While I do not agree with how you designed your argument ;) I do agree that people are to focused on being the first to put something out and often the end result is sub-par.

If anyone is interested in design I highly suggest playing through some Valve games(Half-Life - L4D - TF2 - Portal) with developer commentary on. It is a good way to introduce you to some higher level design concepts.

Don't take everything that you read or hear as the law though. There are proven concepts, but what matters is that it is fun.

I've to fully agree with the above statement. Basic rules of how to at least get a decent amount of fans for your map:

1. It has to be simple. Like a 5 year old could play it without having to read up on it a lot. It has to tell you everything you must know either in the loadscreen (who would ever read these) or has to be designed in a way that you can instantly grasp the concept & what you've to do.

2. It has to be fast. Nobody likes to spend hours playing your map. In fact, the average duration someone plays on one day is about 2 hours. Sometimes even less. This doesn't go for anything related to high-quality products e.g. a full-fledged campaign or something. Those have to be at least 8 hours if possible and should've enough content to keep stuff fun.

3. It has to be thought through. Try out new ideas, but if you notice they just suck, throw them out. Happens all the time during Development. Don't try to keep something that isn't fun. Especially because YOU think its fun while everyone else just wants to punch you in the face for it. Happend to me during a Jump-'n'-Run part of a level. 90% of the Testcrew couldn't get past it. Had to overhaul it all again, in the end is was still a little difficult. I could beat the whole damn game with my eyes closed though :\

4. Have something nobody else has. USPs are important. Have the best Card-Design, when doing a TGC-Map, have the coolest idea of how you combine hero abilites, have the best shooter engine. Have cinematics (*winkwink*).

Yeah, I guess that might help a little.

@zeldarules28: Go

i dunno.... 2 TDs caught my eye in Warcraft..... Gem TD and YouTD

simple fun, interesting

not many else though

i think we've already began to experience the garbage people can make........ heres another tip for u guys, if ur game sucks, but u r gonna make it better, keep it private til then, get a few people together to test and add them to ur game privately

i know thats what im gonna do, who knows if my map will ever get out of the private stage? but atleast its not getting a bad rep as a half-assed game

@PvtChevron: Go

RPG doesn't mean slow grindfest, u can make a swift, smooth fun game and still have a story, its all in presentation and pacings

my idea of an rpg would be a game u can save your data and keep all your stuff but your level, so the next time you play through its still a challenge but you kind of have a leg up, and so long as the story scenes dont pause and slow down everything, you can get through it quick fast and in a hurry

take prince of persia for instance, the game's constantly talking to you telling you whats going on in prince's head, without stopping you from running and jumping and slashing and hacking etc.

@PvtChevron: Go

I don't know if I can agree with this. In SC1, I basically enjoyed only two things. 2v2v2v2 BGH and the occasional break with an RPG map. Look at frustrating maps like Labyrinthos. You won't attract hundreds->thousands of people with your game, but the few you do attract may enjoy it. I think the OP's idea is GREAT if you consider game success as only "appealing to the masses".

However, if you think game success is making the few people who do decide to play out your map have a nice little break from the norm, then by all means, post your maps. Note: If the SC2 community is anything like SC1, there will be masses of people with ADD who refuse to stay in a game when they don't see instant gratification/results. In that community, there will be a subset of players who are willing to try new things.

@EternalWraith: Go

actually i really enjoyed all the variety that we've seen in warcraft 3 and sc1

all those custom maps made for a fun experience, even if alot of them were shit.

Maps dont have to be the most popular, best designed and most ingenious. If you've had fun making it, there will be others who have fun playing it and like in warcraft most of thesse maps found their target audience.

However in starcraft2, the popularity system is meaning that even if there is a small bunch of people wanting to play a certain game; if its not in the top x amount of games then its just not going to happen.

When this changes I will welcome all the smaller, less professional maps with open arms

Thank you for posting this, it was really helpful in a lot of ways!Gives a really good perpective of 'Creating a Good Game' Also I want to thank you for those links, those are very good! Actually I think of buying the book (Game Design: Theory & Practice) of Richard Rouse.

Chipmunk,-

I agree with you that most of complex games always fail coz they are not fun. Some fast and action paced minigame can be really fun. Ofc, there has to be some complexity in it. But not complexity where it takes like 1 minutes to set something before you can do something.

I have to agree with this guy. And I am trying to avoid steps he is talking about here. Coz I burned myself back in the days on some Wc3 maps.

Either they turn too complex to continue developing them. Or they turn into too complex to play. Or they turn into bug fest.

You learn from experience, so most of the first post in this thread can be disregarded. The probablity of someone making a white hot map their first go out is extremely low, but that doesn't mean that people shouldn't publish maps. What it does mean is that when people publish maps, and get feedback, they should incorporate that into making a better product. The only way to fail at making maps is to make a bad map, then get upset when people don't like it and quit making maps. If you roll with the punches, take your licks, and hone your craft, then every bad map you publish is just progress towards a final, quality product.

Stop being so negative man. Put down the haterade and join the community.

Quote from EternalWraith: Go

Just being realistic. I agree totally in the progressive nature of developing a map. Thats the main reason Dota became what it is today. Yet, how many map-makers though are actually doing that?, Gathering feedback, making improvements?. Very very few. The majority of map-makers simply dont care.

I can't speak to this since I haven't played too too many custom maps on SC 2 (mainly focusing on campaign and learning the galaxy editor, plus fixing my woefully eroded microing skills in occasional melee games) so I don't know how many map makers are focusing on improving their maps, but from how generally active the tutorials section of this site is with questions and answers I'd have to say that a lot of people are doing the right thing and trying to expand their knowledge base so that they can make better maps. Maybe some people throw together a broken piece of crap and then try and shine it into a diamond, but those people are always going to exist; if they're the majority than it's a problem, but I haven't nesscessarily seen evidence of that.

Quote from EternalWraith: Go

I personally, am not going to play-test every custom map out there, and I think most people wont either. So it really is in the best interest of the map-makers just to atleast take their maps a bit seriously, otherwise they end up wasting their time and that of the people that play.

Part of the problem in terms of playtesting maps is that sorting system to find custom games right now leaves a LOT to be desired. Right now, in order to play a game, you need to be able to find it, but in order to be able to find it, it needs to be popular, but in order to be popular, you need people to play it. That seems to support maps which already have a massive amount of hype behind them, so that new mapmakers are getting left behind because no one plays their games, they get no feedback on them, and thus when anyone does play them their opinion is "Dude, this sucks, you need to get some people to test this and iron out the bugs". Then even that person never opens the map again so no one touches it and it never improves. Map maker gets frustrated and quits, and the lasting impression is that his map sucks, he sucks, and his mother and or his significant other sucks. In reality, it's a fault of a system that maps don't improve; while there is personal blame to go around for people who create lousy maps and have no intention of ever making them better, it's hard to put any serious effort into making a map better right now with the system set up the way it is.

Quote from EternalWraith: Go

Its about creating a win/win situation for everyone here, thus map makers need to do their bit too.

I also think part of your arguement is flawed in that you seem to set the standard at maps like Nexus Wars and DotA. These maps are NOT new; they went through a lot of bug fixing, playtesting, rebalancing, and rescripting to get to where they are. Also, maps like that tend to be made by people who have a very firm and solid grasp of the tools, so it's unfair to expect most maps to be of a similar quality. Moreoever, there's no reason for a map maker to WANT to make an epic map. The point of making a map is to have fun and make a fun game. I made a few maps for SC 1 when it was new that were, comperably to the big, epic maps with thousands and thousands of triggers, incredibly simple, bland, and boring. But I made them for my friends and I to have fun while playing the game, and modifying it to suit the way we wanted to play. There's nothing wrong with making a map for a minority of people as opposed to trying to make a map that pleases everyone. Not every map maker wants to make the next DotA. Some people just want to make the next Zerg Soccer, and that's fine; they shouldn't give up their work on the editor and go cry in the corner just because their ambition isn't epic enough.