Func_Msgboard: A New Review Site For Quake Maps!

News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Register | Log in

|  | A New Review Site For Quake Maps!

Posted by hakkarin [81.15.54.176] on 2013/03/15 16:20:14

As suggested by RickyT23, I decided to re-post this as a news item.
I just created a website for the purpose of reviewing Quake maps called QuakeBlast.
http://quakeblast.webs.com/
If anyone is interested then they can send me the maps that they create with SleepWalkR's new editor :)
Note that while the creation of TrenchBroom is what inspired me to finally create my own site there is no rule that demands maps to be created with TrenchBroom in order for them to be reviewed on the site.
I will review all maps (even horrible ones) assuming that certain conditions are met. Expect to see the site updated very soon with more information!

#1 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/15 19:09:52
I like the quake background.
I would recommend that you remove all the links that have nothing in them.
I personally feel that the links "Photos", and "Videos" should not be there. I would think that links like those would only be available when viewing a particular map, but not those links in general.
The link "Review Blog" sounds funny to me. I mean, I never seen a review site in the form of a blog. Doesn't seem right. I would remove that link.
I would remove the "Members" link, because it's really not that important. Same goes with Guestbook.
If you really want to keep those links, then they should be placed elsewhere. Placed in the footer, in a menu called "Extra" or something.
Your main menu should really only be something like: "Home", "Submit Map", and "Contact" for starters.
No need for a link for "Reviews", really, your homepage should be the reviews. Your homepage shouldn't be a blog. It should be the reviews.
I would move the homepage to a page called "About" and put "About" link in that footer menu I mentioned(above) "Extra"
The right column with "Signin | Register" should be removed completely. You want as much space as possible, and that column seems useless so far. I recommend that the "Signin" and "Register" links be placed somewhere in the top right corner of the website.
I only say this based on years of experience of doing websites myself.
#2 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/15 19:17:26
Keep it in mind that the site was just being created and that everything on it is subject to change. All of those links and places that you mentioned were already there by default, and not because I added them.
You can be certain that the finished site will look considerably different.
That said, I fail to see what is wrong with having the reviews on a seperate page or even pages. It would make it easier to organize different things.
#3 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/15 19:20:33
Also I forgot to add that I am currently using a free domain (hence the "webs" being in the name) but after a while there is a real chance that I might upgrade the site to go beyond this (meaning that it would simply be called www.quakeblast.com with there being no "webs" in-between"). This would give me more options and power over the site, but would also cost money. So before that I instead going to use the free version for now while I decide how I want to do things.
#4 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/15 19:30:22
Still, you were right about the "review blog" thing sounding stupid so it has been changed right away.
Anyways, I am extremely tired right now so I am going to get some sleep. Expect me to work more on the site tomorrow.
#5 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/15 19:39:27
what is wrong with having the reviews on a seperate page or even pages.
It's a common mistake that many people--including myself--make.
Many times a person will start a website, and have sections such as "News", and "Forums", etc. but eventually they realize that everyone is clicking the "Forums" only. So, eventually they make the Forums be the homepage. It's all about Web Usability, and reducing the amount of clicks a user needs to click.
If you feel the primary focus is to be a blog, then I suppose your homepage would be blog. But I have a feeling everyone will be going to the reviews page, therefore your homepage should actually be the reviews page, and everyone will love you for it.
I suppose a reviews website could be in the form of a blog. That would be a new and interesting approach. Perhaps your reviews website is unique in that sense, where each review is a blog post?
But you would still eventually have an archive of reviews, and I think people would be visiting that more often.
Also, you can display more reviews in the form of a gallery, and such.
---
Be careful with the domain name changing. Your domain gains reputation the longer it's alive, so, if you can somehow manage to get the correct domain for free, that'd be great.
Reviews
#6 posted by ijed [200.73.66.2] on 2013/03/15 20:03:57
To get started maybe review some maps you know are good or interesting - while you wait for those made with TB to get up to speed.
http://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/
Is where they are, but there's a lot :)
So I humbly suggest these;
The Living End by Necros (Grim medieval map crawler)
Zerstorer Turtle Map pack (excellent map collection linked to a classic SP mod)
The Castle of KooHoo by Vondur (Legendary)
Concentric Devastation by Lunaran (epic, single level mod)
The above is a decent cross section that anyone new to Quake would want to know about, although maybe a bit on the epic end of the spectrum.
Of course, if you get bored / are very enthusiatic you could try doing some of the multiple map packs / mods as well;
Rubicon2
Insomnia by CZG
Nehahra
Something Wicked this way Comes by Tronyn / PM
Operation Urth Magik
Contract Revoked by Kell
In The Shadows by Sock
This Is Good News Though, No?
#7 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/15 21:45:35
New review site!
#8 posted by Spirit [80.171.82.147] on 2013/03/15 22:14:36
This is awesome news! Don't forget to advertise your site outside the Quake community. You are welcome to directly link to zip files at Quaddicted if you want, I do absolutely not consider that "evil deeplinking" like some people do.
http://taw.duke4.net/ is still around too. http://spmapcorner.blogspot.com/ never got the attention he deserves!
#9 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/15 22:52:57
Ahh, well, there you go. :)
That taw.duke4.net looks nice, for being a blog-orientated reviews site.
#10 posted by Lunaran [186.124.37.216] on 2013/03/15 23:15:36
Concentric Devastation by Lunaran (epic, single level mod)
too many enforcers, rubbish boss
#11 posted by negke [31.18.175.98] on 2013/03/15 23:19:35
Made up for by an awe-inspiring, extremely useful Vondur secret!
Well
#12 posted by ijed [200.73.66.2] on 2013/03/16 00:20:26
Boss was too complex but the layout was great and there were plenty of decent custom enemies to slaughter.
I Figured Out The Boss Once
#13 posted by onetruepurple [91.240.47.30] on 2013/03/16 00:29:59
And then I forgot. Exciting huh?
#14 posted by necros [99.227.223.212] on 2013/03/16 04:09:09
also all of than's maps are crazy good: http://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/...
The Site Has Been Updated!
#15 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 09:41:15
Ok, I just worked on the site some more and it is now more or less finished with all unneeded sections removed and new sections/pages added!
People who want are now free to send me their maps/mods if they so desire.
While the site now has everything that it strictly needs, it is still very possible that some minor tweaks or changes might be made in the future.
Anyways, I hope people will send me their maps. I also included a link to TrenchBroom's homepage on the site.
Also...
#16 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 09:41:53
I forgot, if anyone knows about any other sites that might be clever to link to on my own site then feel free to mention them.
#17 posted by Spirit [80.171.82.147] on 2013/03/16 09:51:39
Q: Do you use vanilla Quake to play maps?
A: No, I use the Epsilon engine for improved graphics and features.
First of all that is the Darkplaces engine with a collection of fan-made content replacement. The collection is called "Epsilon" something.
That is not good. You won't be playing Quake but some sort of absolutely moronic looking amateur-quality abomination. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sG...
Oh God
#18 posted by SleepwalkR [92.231.109.25] on 2013/03/16 09:56:07
My eyes! Please switch to an engine such as QuakeSpasm and don't use the replacement textures and such. What you are playing is truly not Quake.
Yeah, Ugh
#19 posted by negke [31.18.175.98] on 2013/03/16 09:57:42
Apart from visual controversy, note that Darkplaces has some compatibility issues with certain maps; they may not play correctly or require a special setup beforehand. This has to be taken into consideration when reviewing them to avoid deathz0r-style judgement.
We're Conservative Snobs Here
#20 posted by negke [31.18.175.98] on 2013/03/16 10:01:43
To set it in perspective, think of it as jDoom with 3D models and other pseudo-modern stuff paired with some of the much argued-over ZDoom features. In the end, it's your decision of course.
OK
#21 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 10:01:48
I wasn't aware that you guys did not like the Darkplaces epsilon engine. I will update the FAQ to make mention that I will just play the maps in whatever engine will run them.
#22 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 10:04:19
The site's FAQ has been updated.
Aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh
#23 posted by Kinn [109.151.248.3] on 2013/03/16 11:50:03
My face is melting!!!!!
To echo what others have said - it's not a good idea to use some random engine to review maps - most modern maps have very specific engine requirements, as will be explained in the readme's.
This usually means: FitzQuake, or a FQ fork such as QuakeSpasm, or Mark V. Sometimes, it is a custom engine that ships with the map, but in all cases, a correct and bug-free experience can only be expected using the engines that the designer explicitly states have been tested and shown to play the map/mod correctly.
Re: Send In Maps
#24 posted by negke [31.18.175.98] on 2013/03/16 12:23:38
A little heads-up on the current situation. Sadly, unlike Doom, there are only very few releases each year, perhaps around 15-20 max. This year has seen only one Q1SP release so far. News about new levels is typically posted here at Func_Msgboard and at Quaddicted.
Of course people may well send you their older stuff, but it's probably unlikely to happen. Hence the suggestion to pick some levels from the Quaddicted archive and review them just to get started. For example, you can sort the list by date (year) or rating. Rather than recommending maps myself, I'd say you could go through the Excellent-rated maps (five stars) and pick some that look interesting to you from the description and screenshot. Using the Quake Injector can make this even easier.
I certainly hope TrenchBroom will make for some higher number of releases in the future, but it remains to be seen. If it doesn't, well, SleepwalkR will have to answer for that!
Specific Engine Requirements
#25 posted by negke [31.18.175.98] on 2013/03/16 12:30:56
I wouldn't put it this strongly. It's more like a matter of what works and what doesn't. Generally, you can say that pretty much every regular Q1SP can be played with Fitz/Quakespasm (unless clearly stated otherwise), wheras there' a fair chance to encounter problems with Darkplaces in certain cases.
Many authors didn't/don't test their levels on a wide range of engines, so often potential issues may not even be known and mentioned in the readmes.
About The Engine And Also How Maps Are Reviewed...
#26 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 12:40:03
About what engine to use:
I have already written it into both the FAQ and the "how to send me your map/guide" that those who send me maps can tell me exactly what engine they would like me to use to review their maps/mods, so I don't get it why you are still complaining about this. Perhaps I should update the FAQ to make this even more clear?
About how maps are reviewed:
I have just added an entire new page where I explain it in detail how my review system works and how maps/mods are given scores. You guys might want to check it out.
And as for there not being enough new Quake projects: I am aware of the fact that new maps don't get released as often as for games such as Doom. This is ok, because I also intend to review maps/mods that have already been released in the past. Though I guess I should probably mention this in the FAQ now that I think about it. Yea I will am going to do that right after finishing this post.
First Review Is Up!
#27 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 15:17:09
I just posted my first review on the site! Perhaps I will post some more reviews later this weekend :)
Cool Review
#28 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 15:29:39
I like the honours system, it's fairly straight to the point. A couple more screenshots would be nice. Maybe one large screenshot at the top, and a couple of smaller ones in the text to help break it up. One on the left, and lower down one on the right, perhaps. With text wrapped around. Gives a break to the reader for line-length.
The second-last paragraph - watch the spelling of length, and one instance of 'the level' should probably be replaced with 'it' or 'this map', the phrase is repeated one time too many.
Overall I think it's a good review.
I would give it a solid 7 :)
Good
#29 posted by Cocerello [81.43.217.9] on 2013/03/16 15:33:47
Interesting, keep up the good work. The more sites the better.
About the maps, i have some maps that i never released and about 200 DM maps i got somewhere back in 1997-1998. But more than see them reviewed, i want to get comments to improve them. I am currently bug-fixing them and adding some things, taking advantage of that WC 3.3 has vertex editor (yes, the last editor i used was WC 1.2 and a very old Quark, i came back to Quake 1-2 years ago).
And lastly don't ever say that epsilon is an engine :D. It's just a compilation of mods that someone choose to bundle and put on the net, put on Darkplaces engine. Ther's lots of people, in fact I am one of them even though i use Quakespasm mostly, with their own choose of mods for Darkplaces or other engines that support them, that compilation is one of many others you could do by yourself if you get modifications on your quake engine. By the way i am still perplexed when i see how weird some maps look when you use RTWorld in Darkplaces, for example, with marcher_kinn. What kind of lights are the ones that make so a weird effect on RTWorld? It would be nice if i could adapt my maps to work with RTWorld too.
Enhanced Screenshots
#30 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 15:37:13
bring down the console and enter:
r_drawviewmodel 0
notarget
fov 70
I like low fov settings for screenshots. High fov can be fun too. (try anything from about 50 to 150 to experiment, you'll see what I mean).
Notarget stops the monsters from attacking you unless you hurt them first.
r_drawviewmodel 0 removes the player weapon from the view.
Also you can increase the size of the viewport to remove the HUD bar at the bottom.
Nice
#31 posted by Cocerello [81.43.217.9] on 2013/03/16 15:40:34
It was a good review, but i think that the text is a bit homogeneous and big, maybe giving an space between the main text and the rest and reducing 1-2 points the font size of the main text would be better for readability.
#32 posted by necros [99.227.223.212] on 2013/03/16 15:54:00
Will you be fixing the mobile version? It's currently just some placeholder atm.
Thank You
#33 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 16:05:15
Thanks for your replies guys. I have corrected some spelling errors on the site, and also added a link to the map being reviewed (I was going to do so in the first place, but forgot).
I guys make some nice points about the screenshots, but I think the text is fine as it is for the most part. Also, I did as Cocerello suggested and replaced "Epsilon" with "Darkplaces".
Mobile Version?
#34 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 16:05:56
Will look into that right now. Will get back at you soon...
#35 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 16:15:14
I edited the site to make it look cooler on mobile devices.
Note that I don't personally own a mobile device so its hard for me to know just how good the site is on a mobile device.
Checked It Out On My Android Jellybean Phone
#36 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 16:22:17
768p screen I think.
Looks OK now - you can see the pic and see all of the text in the article. Navigation works and is accessible. The style looks 'OK'.
The one thing I would change for mobile devices is the paragraphs of text. The main text for the review for example has the lighter orange colour, but there is a light grey background. This is not a good combo. Whilst I can read it, I have no colourblindness, and to me it's still a bit of a strain to read.
So - if possible - change the background to a darker colour, or change the font to a darker colour. I do web dev a bit, and this is achievable with CSS or JS, but I don't know how easy it would be to edit with your setup.
As it is though, it's passable :)
More Stuff About The Mobile Version
#37 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 16:32:03
I have messed more with the mobile version.
The background is now black and the text yellow orange on most places. For some reason though I just can't seem to find a way to change the background color on the review pages. That's a shame. But at least the mobile version as far as I know looks mostly fine now.
#38 posted by necros [99.227.223.212] on 2013/03/16 17:00:20
Looks better :)
#39 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/16 17:27:10
I don't see much progress, as much as what's described in the posts (above). All I see is that the top menu has slightly been altered. So, I will comment on that:
I would recommend that you remove links "HOW REVIEW SCORES WORK" and "HOW TO SEND ME YOUR MOD/MAP", and move those to the FAQ page.
I would also recommend you rename "SITES TO CHECK OUT!" to "LINKS"
Remove "MORE", because no one knows what that means and it's probably not of interest to anyone anyways, so, just remove it.
Remove "MEMBERS" link, because no one will care about that either. Links like those should be in the footer of your website.
Deqer
#40 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 17:32:11
I am not sure on what grounds you claim that nobody will care about all of the stuff that you claim should be removed. I also don't see any reason to remove any of those pages. I like the setup the way it currently is.
I Looked At Members A Few Times Already
#41 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 17:44:05
I set my logo to be a kodiak bear, real mean looking one with a fish in its mouth, then some guy set his to what looks like a cartoon fat bear with a thong on and its arse out. It's kinda curious to have a members area on something like this, because of the way the community is.
Links being links is a bit of a no-brainer though, just for SEO purposes really.
I think that the HOW TO SEND ME YOUR MOD/MAP is OK, it lets viewers know instantly that if they send him a map he might review it. That's not such a bad thing.
How review scores work would actually go quite well near the top of the FAQs I guess.
The grey background on mobile devices is a bit of a pain still, but I dont know how this site is constructed. Is it a 'webs.com CMS'? Or other MVC/CMS? The mobile markup is actually quite good other than the background issue.
#42 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/16 17:44:30
Well, I'm not going to click "Reviews" so that I can see reviews. Since your site is a reviews site, I would expect reviews to be right there, on the homepage.
Your homepage right now is pretty much an "About" page, and that should be in the "About" section, like I've already said.
So, if you aren't going listen to me, then I'm not going to bother with it anymore.
Good day, and good luck with that.
Deqer
#43 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 17:46:27
I think it does make sense to have reviews on the home page. Really.
But don't be so quick to throw your toys man.
It's Practically Flame-baiting
#44 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.182] on 2013/03/16 17:46:59
#45 posted by deqer [68.149.147.30] on 2013/03/16 17:57:05
Look, I was going to ignore this thread entirely.
I only posted, because I felt bad that no one else did. But, I really didn't want to, nor did I care.
So, my patience is quite thin already, and I'm done now.
Bye.
#46 posted by Willem [108.228.244.211] on 2013/03/16 18:10:31
You can give someone advice but they aren't obligated to listen to you. Just FYI.
Just Saying
#47 posted by Cocerello [81.43.217.9] on 2013/03/16 18:19:26
He listened, but that isn't the same as accepting what he said and actually doing it.
Nitpicking
#48 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 18:20:58
I really don't get it why deqer finds it so terrible having to spend 3 seconds clicking a whole button to access the reviews.
I also doubt he is someone who is worth listening to if he is the type of person who subscribes to the "do as I say or I am out of here" kind of reasoning.
As for reviews being on the front page, that isn't possible as far as I can tell. Because of limitations with the site's editing tools, the front page can pretty much only serve as a sort of a "about" page. I still fail to see how any of this is a problem though, seeing as making a single click on the review button isn't exactly difficult.
If people cannot stand the idea of having to press the review button every time they enter the site, they can always just bookmark the review section.
Ricky makes a fair point of how the "how review scores work" should be next to the FAQ though. I will change that.
About some peoples ideas about merging the FAQ with the "how review scores work": No.
I personally feel that putting all of the information from both pages on a single page would make the FAQ page too long. I think it is better to have 2 separate pages. 1 FAQ page for FAQ about the site in general, and 1 FAQ ("how review scores work") for how the scoring system works.
Forgot
#49 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 18:23:23
Also, I changed the "Sites to check out" to "Links to check out" to appease some of you who wanted that page re-named to just Links.
#50 posted by gb [46.142.36.165] on 2013/03/16 20:00:11
Just looked at the site for the first time. My first impression:
Very dark looking.
Lots of orange text on the front page, but no review.
Lots of links across the top.
If it is a review page, then a review should really be the first thing anyone sees.
"This is where cool Quake maps are reviewed!" Yeah, OK, but where's the actual reviews? Hidden among those multiple links at the top? Their grey colour makes them almost blend in with the background and thus hard to read. The word "Review" needs to jump out somewhere, it needs to be the first thing anyone sees. Besides that giant quake logo, that is. Put your content front and center. I visit web sites for content.
Hope that helps. Don't get me wrong, it's cool to see someone start a new game related website.
#51 posted by necros [99.227.223.212] on 2013/03/16 20:04:26
You might consider a free wordpress page as the blog format might work better? You get a fair amount of control even with the free version.
#52 posted by Willem [108.228.244.211] on 2013/03/16 20:37:08
At the very least, the latest review needs to be boldly linked, preferably with a screen shot, on the main page.
#53 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 21:14:55
I added a small extra bit of information on the front page that mentions the reviews being on the review page and that the button that takes you there is at the top of the site. That is as far as I will go to make sure people will get there.
I still don't get this complaint in the first place, mind you. Pressing a single button that can easily be seen at the top of the page takes no effort whatsoever.
Willem
#54 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 21:16:55
You make a fair point about always mentioning the latest review on the front page. I will take that into consideration.
I Did As You Said
#55 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/16 21:24:18
Ok, I fallowed your advice. The front page now has and always will have a link to the latest review.
#56 posted by Spirit [80.171.145.181] on 2013/03/16 22:17:16
They are not complaints, they are helpful suggestions (mostly). ;)
In this forum, no matter what you do, you will be criticised. Usually in a constructive way that can help you "improve" in any way.
I like the review style, it seems solid and honest!
A New Review Has Been Published!
#57 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/17 12:50:51
For those too lazy to traverse the site:
http://quakeblast.webs.com/apps/bl...
#58 posted by gb [46.142.22.153] on 2013/03/17 13:10:40
Having the Latest Review link there on the front page is helpful.
Two Neil Manke Maps?
#59 posted by Megazoid [78.32.145.101] on 2013/03/17 19:35:49
You aren't getting these from QuakeTerminus are you? (in my world of delusion people still visit my site) I was a big fan of Neil Manke when I popped those on the site 12 years ago. They are very early maps for him, and probably have not stood the test of time. On a sad note Neil Manke has pretty much dropped off the Internet. Some say he has died, but I couldn't find his obituary, so lets hope not.
Good luck with your review site by the way
I Still
#60 posted by ijed [186.37.203.32] on 2013/03/17 19:56:54
Grab stuff off the terminus now and again, it remains a useful resource.
I Still
#61 posted by ijed [186.37.203.32] on 2013/03/17 19:57:38
Grab stuff off the terminus now and again, it remains a useful resource.
Not
#62 posted by ijed [186.37.203.32] on 2013/03/17 19:59:35
Chrome's fault that time.
Nice Review
#63 posted by ijed [186.37.203.32] on 2013/03/17 20:09:16
But... Orange text on a grey background isn't very easy on the eyes. I'm on the mobile version, I guess.
I like how you've written and structured things. Keep up the good work.
The Mobile Version
#64 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/17 20:28:14
sadly I can't help you when it comes to the mobile version and the orange text and the grey background on the reviews. I have tried changing that but I can't without also changing the way things look on the original site. Your just going to have to live with it or else read the reviews on a PC.
:O
#65 posted by Spirit [80.171.155.155] on 2013/03/17 20:45:08
And here I thought anyone tech-savy would switch their phone browser to identify as a desktop browser.
I rarely run into websites that are awkward to read, I can highly recommend it.
#66 posted by necros [99.227.223.212] on 2013/03/17 20:54:09
Of course it is trivial to request the desktop version, but if you aren't going to officially support it, then don't even have it at all.
Keep
#67 posted by ijed [186.37.203.32] on 2013/03/17 22:33:37
Your snide comments to yourself Spirit.
With what you suggest I'd have to change my browser settings back and forth, because other sites do have a working mobile version, easier to read on a mobile device, not more difficult.
#68 posted by Spirit [80.171.155.155] on 2013/03/17 22:58:57
Sorry, I did not meant it as snide at all. Honestly! I got mad when sites pushed some annoying dumbed down versions of websites in my face.
It Was Fairly Offtopic Though, Sorry
#69 posted by Spirit [80.171.155.155] on 2013/03/17 23:01:11
Np
#70 posted by ijed [200.73.66.2] on 2013/03/18 14:30:57
#71 posted by [Kona] [121.73.104.148] on 2013/03/20 09:08:13
No website on earth should have orange bulk text. Reserve that colour for headings at the most.
To be honest if you've got no web experience, I'd highly recommend starting with a wordpress style blog rather than fumbling around with webs and wix and the other free website builders. Those other 2 sites someone posted http://taw.duke4.net/ and http://spmapcorner.blogspot.co.nz/ both of which use blogs, are far easier to navigate that this new site. I had to click to get to reviews, then all I got was 2 giant pictures which I had to click into again. Getting too time consuming.
Deqer might have been a bit arrogant, but he was actually right with his suggestions.
Reviews Will Now Be Published During The Weekends
#72 posted by hakkarin [81.15.54.176] on 2013/03/23 14:40:15
I have updated the FAQ. From now on the general goal is to review 1 map each weekend. The "1 review a month as a complete minimum" rule still applies, but expect to see 1 review at least during most weekends. There is a new one coming probably some time today/tonight by the way. Or in a worst case scenario, tomorrow. But probably tonight.
What About
#73 posted by Hrimfaxi [89.150.173.209] on 2013/03/23 16:17:07
Reviewing some of Tronyns maps, since he can*t do it on Quakedicted.?
That would be nice!
Good Call!
#74 posted by Drew [216.252.94.249] on 2013/03/23 17:55:07
yeah, review those monstrous beasts!
Tronyns Maps
#75 posted by hakkarin [157.157.157.136] on 2013/03/24 00:33:38
Where are they found?
Try Quaddicted.com
#76 posted by FifthElephant [82.12.230.210] on 2013/03/24 00:49:07
pretty good for finding most maps..
The New Review Of MFXs Map Is Good
#77 posted by RickyT23 [2.216.134.150] on 2013/03/24 20:36:38
Very straight to the point.
Hallmarks
There are some maps that you should probably play if you haven't already:
(In no particular order)
Kinn 'The Marcher Fortress'
Than 'The Final Threat'
Negke 'Red Slammer'
Distrans 'Ruined Nation'
Hrimfaxi 'Breakfast at Twilight'
Necros 'The Living End'
czg & vondur 'The Slipgate Duplex'
digs 'The Parallel Worlds'
I mean there are loads of maps you could review, but these are some of the maps that I think really make a statement in Quake 1 mapping, and are the sort of maps that would be good to know about when reviewing maps, you can refer to these maps. I mean I'm sure you have a good idea of how you want to review your maps, but this stuff is good to know about. Some mappers have a very distinctive style, which will have influenced others.
Other stuff you should probably play if you haven't already:
czg - Insomnia, Terra
ijed - WARPSPASM
Some of Tronyns maps (he has a very strong style)
Guys, what else? I just mean as real hallmark maps, good examples of distinctive artistic stylisation. The stuff that is hard to forget, and just sticks in your mind.
#78 posted by Spirit [80.171.51.174] on 2013/03/24 21:13:44
RickyT23's maps are quite good too, especially that incredibly e4m1rmx.
Donīt Forget
#79 posted by mfx [92.230.85.53] on 2013/03/24 21:54:08
that 768*768 contest entries from negke and necros (Moldy Tower!!)
Fort Driant by JPL
Rubicon 1 and 2
Stark Monstrosity also a burner from RickyT23
..and my fav Apsp3 from Than!!
#80 posted by [Kona] [121.73.104.148] on 2013/03/25 08:06:20
1 review a month minimum? Crikey, don't overwork yourself there hakkarin ;)
[Kona]
#81 posted by RickyT23 [31.53.116.69] on 2013/03/25 12:13:00
Review some of [Kona]s maps. He also has a very strong style, and some of the best maps out there IMO.
I Like
#82 posted by ijed [186.37.203.156] on 2013/03/26 03:05:39
Your writing style. It'd be nice to hear what you think of some of the classics.
Warp, by the way, was designed to crack the players head in two. Apparently people still enjoy playing it.
As ricky says, try insomnia. For many, I think, the standout third party map pack.
To Sum Up All The Map Suggestions:
#83 posted by negke [31.18.177.112] on 2013/03/26 08:56:26
Go review EVERYTHING!
(Like I said earlier, it may not be beneficial to flood suggestions as only creates bias)
Auto-suggest Button
#84 posted by onetruepurple [91.240.47.30] on 2013/03/26 10:06:32
http://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/...
Fuck Otp I Found It. I Found It.
#85 posted by czg [212.16.188.76] on 2013/03/26 10:15:19
This is it.
http://www.quaddicted.com/reviews/...
Too Late Czg!
#86 posted by ijed [186.37.203.234] on 2013/03/27 03:30:09
Go map.
OTP: that'll do pig, that'll do.
We need a monacle smiley...
Ugh
#87 posted by ijed [186.37.203.234] on 2013/03/27 03:33:05
No we don't, because that's not how you spell monocle :(

Post A Reply:

Name: |
Title: |
Body: |

Website copyright © 2002-2013 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.