Starcraft: Aftermath (Updated Nov 22, 2017)

[thebrowncloud]

P.S. Lore problems would be awesome, thebrowncloud! But showing just Jim's baldy is not very nice. I'd prefer an argument than empty display of... well, scalp.

Well...... okay, but you asked for it. 

I'll PM what I find to you, once I'm finished with it. Everybody deserves equal chances from the judges, so I don't want to make what I find public in case the judges wouldn't find it.

[GnaReffotsirk]

Well, I can take it. But, I believe the judges are not as weak as others think though. I believe them to have principles at hand that will guide them through the proper course. And some people who are motivated to influence the judges think they can escape notice. Well, I don't tolerate such a behavior, and they seldom escape notice.

I trust the judges would treat each entry with equality. And please, do read the first post of this thread. I cannot stand people giving their clearly biased thoughts on someone's product. It's good that our fellow campaigners here have strong will and direction, but most of the time, I fear, this fierce, utterly absurd, ill, and unprofitable behaviors I've currently experienced here with some people will cause other aspiring campaigner to go someplace else.

I think we should encourage more people to join our community here, but this snobbish, crab mentality? Jeez. I'm sorry, but things like these does not create a good environment. I'm pointing this out, at the risk of myself, to defend those who may not see what's being done to them, and to enable better conditions for people who share the same interest and are here now, or coming to join in the future.

And I hope people remember the guidelines for posting on someone's thread specifically on the subject of a contestant's right to his/her own creative choices. Please, stop thinking anyone can influence the judges, and please, stop this debased act of sabotage. It's shameful and regrettable.

For this reason, if anyone would advice me otherwise, I'll submit a PM to Lavarinth and request that my entry be taken off this contest. I cannot stand it.

Again, my apologies for the unrefined expression of thoughts, but this stuff doesn't need refinement, they need to be crushed before they spiral out of control.

[thebrowncloud]

Dude, don't pull out! You've already done all the work and all that's left is to sit back and wait for judgement. Don't let everything you've done go to waste just because of people trying to influence the judges. You would be making a statement, but, at this point, it's not worth it.

[thebrowncloud]

I'm so confused... did I miss something?  

I believe he is referring to chris' reviews and how he is pointing out everyone's projects' faults as well as comparing them.

[thebrowncloud]

I'm so confused... did I miss something?  

I believe he is referring to chris' reviews and how he is pointing out everyone's projects' faults as well as comparing them.

I do agree that some of his direct comparisons between projects was a bit much, but if the judges didn't want anyone responding to the campaigns, they would have made them private submissions to the judges, locked the contest threads when they were complete, and then released all the maps once all the judging was done.  I think the judges want and expect people to provide feedback, hence why they keep project threads open even if they are canceled just in case people decide to update them. 

When the judges did feel things were getting out of hand (such as the brief escapade in VE's thread) they have been more than willing to delete all off-topic comments.  And when the judges feel like people are trying to sway them too much, they have been quite forthright with telling those people to stfu.

True, true. But I'm gonna have to agree with Gna on this one in that such kinds of reviews are very discouraging to potential new members of the community. If they see someone who is new to the community, like me and Tim or Gna (?) get some rather harsh and brutally honest feedback like "Played the very beginning and got bored so I gave up" or "Your campaign might be as good as blah's but maybe a bit worse" isn't exactly a heart-warming "welcome to CC!" The kind of stuff that new submitters should be getting for feedback (or even veterans) is "I liked this. I didn't like this and here is how you can improve it. Good (first) attempt. Despite the cons, I enjoyed playing it." I might just be crazy (no, not you, Krazy  ) but communities tend to last longer when people aren't to critical of others and their work. If you need an example of such a community, look at SC2GDF. That place is a hell hole and coming across someone who isn't a complete asshole is nearly impossoble. Personally, I would like to see this community stay as far away from that kind of behavior as possible. It's a pretty big stereotype that fans of any Blizzard game are assholes that don't even respect the company that makes the games they love. I like that this place is different and I want it to stay that way.

Sorry for ranting. 

[GnaReffotsirk]

I believe he is referring to chris' reviews and how he is pointing out everyone's projects' faults as well as comparing them.

Not at all. Chris made his honest opinions, and they were in fact personal opinions. The way it was expressed was coming from a bad corner of the pyche, and I didn't want that stuff around. You know why. And he didn't even read the genre: Historical/Documentary (or should I say, Warcraft II style?). It was just so aggressive I cannot tolerate the driving principle behind his actions.

Let's just say, Chris coming to this thread and taking the role he chose to take simply got my senses up to a breaking point. Somebody's gotta fend-off "mrs. phillips".

But understand this, that Chris is not to blame. Blame me, but know that I only wish to cut this kind of stuff. I hold nothing against Chris, he has boldly done what he thinks is right for him, but freedom ends where freedoms meet. We should play some pool sometime, Chris, I like your style. But it's not for everyone.

Remember guys, not everyone who seems to give help know what they're talking about; not everyone who helps have the right motives, even if they do know what they're doing. And I know you guys are more than capable of shrugging-off the likes of which not many have the ability to do so.

All I'm saying is that I cannot stand lording and oppression. This is built into me, but hey, I'm calm and everything is alright. I'd rather encourage others out there, and that's what I've been doing ever since I came here.

/sneezes

I do agree that some of his direct comparisons between projects was a bit much, but if the judges didn't want anyone responding to the campaigns, they would have made them private submissions to the judges, locked the contest threads when they were complete, and then released all the maps once all the judging was done.  I think the judges want and expect people to provide feedback, hence why they keep project threads open even if they are canceled just in case people decide to update them. 

When the judges did feel things were getting out of hand (such as the brief escapade in VE's thread) they have been more than willing to delete all off-topic comments.  And when the judges feel like people are trying to sway them too much, they have been quite forthright with telling those people to stfu.

Not entirely true. You can actually ask Lav to close your thread, and it's really is up to you to accept things or not. And if people can say what they want without even showing some good grounds or reason, but just their impulse and gut-feeling, where's the glory in that?

But you know me well enough, Krazy. I really like how you make maps, and I believe one of these days you'll show some mercy to the apm-challenged individual such as myself? Plz? I like what you are trying to perfect in your works.

True, true. But I'm gonna have to agree with Gna on this one in that such kinds of reviews are very discouraging to potential new members of the community. If they see someone who is new to the community, like me and Tim or Gna (?) get some rather harsh and brutally honest feedback like "Played the very beginning and got bored so I gave up" or "Your campaign might be as good as blah's but maybe a bit worse" isn't exactly a heart-warming "welcome to CC!" The kind of stuff that new submitters should be getting for feedback (or even veterans) is "I liked this. I didn't like this and here is how you can improve it. Good (first) attempt. Despite the cons, I enjoyed playing it." I might just be crazy (no, not you, Krazy  ) but communities tend to last longer when people aren't to critical of others and their work. If you need an example of such a community, look at SC2GDF. That place is a hell hole and coming across someone who isn't a complete asshole is nearly impossoble. Personally, I would like to see this community stay as far away from that kind of behavior as possible. It's a pretty big stereotype that fans of any Blizzard game are assholes that don't even respect the company that makes the games they love. I like that this place is different and I want it to stay that way.

Sorry for ranting. 

Finally, someone who shares the concern. Somebody's gotta stand for the young and vulnerable. I'm here to nurture, and having seen what you guys are capable of, we can achieve something so awesome, CC will be remembered as a community who do not tear themselves from the inside, welcome the new without the traditional "gotta do the shadow walk first, dude". And we are just at the crossing towards this inevitable fate.

But, hey, who am I to say?

Oh, and I've been a lurker for years. Not actually new. I go way back 1999. Finished the campaign, got into the editor, released a campaign. Then I watched... I listened... from the murky depths... and then BOOM! 

But the city was empty. So uh... 


Now, enough of this trivial thing, and let's get things moving again, shall we?

[Lavarinth]

Don't worry, Gna, we all review differently. You'll find mine more.. Basic and minor in details compared to deep analysis that Ricky does.

They are more of suggestions to improve them to their upmost best instead of "this is why it sucks."

[thebrowncloud]

But you know me well enough, Krazy. I really like how you make maps, and I believe one of these days you'll show some mercy to the apm-challenged individual such as myself? Plz? I like what you are trying to perfect in your works.

Although I do find this criticism surprising coming from you, considering I would have said you had one of the three most apm-challenging campaigns in the contest.

Postin' from ma Wii again! (I'll stop mentioning that now)

Agreed. I had quite a difficult time making it through some of it. I'm not the greatest either when it comes to apm. I'd even go as far as to say I'm quite dreadful...

[Legion]

Right, I skimmed through this, its basically like adun, but shorter and slightly better. its pros and cons are different than adun but overall its as good as adun (or maybe a bit worse)

pros:
- you get to be with kerrigan, its been too long since I played a custom campaign with kerrigan in it, usually its all about daggoth.
- good music but.... see cons
- Almost no typos
- Decent mapping

cons:
- the music is too loud, you should just have told people to ctrl + M and set the music volume lower
- uninspiring/poor story, you feel at times confused and at other times like you're being told what happens instead of being in the action of it.
- Raynor strikes a deal with kerrigan [imgwh 147x97]http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6697 ... epalmp.jpg[/imgwh]

First of all, chris, you're entitled to an opinion. I believe you really attempted to contribute to a healthy discussion, but you seem to have done it in a way that makes the author feel bad about his work. Let me run this by you for a second. You say you 'skimmed'  through this campaign. I don't know about your lexicon, but mine says that means you didn't actually play it start to end. No harm done, but I'm just saying. Then you narrow this down to "it's basically like Adun" which apparently means you saw a lot of similarities between these two specific campaigns. If so, then that's a statement, and I'd like to see you produce examples. It didn't strike me as "basically like Adun".

"Decent mapping". What's that? 10 doodads that should've been 15? Elaborate. To me, "decent mapping" sounds like a point of criticism without explanation.

There's more of those.

" (or maybe it was worse) "? What does that mean, exactly? You mean you're not sure? You compare two things that you think are very similar, and then you state one is either better or worse than the other. You could have said they're equal if you haven't made up your mind yet, but you seem to balance on two extremes. Okay, then.

You call this an uninspiring, poor story, because "you feel at times confused and at other times you're being told what happens". Instead of telling the author this, you might want to specify... What confuses you? Being told what happens instead of being in the action of is almost a good critcism. Had you given an example, it would have been a valid and discussable point. Now it's not.

I assume you weren't at all positive about Raynor striking a deal with Kerrigan. Apart from this being a dark concept and a plausible plotpoint, have you considered the authors were free to make up whatever they wanted, long as it fits in SC universe and takes place in those 4 gap years? His story, like all the others, are merely speculation, and when last I looked, that's what this competition was about. It's okay if you don't like it, but does that make this a bad campaign?

Sorry for this lengthy post. You must think I'm trying to bash you or something. I'm not. I just thought I'd point out that incomplete reviews, though being mostly personal first-glance impressions from "skimming through"  the product, can actually make the author think their product deserves no more than that.

[chris]

You say you 'skimmed'  through this campaign. I don't know about your lexicon, but mine says that means you didn't actually play it start to end.

yep.

Then you narrow this down to "it's basically like Adun" which apparently means you saw a lot of similarities between these two specific campaigns. If so, then that's a statement, and I'd like to see you produce examples. It didn't strike me as "basically like Adun".

I meant in terms of summation of its pros and cons in my eyes. The stories between the two are completely different.

Sorry for this lengthy post. You must think I'm trying to bash you or something. I'm not. I just thought I'd point out that incomplete reviews, though being mostly personal first-glance impressions from "skimming through"  the product, can actually make the author think their product deserves no more than that.

Anyone who takes my reviews as a serious interpretation of the quality of their campaign is making a big mistake. Its nothing more than my sole opinion. I was afraid that people would take my reviews too seriously and it looks like my fears have come true. I haven't touched staredit in 6 years and my only real experience with customization comes from playing a ton of custom campaigns during the past 10 years. I am not a judge, I am not an official, I'm just your friendly neighbourhood SC fan.
Edit:
This is why I don't like post counts being shown in public, they should be hidden.

[Ricky_Honejasi]

Critical Aspects

-> YES - Campaign's storyline is between Starcraft 1 and Starcraft 2.

Comments related to the direct scoring

===TEXT
-> + Grammar seems fine overall
-> + Informs the player correctly of events.
-> + Text properly formatted for reading
-> - Few typos (considering the length of the campaign's text).
-> - Some minor text color inconsistency

===PROFESSIONAL
-> + Some extra sounds are added and played although quite a few seems added for the sake of it
-> + Good thread updates with screenshots and such
-> - Very vague credits section (no proper names and such, not even the author's name)

===TRIGGERING
-> + Good overall and very functional overall. No critical bugs.
-> + Use of switches and locations.
-> + Commented triggers
-> - Some minor bugs/issues.

===MAPPING - LAYOUT

-> + Terrain is very fluid.
-> + Had no trouble maneuvering the map

===MAPPING - BEAUTY

-> + Decent overall (looks good, doesn't look rushed, terrain isn't "plain")
-> + Very nice placement of doodads such as debris at the right places, etc.

===Brownie Points
Note : This doesn't influence directly the scores but might improve it

-> + First version released 1 week before schedule
-> + Campaign just at the right length (not too short, not too long)

===Drawbacks (outside the score system)
Note : Might potentially influence negatively the campaign's scores.

-> Custom Music too loud (worse considering you can't turn off volume without killing all sounds and at best, have to manually turn off/on to cancel the music)
-> Story-wise, Raynor helps Kerrigan with no solid reason considering Starcraft lore.
-> Have too many maps with B&D gameplay
-> The story isn't that interesting due to a lack of story originality and maybe a bit of "deja vu".

===INDIVIDUAL MAPS=====

General

Issue : Epilogue's map is on the top of map list thus likely to be opened on accident before playing any maps (ex : out of habit of opening the first map).
Odd : Some units have +1 HP above their maximum (ex : 901/900) for some reason. Seen with Kerrigan and Armageddon Battleship.


Map 1

Odd : Look odd when overlord unloads the units but cannot reload them again in the beginning of the mission.
Odd : Some text show up white and other times in normal color for speech (inconsistency)
Typo (Briefing) : "everytime" instead of "every time"
Typo (Mission) : "Scour" instead of "Scout"

Map 2

Typo (Mission) : "facinated" instead of "fascinated"
Typo (Mission) : "irradicated instead of "eradicated"

Map 3

Issue : Seems illogical at this point that Raynor would help Kerrigan unless he is cornered or had a very solid reason. This is considering Fenix's death by Kerrigan in the Brood War and thus Raynor would distrust Kerrigan enough to not even help her except in very special cases.

Odd : Some Terran forces and Zerg have the same red color.

Suggestion : Should say that you need to destroy all Armaggedon battleships rather their "final push" since that can be vague (can imply all remaining units or maybe even all buildings).



Map 4

Complain : Blue's cloaked observers and Shuttles in addition of triggers which only remove buildings off Blue without blue forces can make it more difficult than intentional (ex : unable to take control back when area is "protected" by a single observer hidden somewhere).

Issue : Mission objectives says to use your Dark Templars to take control of buildings but it is only half-true since only Kindred Assassins can do it, not normal Dark Templars.

Odd : Terran Beacons should be renamed and not left named as "Terran Beacon" when no Terran is implied in the first place and they are selectable.

Bug : Possible to kill your own Kindred assassins (against each other) and then all four are "back" when you get to the very first beacon.

Bug : No mission defeat before Zeratul shows up if you lose all your Kindred Assassins (since you technically no longer can win if you can't capture buildings).

Typo (Briefing) : "Shakles" instead of "Shackles"
Typo (Briefing) : "trechery" instead of "treachery"
Typo (Briefing) : "anylonger" instead of "any longer"

Map 5

Complain : The right most gateway must be manually rescued rather than rescued automaticly.

Issue : Mission objectives should be written as "with very minimal casualties on both sides" instead of "without causing any casualties". Otherwise the player loses/kill one, he might feel the trigger doesn't work right until he tries something more ambitious attempts (and cause its defeat).

Complain : The common dialog seems to last too long delay-wise (2x-3x longer than it should be).

EDIT : Bug : Danimoth isn't invulnerable AND can be killed by you without any defeat.

Typo (Mission) : "En Taru Tassadar" instead of "En Taro Tassadar" (Taru is legit in some other languages but it's Taro in English).



Map 6

Complain : Reavers should start with full scarabs.

Complain : The reinforcement wave after retaking the Nexus should have been auto-ordered to join your base similar to the earlier ones.

Issue : Mission objectives should mention that you still need to keep your first nexus even after Zeratul arrives (since losing it results in a defeat even then).

Complain : Artanis lacks green color (he is yellow like all other scouts)

Issue : Same music is played multiple times at different time segments.

Bug : Player can fully neglect to move Zeratul away from the temple without any penalty or defeat.

Complain : Blue Protoss buildings with a prtoss beacon somewhat top-left of first Nexus imply they are rescuable but aren't.

Bug : Zeratul can be killed at no defeat before/after Artanis arrives.

Typo (Mission) : "Your" instead of "You're" or ("You are") in "Your weak and inexperienced!"



Epilogue

Complain : While it does a credit section, it is too vague. Doesn't include any name (not even the author's name).

[thebrowncloud]

-> Story-wise, Raynor helps Kerrigan with no solid reason considering Starcraft lore.

Actually, a recent development (that I just learned this morning) makes this not entirely unbelievable.

Spoiler

The third issue of the StarCraft comic series says that Raynor and his Raiders are "with the zerg" in 2502. How long he stayed with them is unclear at the moment or even if he was actually with them at all (I'll let you read the comic yourself unless you WANT me to spoil it because this information is TOLD to you; you don't see it).

It really all depends on what the judges shall be referring to for lore: all lore pieces or just ones that were released before the contests deadline.