What's with the 'love-in'?

[Mr-Jigsaw]

it just seems like everyone is eager to suck each other's cocks, or at least the cocks of those who make awesome maps/models/art (for lack of better wording).

From now on, call them sycophants.

[Jitterbug]

I often find myself thinking the same thing, but it is a courtesy to just go ahead and say that the work someone put into a map is work well done. However, the effort made to just tell someone so is often wasted if unaccompanied by constructive critique or something to help improve the quality of either the map or the mapper. I hold no problem with saying, "Hey, that's a nice map you got thar" , just as long as something is included with it. What I consider unacceptable is people saying, "OMG KEWL MAP LETS HAV SEX" or some shit like that.

[Sentura]

it just seems like everyone is eager to suck each other's cocks, or at least the cocks of those who make awesome maps/models/art (for lack of better wording).

From now on, call them sycophants.

i'd call them groupies, but hey, potato, potatoe.

[Kremator]

I do make a point of being honest with critiques but it doesn't help when you risk being hated by the person - it requires a lot of tact that I frankly don't possess. I'm working on developing one tho :/

And yeah, another thing is too much criticisms, while valid, can definitely wear a person down - so do keep these things in mind.

[Sentura]

I do make a point of being honest with critiques but it doesn't help when you risk being hated by the person - it requires a lot of tact that I frankly don't possess. I'm working on developing one tho :/

And yeah, another thing is too much criticisms, while valid, can definitely wear a person down - so do keep these things in mind.

constructive critique can be formulated as a motivation rather than as an obstruction. objective criticism can't. come to think of it, there should be a tutorial on how to give good criticism.

[KILLA-COW]

Okay, here's my 2 cents, as I assume everyone thinks the way I go about it to be that of a cunt.

Right so it does my nut when people jizz all over someones map when it's not really worthy, only the very, very best maps are totally exempt from any kinds of constructive criticism, and sometimes people need to be told in no uncertain terms - "that is shit." It helps them, you shouldn't thrust your work into the public eye if you're not prepared for it to get slated, I'm always willing to offer advice, help and say why it's shit and how it could be better if asked, but if people have a shitty attitude they don't deserve peopels time and effort helping them.

People all too often pussyfoot around the issue and are like oh yeah it's really nice but I suppose you could improve this, well that doesn't help, because they work on the things you mention then the shitpool around those things stays unchanged and they don't improve overall as a mapper, if you tell someone it's shit, then they should have the strength of character to ask you how to improve, then when they've used this advice and sought some help from other areas, should prove to you their improvement by creating a much better map - exactly what WoeKitten did.

I think discretion is the best policy, we don't need hundreds of people swarming threads making inane, useless comments when they have no intention of helping but just want to be a smart-arse and jump on the band wagon, but equally we don't need threads being swarmed by knobheads looking for extra I'm-a-nice-guy points by calling every thing that passes through a work of art and of genius.

I never just slate a map for the sake of it, I do it for the good of that persons furthering of their skills and am always willing to give that person guidance if asked for it by them in a responsive manner.

[JakeParlay]

as a habitual "nice job!" two-word typical poster/offender, for me it's a matter of timeliness. I don't have the time to offer detailed advice, crits, etc. like I used to. The amount of content on this site has simply exploded over the last few years, so I'm much more content these to sit back and spend my self-allotted browsing time reading rather than writing.

it has nothing to with being a sycophant. it simply means, if I'm going to spend 20 minutes a day browsing the site, 18 minutes worth of it I'm going to spend checking out new content.... which only leaves me a couple minutes to scatter a few virtual high-fives around this corner of the intertubes, if you will.

[Australian Bushman]

Yeah, I've noticed a fair bit of this on here and Moddb. It's pretty worrying because sometimes what people show is riddled with obvious and basic mistakes, and I don't know whether the person leaving the positive comment realises that or not, or they just can't be bothered leaving proper constructive criticism. Fair enough to the latter, but it's people who 'jizz their pants' without noticing the simple mistakes which worries me. These people are the ones playing the map or mod or whatever, and if they can't pick a design flaw and point it out then all that work by the author(s) has gone to waste, in my opinion.

[Sentura]

Okay, here's my 2 cents, as I assume everyone thinks the way I go about it to be that of a cunt.

never slate a map if you in the same paragraph cannot give the reasons for it. they shouldn't need to ask you for advice, they should just know what you base you criticism on. this isn't as much about them as it is about you. if you keep that attitude towards people in a real life working environment, you're going to be brought down. whether you feel personally gratified for this or not, nobody will ever like a guy that can't grow up.

no map is born perfect, and few attain the status of perfection. with every iteration, there should be something new brought in, something that adds to the gameplay, the immersion or the story. it is important to avoid criticism of things that the author deliberately left out for a later iteration.

i could go on and on about points that important, but the bottom line is: as a critic, focus on the work, focus on what lacks and could be made better. do not focus on who made it or what kind of person that is, or telling subjective criticism (e.g., "this map is good/bad").

[KILLA-COW]

For a start your analogy doesn't work, a real life working environment, this is the internet, amateur work by likeminded people who share similar intrests, some people don't show the attitude to warrant me or anybody else spending their time writing out streams of criticisms for them not to appreciate. Sometimes you have to call shit shit and leave it be.

This;

i could go on and on about points that important, but the bottom line is: as a critic, focus on the work, focus on what lacks and could be made better. do not focus on who made it or what kind of person that is, or telling subjective criticism (e.g., "this map is good/bad").

Is quite probably the most ridiculos thing I have ever read, no-one here is suggesting that for one moment you call something rubbish because of the person that made it, this whole thread is talking about the maps in themselves, as was I. The person doesn't come in to it.

Also calling something "good" or "bad" isn't about subjectivity, you use your knowledge about what is good or bad in mapping terms and see if that map holds up. When it comes to deciding yourself if you personally think something is good or bad yes this is subjective and an INTEGRAL part of criticising something, in fact I'd go so far as to say being a "critic" relies totally on subjectivity.

[Sentura]

some people don't show the attitude to warrant me or anybody else spending their time writing out streams of criticisms for them not to appreciate.

this is exactly why i wrote:

do not focus on who made it or what kind of person that is.

you're helping nobody by calling "shit" shit, because shit is subjective. if you don't think a specific person warrants you anything, why spend enough time to say that the map is shit in the first place? just ignore it if you don't like it. nobody is forcing you to play, to reply or to even look at a map/thread/screenshot.

this does pose the question of why you're actually here. you seem to seek gratification in derailing others work, especially of those people not worthy, because you think your criticism is above everyone else's. where i come from, that's called trolling. i'm surprised people let you live and breed on these forums.

For a start your analogy doesn't work, a real life working environment, this is the internet, amateur work by likeminded people who share similar intrests

suit yourself. i said it because you might have a problem fitting in later, in what will eventually be a real life working environment. while you might not behave like this in real life, if you don't have the skill to criticize properly, it will affect you. consider it a piece of friendly advice.

Also calling something "good" or "bad" isn't about subjectivity, you use your knowledge about what is good or bad in mapping terms and see if that map holds up. When it comes to deciding yourself if you personally think something is good or bad yes this is subjective and an INTEGRAL part of criticising something, in fact I'd go so far as to say being a "critic" relies totally on subjectivity.

if there was an exam for becoming a good critic, this would be what would make you fail.

let's for a second split critics up in two groups: professional critics or reviewers, who get paid to recommend or not recommend a piece of media in one way or another (striving for objectivity), and critics within a workplace, as a secondary profession (striving for constructivism).

in the former, you point out what a certain media can offer you in terms of entertainment, fun, awe, inspiration, dread or some other such feeling recommendation. you usually outline a series of points that you discuss or dissect as you venture further into the piece of media. in the end, you conclude by saying your overall opinion of the media.

in the latter, you're usually part of a team that has to work together to finish a product before a deadline. for the sake of at least your own paycheck, you want this product to show the best you and your team have to offer in a joint effort.

when you review something one of your colleagues have made, you want it to be good enough as to minimize further work. you give off criticism that teaches your colleague what is wrong and why it is wrong, you make sure the overall piece of work is the best possible (remember, your paycheck depends on it). your colleague learns from this, able not only to right the fault, but in the future observe and see the same fault in the works of others, should it occur. this way, you have made the work flow in your team more efficient, because now your colleague knows how to teach the next guy so that you don't have to say it twice.

so, keeping the two different aspects of a critic in mind, which one do you think these forums focus on? i'll give you a hint: you don't get paid for your opinion. so, by use of logical exclusion, we can conclude that the people here ask for constructive criticism because they want to learn and do what they like. are you going to help them or are you going to stand in their way?

[KILLA-COW]

some people don't show the attitude to warrant me or anybody else spending their time writing out streams of criticisms for them not to appreciate.

this is exactly why i wrote:

do not focus on who made it or what kind of person that is.

you're helping nobody by calling "shit" shit, because shit is subjective. if you don't think a specific person warrants you anything, why spend enough time to say that the map is shit in the first place? just ignore it if you don't like it. nobody is forcing you to play, to reply or to even look at a map/thread/screenshot.

this does pose the question of why you're actually here. you seem to seek gratification in derailing others work, especially of those people not worthy, because you think your criticism is above everyone else's. where i come from, that's called trolling. i'm surprised people let you live and breed on these forums.

For a start your analogy doesn't work, a real life working environment, this is the internet, amateur work by likeminded people who share similar intrests

suit yourself. i said it because you might have a problem fitting in later, in what will eventually be a real life working environment. while you might not behave like this in real life, if you don't have the skill to criticize properly, it will affect you. consider it a piece of friendly advice.

Also calling something "good" or "bad" isn't about subjectivity, you use your knowledge about what is good or bad in mapping terms and see if that map holds up. When it comes to deciding yourself if you personally think something is good or bad yes this is subjective and an INTEGRAL part of criticising something, in fact I'd go so far as to say being a "critic" relies totally on subjectivity.

if there was an exam for becoming a good critic, this would be what would make you fail.

let's for a second split critics up in two groups: professional critics or reviewers, who get paid to recommend or not recommend a piece of media in one way or another (striving for objectivity), and critics within a workplace, as a secondary profession (striving for constructivism).

in the former, you point out what a certain media can offer you in terms of entertainment, fun, awe, inspiration, dread or some other such feeling recommendation. you usually outline a series of points that you discuss or dissect as you venture further into the piece of media. in the end, you conclude by saying your overall opinion of the media.

in the latter, you're usually part of a team that has to work together to finish a product before a deadline. for the sake of at least your own paycheck, you want this product to show the best you and your team have to offer in a joint effort.

when you review something one of your colleagues have made, you want it to be good enough as to minimize further work. you give off criticism that teaches your colleague what is wrong and why it is wrong, you make sure the overall piece of work is the best possible (remember, your paycheck depends on it). your colleague learns from this, able not only to right the fault, but in the future observe and see the same fault in the works of others, should it occur. this way, you have made the work flow in your team more efficient, because now your colleague knows how to teach the next guy so that you don't have to say it twice.

so, keeping the two different aspects of a critic in mind, which one do you think these forums focus on? i'll give you a hint: you don't get paid for your opinion. so, by use of logical exclusion, we can conclude that the people here ask for constructive criticism because they want to learn and do what they like. are you going to help them or are you going to stand in their way?

Okay wow wow wow wow lot's of words.

So, calling something rubbish/shit whatever, I do because I do want to help, I usually (now) do follow by giving some crits of how to improve, but telling someone what they've done could be better IS helping, because they then FURTHER themselves because they seek to improve, if you don't ever tell anyone something is a bit shit, they think it's great and continue in the same vein.

I don't know what this shit about "I think my crits are above everyone elses" is, that is a ludicrous thing to say. So we'll skip over it.

No, I don't have a problem in a work environment.

Hmmmm.... Don't reallllly see what your last point is about colleagues etc, I don't know why you think I'd disagree with that? Surely it's clear that you give criticisms to help someone else. I don't even really see anyone here as a critic other than in a literal meaning of the word sense, we are more peers, who all do the same thing and thus can form an OPINION of others work based on that which we know and then help others based on what we know to impart our knowledge to them thus helping them improve.

Also it is stupid to say that there isn't a degree of subjectivity and opinion in criticising something, even a workmates work, you are saying this isn't right because of what you know, in your opinion it's wrong and in your opinion this is how you'd change it, not everyone would agree.

I'm bored of this now and it's degrading this thread so if you want to bitch more then PM me.

[Kremator]

err yeah, how did the discussion got inflated to this?

Anyways, on the topic of criticisms, I think a good criticism don't emphasize on the mistakes but instead emphasizing on what they did right and what they could be doing. We should try and encourage people to be at their best.

[srredfire]

This topic is dumb. Especially ya'll who are gettin' all FGSFDS'd about it. If you like something you say you like it. If you don't you say you don't. If something is honestly good, the majority will say it is, if it is not, the opposite will happen. In either case, there is the fair share of people who say good job and leave it at that, and others who critique and help out. It balances out. I don't even think some of you are talking about Interlopers anymore, so it's like, "What?"

Also, Sentura, you're dumb. And I'm serious. Because this is "Serious Discussion".

[saberx2]

Great thread! especially for a newb.... I'd say that the quality of the constructive criticism I have read in these forums in the past was a good motivator for me to join up here.