether a more conservative or reckless approach would be beneficial to getting to the same spot in the middle of the map, in a better condition to complete. You throw the idea of difficulty out, so I can't fully accept your criticism.

 

Is that me being an asshole? Hopefully not but I'll take it anyways, because in no way would save scumming through a map to complete/full complete it is ever going to give more organic or insightful feedback than completing the map in one go (as they are almost always designed).

[Margaret Thatcher]

2 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

Is that me being an asshole?

Yes. Saving helps people enjoy the map. What if I have to close the game mid-way? You're basically telling someone to fuck themselves because they're not enjoying something the right way.

[Nine Inch Heels]

7 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

For maps, if you have to make saves in the middle of the map while trying to full complete it, you aren't playing the map properly for me to understand how difficult it really is. Since probably the dawn of SP mapping, maps were usually no doubt designed to be done without saves or checkpoints, you deciding to play it with saves and critique it outside of it's intended design does render your feedback mostly null.

I agree halfway here... Yet, there is an important distinction to be made between "brute forcing" a fight by way of save/load spam until somehow the stars align - aka savescumming - and saving before a fight, maybe dying once or twice, but then figuring out how the previously lethal fight is supposed to be beaten... The latter is something I can respect as a basis for feedback, the former is, like you said already, basically worthless feedback...

 

EDIT: As for this topic, whichever method players employ is on them entirely, so we're still at "player's fault" in case of frustrating savescumming issues..

Edited March 12, 2021 by Nine Inch Heels

[Peter]

Blame the player 100% of the time. If they can't handle a bit of jank, then they're not competent as a player.

[Stabbey]

1 hour ago, Razgriz said:

The criticism for maps is valid only if the player can actually prove through different play styles that a map can't be beat or is too hard to _complete_. The biggest issues that I have noticed through watching multiple streams is that:

 

1) Players tend to _save in the middle of the map_

2) They also want to _kill everything_ for full completes' sake

 

Which is quite frankly boring, long, and counter productive if you plan to make criticism of said map pieces. If you base your complaints on whether the map can easily be full completed, then you aren't doing anything but validating that it should take some time/work/risk as opposed to the idea of actually just trying to complete it on the basic level. But if you have to save frequently during a map, then you are just cheesing your way through a map while complaining that it's too easy or too hard (you basically don't gain competency when completing maps or get the actual intended difficulty/pace).

 

If the player is repeatedly saving over one single save file including such times as "oops I got 1 health left, better save over my only save file", and then complain about difficulty, then that's probably a fault with the player.

 

If you as a mapper are getting salty over players saving or wanting to kill everything, then as a player, I say "get over it". Outside of extreme cases, saving the game is neither cheating nor cheesing. Wanting to kill everything is also not a fucking sin or an indication of a bad/dumb player, and only maybe gets into that territory when they persist despite there clearly not being enough ammo and an escape route has been provided.

 

 

34 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

Because you need a refresher already: 

 

"Full completes should not be easy, but a basic complete of the map with ignored monsters and secrets should take time and be risky, but how am I supposed to really know how it can be played if I see you save scumming through all the maps once you get over a potentially difficult hurdle, I can't take your criticism at all _especially_ for difficulty"

 

For maps, if you have to make saves in the middle of the map while trying to full complete it, you aren't playing the map properly for me to understand how difficult it really is. Since probably the dawn of SP mapping, maps were usually no doubt designed to be done without saves or checkpoints, you deciding to play it with saves and critique it outside of it's intended design does render your feedback mostly null.

 

If you want to think about it some more, if you get lucky and make it to the middle of the map and save, but die to a cyber at the end, but respawn again at the middle of the map at a fixed location and die some more, it's not known whether you would reach the middle with the same ammo, amor, or health, because you got lucky. From that it's not fully understood whether a more conservative or reckless approach would be beneficial to getting to the same spot in the middle of the map, in a better condition to complete. You throw the idea of difficulty out, so I can't fully accept your criticism.

 

Is that me being an asshole? Hopefully not but I'll take it anyways, because in no way would save scumming through a map to complete/full complete it is ever going to give more organic or insightful feedback than completing the map in one go (as they are almost always designed).

 

Players playing a map for the first time do not know how difficult a map will be, or whether there are any bullshit traps. Players do not like wasting their time. Having to play a map again from scratch every time they die wastes their time. Especially because your philosophy is that a basic complete should take time and be risky. A player who feels like their time is being wasted is going to be less inclined to finish the map. A player who has to start from scratch and play the whole map all over again is also not going to get you accurate feedback on difficulty, because they'll know what to expect already.

 

Every single play-tester for my maps who has posted videos has saved mid-map, and it's still given me valuable feedback. If a player saving mid-map means you are unable to determine how difficult a map is, that's a fault with your ability to collect data, not with the player.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Stabbey
cleaned up and clarified

[Margaret Thatcher]

Just now, Stabbey said:

 

If the player is repeatedly saving over one single save file including such times as "oops I got 1 health left, better save over my only save file", then that's probably a fault with the player.

Is it bad that I regularly save at single-digit health, knowing I'm fucking myself over?

[94's the best style]

Bad mappers blame players. Good mapper blames the map, and uses the wisdom gained to make a better map. Players blame mappers because they need to blow steam after getting so riled up. Players got overheated and now they're burnt. Fighting people who are on fight mode will just make things worse. Experienced mappers know what things players enjoy, and use them to pace the maps better and calm them down. You can never satisfy everyone, and most players drop maps quickly, so mappers should be grateful for those players who put up with the maps and bullshit of us mappers. 

 

In the end, mapper puts time to make a map, but the player also uses time to play the map. Mappers should not take the preferences of players personally, players can like the dumbest things, and play the dumbest ways, but they do that because they like it, and mappers do maps the way they like.  

[Stabbey]

3 minutes ago, Margaret Thatcher said:

Is it bad that I regularly save at single-digit health, knowing I'm fucking myself over?

 

Right, sorry. I meant to say that if you do that and then complain about how difficult it is, that would be be... less-than-helpful feedback for assessing difficulty.

[Nine Inch Heels]

6 minutes ago, 94's the best style said:

Bad mappers blame players. Good mapper blames the map, and uses the wisdom gained to make a better map.

If a player who sucks at platforming tries their hand at one of my platforming sections and tells me that something they don't like is BS because they lack the required finesse to make it past that section - that's on them 100% of the time... Don't gimme that crap...

[roadworx]

18 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

For maps, if you have to make saves in the middle of the map while trying to full complete it, you aren't playing the map properly for me to understand how difficult it really is. Since probably the dawn of SP mapping, maps were usually no doubt designed to be done without saves or checkpoints, you deciding to play it with saves and critique it outside of it's intended design does render your feedback mostly null.

 

really? you can somehow magically read the minds of the majority of mappers from the past 27 years and tell that they explicitly had the exact same elitist mindset of "saving BAD ))):<"? despite the fact that there has been a save function since vanilla and there's a reason that it's there? and mappers have, for the past 27 years, been tweaking their maps for the various difficulties knowing that people who aren't as great at the game as others will likely use that save function?

 

26 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

If you want to think about it some more, if you get lucky and make it to the middle of the map and save, but die to a cyber at the end, but respawn again at the middle of the map at a fixed location and die some more, it's not known whether you would reach the middle with the same ammo, amor, or health, because you got lucky. From that it's not fully understood whether a more conservative or reckless approach would be beneficial to getting to the same spot in the middle of the map, in a better condition to complete. You throw the idea of difficulty out, so I can't fully accept your criticism.

idk how playing the map over again will improve your dodging abilities but okay lol

 

29 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

Is that me being an asshole?

you're being an elitist who expects everyone to not use the save function because you think it's somehow not playing correctly, so yeah kinda

[Lucky_Edie]

Instead of blaming players or mappers, just blame me. I'll take it for the team.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Lucky_Edie

[Major Arlene]

Basically this question boils down to: what constitutes good feedback?

answer: constructive feedback given in a way that isn't asshole-ish. ignore the assholes, listen to the people who give feedback that's useful. what constitutes that useful feedback will be learned with time and interaction.

[94's the best style]

2 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

If a player who sucks at platforming tries their hand at one of my platforming sections and tells me that something they don't like is BS because they lack the required finesse to make it past that section - that's on them 100% of the time... Don't gimme that crap...

Reasonable expectations are important! A driving section in middle of the fps can't expect for the player to be a seasoned racing game player. If the map needs a special skill, you have to teach the player that skill. 

[Nine Inch Heels]

Just now, 94's the best style said:

Reasonable expectations are important! A driving section in middle of the fps can't expect for the player to be a seasoned racing game player. If the map needs a special skill, you have to teach the player that skill. 

More pretentious nonsense, just as expected...

 

Save before that section, practice, and that's that... I'm not gonna put a tutorial for something that is a core skill into a map that isn't meant to be touched by gameplay illiterate dumbfucks... Platforming has been in the game since forever, so your point is moot...

[Margaret Thatcher]

Just now, Nine Inch Heels said:

More pretentious nonsense, just as expected...

 

Save before that section, practice, and that's that... I'm not gonna put a tutorial for something that is a core skill into a map that isn't meant to be touched by gameplay illiterate dumbfucks... Platforming has been in the game since forever, so your point is moot...

Ever played the secret level in DO:TIMS? The one entirely made up of a bullshit platforming section?

[94's the best style]

Just now, Nine Inch Heels said:

More pretentious nonsense, just as expected...

 

Save before that section, practice, and that's that... I'm not gonna put a tutorial for something that is a core skill into a map that isn't meant to be touched by gameplay illiterate dumbfucks... Platforming has been in the game since forever, so your point is moot...

Why do you hate players? As a mapper they're the most precious little things! Also, why do you reflect my criticisms with words like "pretentious" and call players who aren't good dumbfucks. Why are you so mean? I want to have a civil conversation.

[Snarboo]

29 minutes ago, Razgriz said:

Is that me being an asshole? Hopefully not but I'll take it anyways, because in no way would save scumming through a map to complete/full complete it is ever going to give more organic or insightful feedback than completing the map in one go (as they are almost always designed).

Some maps take a good 30 minutes to an hour to beat for even seasoned players that know what they're doing, so I'm not sure this is a good philosophy to have when looking for playtesting feedback unless you're making deliberately short maps or things on par with the IWADs. I'm also not sure why someone attempting a UV-max playthrough of a map is somehow playtesting the map wrong? That's my standard method of playing, and while I don't always do 100% runs my first time through, this is a good way of turning away players who may be interested in your work.

 

As for the topic, this statement:

8 minutes ago, 94's the best style said:

In the end, mapper puts time to make a map, but the player also uses time to play the map. Mappers should not take the preferences of players personally, players can like the dumbest things, and play the dumbest ways, but they do that because they like it, and mappers do maps the way they like.  

matches my feelings the closest! It's better to think of these things in terms of art criticism or what is "owed" to an audience rather than implying a moral failing by saying "who is at fault."

 

As a mapper, all you "owe" is a playable, functioning map. It need not even be finished, balanced or completable if it's a WIP and you're looking for valuable feedback, or you just wanted to release it knowing you couldn't complete it. Likewise, a player only "owes" the ability to play and engage with a map. If you can't articulate your feelings or engage with a map in a meaningful way, that's not a failing on the mapper's part.

 

As a content creator that also actively consumes a lot of content, I've been on both sides of this divide. It's really hard to discuss this issue in a way that isn't contentious, but it doesn't hurt to research things like art criticism and Death of the Author for a deeper discussion on this issue.

[roadworx]

4 minutes ago, 94's the best style said:

Reasonable expectations are important! A driving section in middle of the fps can't expect for the player to be a seasoned racing game player. If the map needs a special skill, you have to teach the player that skill. 

tbf, if a map is designed for a certain skillset, then that's not gonna be the case. not every map will be designed for everyone, y'know?