Just came into this problem.
Today’s modern mapping standards I think went into a change where most people is looking for detailed maps, with excelent lights placement, maybe new textures, etc…
After playing one of those maps, I downloaded one from 1997 or something. In comparison with the modern map, the classic one looks empty, lack of building detail and features, quite predictable and maybe too simple.
So, how can one rate such classic maps? Let say, I give a uberdetailed, great replayability and modern map 5 stars, then, how can a classic map have that same 5 stars rate if most of the features from the modern map are lacking?
Basically what I’m saying is that 5 stars are rather dumb way to rate something from different years and different standards.
The point here is that we are comparing a 2013 map with a 1997 map, which is pointless.
Lets say that John creates a map today that looks like a classic map.
Now Sam creates another map that looks like a 2014 modern map.
If we have to rate both maps, John’s maps will get a 3, maybe a 4, while Sam’s map will get a 4 or 5.
This leads me to think that maps with the “classic” tag should be rated in comparison with ID’s original standards rather than today’s standards.
And for this to happen, I think that there should be a place in the Help section in the webpage that specifies what maps should we use to compare classic usermade maps, so everyone can know what a classic map should look like, what level of detail, monster placement, lights, and such.
Lets say, something similar to the “wizard”, “castle”, “base”,… themes, but for rating the maps.
All of this may sound a bit obvious or even stupid, but it is not. Lets say we find a classic looking map made in 2013. Someone could give that map 5 stars. But now, the next person to see the map doesn’t know if that map is a 5-star map in comparison with today’s standards or in comparison with 199x standards. So you may be expecting something with good amount of detail and then you can find playing a map that looks quite empty and lacking of detail, which you are not wanting to play anyway.
Actually, that happened to me: I dloaded a map with the tag “classic” and a good rating. I was expecting a map that really looks like a ID-made map, but instead I got a quite modern, full of detail map. Yes, it had a feeling of classic map, but not a classic map at all. At least ID software would never do a map with such amount of detail.
So that’s basically the problem: all maps with “classic” tag should be rated in comparison with original ID maps.
That’s all. Thanks in advance.